Textbook Notes (369,100)
Canada (162,379)
Psychology (3,337)
PSYC 1000 (740)
Chapter

Chp17 Social Psychology2.docx

12 Pages
103 Views

Department
Psychology
Course Code
PSYC 1000
Professor
Peter Pada

This preview shows pages 1,2 and half of page 3. Sign up to view the full 12 pages of the document.
Description
Social Psychology Despostional Situational Factors Systematic Factors Lecture: 528-532 & 546-554  Social psychology (defn- branch of psychology that studies the effect of social variables on individual behaviour, attitudes, perceptions and motives; also studies group and intergroup phenomena)  area of psychology that investigates the ways in which individuals create and interpret social situations  The study of ways in which thoughts, feelings, perceptions, motives, and behaviour are influenced by interactions and transactions between people  Major themes of social psychological research : social cognition, social relationships, and social influence  Social cognition- process in which people select, interpret and remember social information (how we think in a group relationship)  Social perception – process by which people come to understand & categorize the behaviours of others. Attributions  Attribution theory- General approach to describing the ways the social perceiver uses information to generate causal explanations (detr the causes of event. You want to know the whys of life.)  Fritz Heider – argued that people continually make causal analyses as part of their attempts at general comprehension of the social world - proposed dispositional and situational attributions(trait vs state)- how do you describe your test#1 mark? - Wanted to know whether if a behaviour is found in the person (internal ) or in the situation (external)  Harold Kelley – how we try to understand uncertainty proposed that attributions were guided by covariation principle - Believed that people grappled with uncertainty by accumulating information from multiple events and using the covariation principle - Covariation principle: suggests that people should attribute behaviour to a causal factor if that factor was present whenever the behaviour occurred but was absent whenever it did not occur  E.g you are walking down a street and you see a friend pointing at a horse and screaming. What evidence would gather to decide whether your frined is crazy (a dispoitional attribution) or danger is a foot (a situational attributions)  Three dimensions of covariations(that people make judgements: - Distinctiveness – wheter the behaviour is specific to a particular situation – does your friend scream in response to all horse? - Consistency- whether the behaviour occurs repeatedly in response to this situation – has this horse made your friend scream in the past - Consensus- whether other people also produce the same behaviour in the same situation- is everyone pointing and screaming?  Each play a role in the conclusions you draw **8Attribution Errors  Fundamental attribution error (FAE)(lee ross)  Represent the Dual tendency for people to overestimate dispositional factors (blame or credit people) and to underestimate situational factors(blame or credit the environment) when searching for the cause of someone else’s behaviour (Ross, 1977)  When assessing the cause of our own behaviour, tend to engage in the actor-observer bias - Defn; basic difference in the way we make attributions for our own Behaviours compared to the behaviours of others Self-serving bias  When people take credit for their successes (dispositional) while denying or explaining away responsibility for their failures (situational)  Relationship with others may change attributions The Role of Expectations  Self-fulfilling prophecies  Predictions made about some future behaviour or event that modify behavioural interactions so as to produce what is expected  E.g., Rosenthal & the Pygmalion effect in the classroom  Behavioural confirmation  Process by which someone’s expectations about another person actually influence the second person to behave in ways that confirm the original hypothesis ***(continue)The Power of the Situation  Social role- Socially defined pattern of behaviour that is expected of a person when functioning in a given setting or group  Different roles depend on the situation  Rules- Behavioural guidelines for specific settings  Explicit (stated in sign or taught to children) and implicit (learned through transaction with in a particular setting) in nature The Stanford Prison Experiment  The power of the situation can alter our social reality(behaviour)  Applications to recent prisoner abuse  Ordinary people can exhibit horrendous behaviours under situational forces  Social norms  Specific expectations for socially appropriate attitudes and behaviours that are embodied in the stated or implicit rules of a group  Broad guidelines to specific standards of conduct (waitress being courteous to rude customers)  Norms discovered by noticing uniformities (behaviours of a group) and negative consequences when violations occur  Conformity  Tendency for people to adopt the behaviour and opinions presented by other group members  Two types of forces that lead to conformity  Informational influence  wanting to be correct & understand the right way to act  Norm crystallization (norms will be persuavies across time) (Sherif)- Defn’ convergence of the expectation of a group of individuals into a common perspective as they talk and carry out activities together.  Normative influence(changes their thought)  wanting to be liked & accepted by others(  Solomon Asch’s line judgment experiments TheAschEffect  Conformity  Small minorities can potentially change the majority opinion  Serge Moscovici  Study of minority influence  Minority groups often don’t have much normative influence but can have informational influence Group Decision Making  Group polarization  Groups show a tendency to make decisions that are more extreme that the decisions that would be made by the members acting alone  Two processes underlying polarization: a) Information-influence- suggest that group members contribute different information to a decision. b) Social comparison-suggests that group members strive to capture their peers’ regard by representing a group ideal that is a bit more extreme than the group’s true norm.  Groupthink  Tendency of a decision-making group to filter out undesirable input so that a consensus may be reached (Irving Janis)  Groups are more vulnerable to groupthink when a group embodies a collective desire to maintain a shared positive view of the group and doesn’t acknowledge dissent as valuable Altruism & Prosocial Behaviour  Prosoci
More Less
Unlock Document

Only pages 1,2 and half of page 3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Unlock Document
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Unlock Document

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit