Social Psychology

Prof George Bishop

Social Psychology
Social thinking Social influence Behaviour in groups Prejudice Aggression Prosocial behaviour

Social Thinking
Social Psychology: the study of:
Social Thinking: how we think about our social world Social Influence: how other people influence our behaviour Social Relations: how we relate toward other people

Three key aspects of social thinking:

Attributions, impressions, and attitudes

Attribution
Attributions: judgments about the causes of our own and other peoples behaviour and outcomes
Personal (Internal) Attributions: infer that peoples characteristics cause their behaviour Situational (External) Attributions: infer that aspects of the situation cause a behaviour

Attribution
Three types of information determine the type of attribution we make:
Consistency Distinctiveness Consensus

When all three types of information are high, we tend to make a situational attribution When consistency is high and the other two are low, we tend to make a personal attribution

Attribution

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2008

Attribution
Fundamental Attribution Error: we underestimate the impact of the situation and overestimate the role of personal factors when explaining other peoples behaviour
FAE is reduced when people have time to reflect on their judgments or are highly motivated to be careful FAE does not apply to our own behaviour

Attribution
Self-Serving Bias: the tendency to make personal attributions for successes and situational attributions for failures
Protects or enhances our self-esteem Not used by people who are depressed

Attribution and Immunity in Men with HIV

Concentration of Helper T Cells

450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Interview 18 Mo. Later

Low NIC High NIC

Note: Data from Segerstrom et al. (1996)

Attribution
Culture and Attribution:
FAE may reflect a Westernized emphasis on individualism Members of other cultures are less likely to display a self-serving bias Culture influences how we go about making attributions

Impressions
Primacy Effect: our tendency to attach more importance to the initial information that we learn about a person
We tend to be more alert to information we receive first Initial information may shape how we perceive subsequent information Influences our desire to make further contact with a person

Impressions
Mental Set: a readiness to perceive the world in a particular way
Schemas: mental frameworks that help us organise and interpret information

Stereotype: a generalised belief about a group or category of people

Can bias the way we perceive other peoples behaviour

Beliefs About Persons Living with AIDS (Singapore Health Care Providers)

Percentage who agree that: People with AIDS/HIV have brought this problem on themselves. Homosexuals and other persons at high risk of AIDS/HIV have endangered society through their high risk activities.

Nurses 40.6 84.5

Doctors 32.2 77.6

AIDS is a punishment for immoral behaviour.

35.7

27.2

From Bishop, Oh, & Swee (2000)

Impressions
Self-Fulfilling Prophecy: our expectations affect our behaviour toward a person, which can cause the person to behave in a way that confirms our expectations

Impressions

Attitudes
Attitude: a positive or negative evaluative reaction toward a stimulus, such as a person, action, object, or concept Attitudes influence behaviour more strongly when situational factors that contradict our attitudes are weak

Attitudes
Theory of Planned Behaviour: our intention to engage in a behaviour is strongest when:
We have a positive attitude toward that behaviour When subjective norms (our perceptions of what other people think we should do) support our attitudes When we believe that the behaviour is under our control

HIV Testing in Pregnancy

Correlations with intention to be test for HIV
Attitudes Going for a blood test Reducing HIV transmission Protecting health of foetus Norms Doctor supports testing Husband supports testing Friends support testing Husbands parents support testing Parents support testing Most family members support testing r 0.27 0.26 0.26 0.49 0.46 0.45 0.39 0.39 0.39 p <.01 <.01 <.01 <.001 <.001 <.001 <.001 <.001 <.001

Attitudes
Attitudes have a greater influence on behavior when we are aware of them and when they are strongly held General attitudes best predict general classes of behaviour, and specific attitudes best predict specific behaviours

Attitudes
Behaviour influences our attitudes

Cognitive Dissonance (Festinger, 1957): people strive for consistency in their cognitions
Cognitive dissonance is created when two or more cognitions contradict one another People are motivated to reduce dissonance
Changing one of their cognitions Adding new cognitions

Attitudes
Counterattitudinal Behaviour: behaviour that is inconsistent with ones attitude
Produces dissonance only if we perceive that our actions were freely chosen Especially likely to cause dissonance if: Behaviours produce foreseeable negative consequences Behaviours threaten our sense of self-worth

Attitudes
Self-Perception Theory: we make inferences about our own attitudes by observing how we behave
Attitude is not produced by cognitive dissonance

People experience heightened physiological tension when engaging in counter attitudinal behaviour

Attitudes
Both Dissonance Theory and SelfPerception theory seem to be correct
Dissonance theory explains attitude change when counter attitudinal behavior threatens self-worth or is highly inconsistent Self-perception theory explain attitude change in situations that are less likely to create significant arousal

Norms
Social Norms: shared expectations about how people should think, feel, and behave
Often implicit and unspoken Regulate daily behaviour without our conscious awareness

Social Role: a set of norms that characterises how people in a given social position ought to behave
Role conflict: occurs when the norms accompanying different roles clash

Conformity
Conformity: the adjustment of individual behaviours, attitudes, and beliefs to a group standard Informational Social Influence: following the opinions or behaviour of other people because we believe that they have accurate knowledge and that what they are doing is right

Conformity
Normative Social Influence: conforming to obtain the rewards that come from being accepted by other people while at the same time avoiding their rejection
Solomon Asch (1951):
Students were asked to judge which of three comparison lines was the same length as a standard line

Conformity

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2008

Conformity
Normative Social Influence: conforming to obtain the rewards that come from being accepted by other people while at the same time avoiding their rejection
Solomon Asch (1951):
Students were asked to judge which of three comparison lines was the same length as a standard line 37% of participants conformed to the incorrect group answer

Conformity
Factors that affect conformity:
Group size:
Conformity increases as group size increases No increases over five group members

Presence of a dissenter:
One person disagreeing with the others greatly reduces group conformity

Culture:
Greater in collectivistic cultures

Conformity
Minority Influence: to maximize its influence, the minority must:
Be highly committed to its point of view Remain independent in the face of majority pressure Appear to keep an open mind Maintain a consistent position over time Not appear unreasonable, deviant, or negative

Compliance
Compliance Techniques: strategies that may manipulate you into saying yes when you really want to say no Norm of Reciprocity: involves the expectation that when others treat us well, we should respond in kind Door-In-The-Face: a persuader makes a large request, expecting you to reject it, and then presents a smaller request

Compliance
Foot-In-The-Door: a persuader gets you to comply with a small request first, and later presents a larger request Lowballing: a persuader gets you to commit to some action and then - before you actually perform the behaviour - he or she increases the cost of that same behaviour

Behaviour In Groups
Social Loafing: the tendency for people to expend less individual effort when working in a group than when working alone
Collective Effort Model: on a collective task, people will put forth only as much effort as they expect is needed to reach their goal

Behaviour In Groups
Social Loafing (continued):
More likely to occur when:
The person believes that individual performance is not being monitored The task (goal) or the group has less value or meaning to the person The person generally displays low motivation to strive for success The person expects that other group members will display high effort

Behaviour In Groups
Social Loafing (continued):
Depends on gender and culture Occurs more strongly in all-male groups Occurs more often in individualistic cultures Social loafing may disappear when: Individual performance is monitored Members highly value their group or the task goal Social Compensation: working harder in a group than when alone to compensate for other members lower output

Behaviour In Groups
Group Polarisation: when a group of like-minded people discusses an issue, the average opinion of group members tends to become more extreme

Effects of Group Discussion on Racial Attitudes

From Myers and Bishop (1970)

Behaviour In Groups
Groupthink: the tendency of group members to suspend critical thinking because they are striving to seek agreement
Most likely to occur when a group:
Is under high stress to reach a decision Is insulated from outside input Has a directive leader Has high cohesiveness

Behaviour In Groups
Groupthink (continued):
Symptoms of Groupthink:
Direct pressure applied to people who express doubt Mind Guards: people who prevent negative information from reaching the group Members display self-censorship and withhold their doubts An illusion of unanimity is created

Behaviour In Groups
Deindividuation: a loss of individuality that leads to disinhibited behaviour
Anonymity to outsiders: conditions that make an individual less identifiable to people outside the group reduce feelings of accountability
Increases the risk of antisocial actions

Prejudice
Prejudice: a negative attitude toward people based on their membership in a group Discrimination: overt behavior that involves treating people unfairly based on the group to which they belong Explicit Prejudice: people express publicly Implicit Prejudice: hidden from public view

Prejudice
Cognitive Roots of Prejudice:
Categorisation and us-them thinking leads to the perception of in-groups and out-groups
In-group favoritism: tendency to attribute more positive qualities to us than them Out-group derogation: tendency to attribute more negative qualities to them than to us Out-group homogeneity bias: viewing members of out-groups as being more similar to one another than members of in-groups

Prejudice
Cognitive Roots of Prejudice (continued):
When members of out-groups contradict our stereotypes, we can:
Change the stereotype Explain away the discrepant behaviour Explain the person as an exceptional case Explain the behaviour using situational causes

Prejudice
Reducing Prejudice:
Teaching interventions designed to minimise stereotype threat Equal Status Contact: prejudice between people is most likely to be reduced when they:
Engage in sustained close contact Have equal status Work to achieve a common goal that requires cooperation Are supported by broader social norms

Contact and Prejudice Reduction

From Hamilton & Bishop (1976)

Contact and Prejudice Reduction

9 8

Symbolic Racism

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

Integrated
From Hamilton & Bishop (1976)

Unintegrated

Contact and Prejudice Reduction

From Hamilton & Bishop (1976)

Aggression
What is aggression?
Behaviour intended to harm another person

Types of aggression
Instrumental aggression Hostile aggression Relational aggression

Aggression
Environmental Factors:
Frustration: occurs when some event interferes with our progress toward a goal Extreme heat Provocation Painful stimuli Crowding Influenced by learning

Aggression
Psychological Factors:
Self-justification:
Blaming the victim Dehumanising victims

Attribution of intentionality Catharsis: performing an act of aggression discharges aggressive energy and temporarily reduces our impulse to aggress Overcontrolled hostility

Aggression
Media and Video Game Violence:
Social learning: media violence is likely to increase viewers aggressive behavior by providing numerous aggressive models Multiple avenues:
Viewers learn new aggressive behaviours through modeling Viewers come to believe that aggression is usually rewarded Viewers become desensitised to violence

Aggression
Biological Factors:
Animals can be selectively bred to be more or less aggressive Aggression is influenced by heredity
Possibly an evolutionary adaptation

No single brain center or chemical controls aggression

Involves activity in hypothalamus, amygdala, and frontal lobes Low serotonin; high testosterone may play a role

Levels of Analysis

The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2008

Prosocial Behaviour
Evolution and Prosocial Behaviour:
Kin Selection: organisms are more likely to help others with whom they share the most genes, namely, their offspring and genetic relatives
Increases the odds that genes will survive across successive generations

Reciprocal Altruism: helping others increases the odds that they will help us or our kin in return

Prosocial Behaviour
Social Learning and Cultural Influences:
Norm of Reciprocity: we should reciprocate when others treat us kindly Norm of Social Responsibility: people should help others and contribute to the welfare of society We internalise these norms and values as our own through socialization processes

Prosocial Behaviour
Altruism: helping others for the ultimate purpose of enhancing that persons welfare Egoistic Goals: helping others to improve our own welfare Empathy-Altruism Hypothesis: altruism is produced by empathy
Empathy: the ability to put oneself in the place of another and to share what that person is experiencing

Prosocial Behaviour
When Do People Help?
Situational and personal factors:
Not being in a hurry Recently observing a prosocial role model Being in a good mood

Prosocial Behaviour
5-Step Bystander Intervention Process (Latan & Darley, 1970):
Notice the event Decide if the event is really an emergency
Social comparison: look to see how others are responding

Assuming responsibility to intervene

Diffusion of Responsibility: believing that someone else will help

Prosocial Behaviour
5-Step Bystander Intervention Process (Latan & Darley, 1970) (continued):
Self-efficacy in dealing with the situation Decision to help (based on cost-benefit analysis)

Bystander Effect: presence of multiple bystanders inhibits each persons tendency to help
Due to social comparison or diffusion of responsibility

Prosocial Behaviour
Some people are more likely to receive help because:
Similarity Gender
Male bystanders are more likely to help women Women are equally likely to help either gender

Perceived fairness and responsibility

Prosocial Behaviour
Increasing Prosocial Behaviour:
Exposing people to prosocial models Encouraging feelings of empathy and connectedness to others Learning about factors that hinder bystander intervention