Social Psychology
Social Psychology: the study of how we think about, influence, and relate to one another
Three main focuses: Social Influence Social Thinking Social Relations
Social Influence
What would happen if: You cut into the middle of a
checkout line at the store? You sang loudly on a public
bus? You positioned yourself 6
inches from an acquaintance’s nose during a conversation?
You laughed during a funeral?
How would you feel? How would others behave?
Social Influence
Social norms: Rules that tell us how we should behave in specific situations
Most people obey them most of the time
Those who don’t conform are often subject to social sanctions
Social Influence: Social Norms
Descriptive norms: What we think people do
i.e., people litter
Injunctive norms: What people ought to do
i.e., “people should not litter”
Situational norms: What people do in specific
situations i.e., you lower your voice in the
library
Conformity Conformity: Adjusting one’s behavior or
thinking to coincide with a group standard Follow behavior of others (sheep)
Conformity
Why do we conform?
Normative Social Influence: Influence resulting from a person’s desire to gain approval or avoid rejection
Informational Social Influence: Influence resulting from a person’s desire for info
Normative Social Influence
Why do we conform? Because we want to be liked To avoid embarrassment or ridicule
When do we conform? Cohesive groups Large group size
Hell’s Angels
Informational Social Influence
Why do we conform? Because we want to be right Because others may know more about the
situation
When do we conform? Situation is ambiguous Situation is a crisis Other people are experts
Conformity
The Sherif study (1936) Autokinetic effect: A stationary point of light appears
to move in a dark room without any external frame of reference
Participants first asked to estimate how far the light moved alone
Would judgments become more similar when making estimates as a group?
Conformity
The Sherif study (1936) Enter the same dark room with 2 others
Tell how far the light is moving
The others give very different answers from yours but are consistent with each other
Over time, groups formed a new estimate of how far the light moved despite the fact that the light never actually moved at all
Conformity
The Asch study (1951,1955) Method:
Perceptual test of line lengths 1 participant and 6 confederates Confederates start out saying the correct line,
then begin saying the wrong line Participants gave their answers after a
unanimous group gave the wrong answer
Conformity: Asch Study
Results: 76% of participants conformed at least once Overall, participants agreed with the errors
37% of the time
Conformity
When won’t we conform? Maintenance of individuality Maintenance of life control Having an “ally”
Social Influence: Summary so far…
Social norms
Conformity Chameleon Effect Social influence
Normative Informational
Asch Study
COMPLIANCEAgreeing to a request from another
person or groupWhy do we comply?
Foot-in-the-door technique Ask for compliance to small request 1st,
then larger request Door-in-the-face technique
Ask for compliance to larger request; denial; then smaller request
22
Obedience
Stanley Milgram
Interested in unquestioning obedience to orders
Stanley Milgram (1933-1984)
Obedience (Milgram, 1963)
Basic study procedure Participants = “Teacher” Confederates = “Learner”
“Learner” being strapped into chair
Obedience (Milgram, 1963)
“Teacher” instructed to give increasingly stronger shocks for each “learner” mistake
Obedience (Milgram, 1963)
Predictions Experts thought only 1-3% would keep going Experts also thought that they themselves would
never obey
Results
Obedience (Milgram, 1963)
Predictions Experts thought only 1-3% would keep going Experts also thought that they themselves would
never obey
Results 100% obeyed up to 100 volts 65% obeyed to the end (450 volts) Women and men obeyed similarly More or less the same across cultures
ObedienceWhat factors affect tendency to obey?
Lack of responsibility Social norms: obey the person in charge Foot in the door technique: gradual
escalation of requests Time pressure
Obedience
Hospital Medication Study (Hofling et al, 1966)
Method Nurses received calls from MD Asked to give patients doses of 2x maximum
Findings 95% of nurses went to administer a fatal dose of
the drug
Obedience
Hospital Medication Study 2 (Rank & Jacobson, 1977)
Method Repeated earlier study Used more common drug (Valium) Nurses were able to consult with others about dosage
Findings 12% of nurses went to administer a fatal dose
Conclusion: People more likely to resist authority with knowledge
and social support
Obedience
How can we resist obeying? Reminders of responsibility Disobedient models Question expertise of authority Knowledge
Social Influence: Summary
Social Norms Conformity Obedience
Milgram’s Study Factors affecting obedience
Group Influence
Social Loafing: Tendency to exert less effort when working toward a common goal
Diffusion of responsibility: Less personal responsibility for task when responsibility is spread across group members
Explanation for bystander effect
DEINDIVIDUATION Deindividuation: Loss of self-awareness and self-restraint in group situations that foster arousal and anonymity
39
Mob behavior
GROUP POLARIZATION & GROUPTHINK Group Polarization
Strengthening of group’s opinion on a topic following discussion of the topic
Groupthink Impairment in
decision-making Group harmony
emphasized Illusion of infallibility
40
Social Facilitation
Presence of others exaggerates dominant tendency If you are good, you get better
On simple, well learned tasks If you are bad, you get worse
On complex poorly learned tasks
Social Enhancement Tendency to perform better when others are present
Social Interference Tendency to perform worse when others are present
Social Facilitation
Social enhancement Dominant tendency - to do well
Presence Exaggeration of Of others Dominant Tendency
Social interference Dominant tendency - to do poorly
Social Influence: Summary
Social Norms Conformity Obedience Group Influence
Social Loafing Deindividuation Social Facilitation
Social enhancement Social interference
Cognitive Heuristics & Biases
What is a heuristic? Rule of thumb for
making decisions
Why do we need heuristics? Allows quick decisions Efficiency of thinking
Cognitive Heuristics & Biases
Self-Serving Bias: The tendency to view oneself favorably
Examples: False Consensus False Uniqueness Fundamental Attribution Error
False Consensus
The “everyone-does-it” effectTendency to overestimate the
commonality of one’s opinions and undesirable or unsuccessful behaviors
We justify our actions through the behavior and opinions of the group
False Consensus
“Everybody says I’m plastic from head to toe. Can’t stand next to a radiator or I’ll melt. I had implants, but so has every single person in L.A.”
- Pamela Anderson
False Consensus Applied Racism/Sexism/Ageism/Heterosexism
If you have ist/ism attitudes you tend to think they are common
Risky Behavior Drunk driving
Aggression Road Rage
Compared to all other drivers in the state, I am ___________ average.
A) Better than B) The same as C) Worse than
Compared to people in this classroom, I am...
A) Smarter than most B) As smart as most C) Less smart than most
False Uniqueness
The “I-Am-Special” effect
The tendency to underestimate the commonality of one’s abilities and one’s desirable/successful behaviors
False Uniqueness Applied
Charitable contributions Just giving makes you special so
you don’t need to give much
Intelligence & Group work The group should follow my advice
because I am smarter I should get the promotion not
others
Attraction Everyone wants me because I am
so ridiculously good looking
Fundamental Attribution ErrorThe tendency to overestimate the influence
of personality and underestimate the influence of the situation on others’ behavior
Translation We blame the person (not the situation) when it happens to someone else We blame the situation (not the person) when it
happens to us
Fundamental Attribution Error Castro Study (Jones & Harris, 1967)
Method: Debaters randomly assigned to argue for or against
Fidel Castro Participants told that debaters were assigned their
role Participants rated debaters “actual beliefs”
Findings: > 40% said debater believed what she/he was saying
Fundamental Attribution Error
Also, the tendency to overestimate the influence of personality when we succeed
And overestimate the influence of situation when we fail
Fundamental Attribution Error
Attraction Study (Ditto et al., 1997) Method:
Female RAs talked to hetero male participants RAs were assigned to give positive or negative
feedback to participants Findings:
Negative comments viewed as due to the assignment (situation)
Positive comments viewed as due to attraction (person)
Summary so far…
Cognitive heuristics & biases Self-serving biases
False consensus False uniqueness Fundamental attribution error
Attitudes
Attitudes
Attitudes: Feelings (often based on our beliefs) that predispose us to respond in a particular way to objects, people, and events
Attitudes affect our actions
AttitudesActions also affect our attitudes
Cognitive Dissonance Theory People feel discomfort when their actions
conflict with their feelings and beliefs They reduce discomfort by aligning their
attitudes with their actions Self-Perception Theory
Infer attitude from behavior
Attitudes – Role Playing
Actions such as roles and role-playing also affect our attitudes
Our attitudes will start to align with our role Ex. Caregiver
Stanford Prison Experiment (Zimbardo, 1971) Participants divided into “prisoners” or
“guards” See what happens…
Stanford Prison Study (Zimbardo, 1971)
What was unethical about this study?
What did we learn? Importance of roles in attitudes and behavior Conformance to roles
Applications for prisoner’s of war?
Abu Ghraib Gitmo Abu
Ghraib
Social Thinking: Summary
Cognitive heuristics & biases
Attitudes Cognitive dissonance theory Foot-in-the-door phenomenon Role-playing
Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment
Introduction to Attraction
What are the most important characteristics in a long-term mate?
Four most important characteristics in a partner cross-culturally (Buss et al., 1990)
Mutual attraction and love Dependable character Emotional stability Pleasing disposition
Introduction to Attraction
Why do we select certain mates? Why do we select certain friends?
Three factors influence liking others1. Proximity (geographical)2. Physical attractiveness3. Similarity
Proximity
The Power of Proximity Physical closeness between two individuals
Mere Exposure Effect Repeated exposure results in increasingly positive evaluation Ex. Zajonc (1968)
How does proximity work? Familiar = positive
Proximity
How does proximity work? Increases familiarity which increases positive affect Ex: Attending class
Proximity
Upon getting home on Friday, you see your annoying neighbor coming and you decide to take the stairs
Later you are at a nearby party, will you talk to:
A) People you don’t know? B) No one (wait for friends to get there)? C) The annoying neighbor?
Proximity
Upon getting home on Friday, you see your annoying neighbor coming and you decide to take the stairs
Later you are at a nearby party, will you talk to:
A) People you don’t know? B) No one (wait for friends to get there)? C) The annoying neighbor?
Physical Attractiveness“What is beautiful is good”
Positive stereotypes related to attractiveness across cultures
Influences perceptions Ex: Healthier, happier, more sensitive, more successful
Influences social opportunities Popularity, good interpersonal skills, high self-
esteem
Physical AttractivenessDo other physical characteristics influence attraction?
Physique Men’s height
Leadership and masculinity Physical shape
Muscular & thinner seen as higher IQ
Overt behavior
Does facial appearance affect one’s likelihood of winning an election?
Election Study (Todorov et al.)
Method 800 participants looked at black-and-
white photos of candidates Participants viewed faces for <1 sec Judged personality characteristics, age,
IQ, attractiveness
Results Participants correctly identified the
winner in about 70% of the races Competency associated with facial
maturity (less “baby-faced”)
Physical Attractiveness
Which of the following proverbs is true?
A. “Birds of a feather flock together” B. “Opposites attract”C. Both are probably true
Which of the following proverbs is true?
A. “Birds of a feather flock together” B. “Opposites attract”C. Both are probably true
Similarity
“Birds of a feather, flock together” Across gender, age, culture, education
Similar = positive (dissimilar = negative)
Similar people seen as intelligent, moral, and better adjusted
Similarity
How does similarity work?
Reward Theory Like behavior that is rewarding to us Principles of reinforcement
We like positive evaluations (even if inaccurate or insincere) e.g., eye contact, moving closer
Top Related