Social Psychology Chapter 14. Helping Theories Helping behavior: act intended to benefit another...

Social Psychology

Chapter 14

Helping Theories

Helping behavior: act intended to benefit another

Altruism: unselfish concern for another’s welfare

Helping Theories

Arousal Theory: sight of victim produces anxiety so you act

Cost-Reward Theory: Cost of helping low & cost of not helping high - help Cost of helping high & cost of not helping low - no

Empathy-Altruism Theory: feeling empathy for other increases chances of helping

Evolutionary Theory: contributed to our survival in the past

Kitty Genovese

Bystander effect: as number of bystanders increases, the likelihood of any one by-stander helping decreases

Diffusion of responsibility: Dilution or weakening of each group member’s obligation to act when responsibility is perceived to be shared with all group members

Bystander Intervention Problem: Latane and Darley;Best predictor of bystander intervention was group size

2-person groups2-person groups

3-person groups3-person groups

6-person groups6-person groups

20 80 120 160 200 240 280

Seconds from beginning of emergency

80

40

60

100

20

0

Per

cent

age

help

ing

The Bad Samaritan – What influences helping behavior?

Bystander Effect/Diffusion of Responsibility Fake seizure

Social Cues Frisbee girls Hurt worker Smoke in room

Appearance/background Lover’s quarrel Drunk or old guy Race

Why don’t people help???

Diffusion of Responsibility; Bystander effect Conformity – when we don’t know what to do,

we take our cues from others More likely to help if…

How does the social situation affect our behavior?

Situationism: The view that environmental conditions influence people’s behavior as much or more than their personal dispositions do

Stanford Prison Experiment Philip Zimbardo and Craig Haney (1971) Created a new social reality Called off after 6 days (planned 2 weeks) Never underestimate the power of a bad situation to

overwhelm the good.

Social Norms

Socially based rules that prescribe what is acceptable and what is not Taught by family, friends, teachers, culture Often not verbalized Reciprocity: candy = bigger tip Examples?

Why do people conform???

Conformity: change behaviors or beliefs to match those of others

Asch Effect: group majority influences individual judgments Asch identifies three factors that influence whether a person

will yield to pressure: The size of the majority The presence of a partner who dissented from the majority The size of the discrepancy between the correct answer and

the majority position

Cognitive Dissonance

A highly motivating state in which people have conflicting cognitions, especially when their voluntary actions conflict with their attitudes – Leon Festinger

Must change either behavior or thoughts

Inducing Compliance

Foot-in-the-door technique: get one to agree to small request and then gradually present larger ones Drive Carefully sign & charities

Door-in-the-face technique: ask for large favor likely to be denied and then ask for something less Political groups and labor/management

Low-ball approach: oral commitment made and then cost of fulfilling it raised Car salesmen

Other Topics in Social Psychology

Social facilitation: Presence of other people or working with others can improve performance

Social loafing: People exert less effort when performing a group task than when performing the same task alone

Deindividuation: When group members lose individuality and tend to do things not normally done when alone lose sense of personal responsibility group “assumes” responsibility

Group polarization: tendency of people to make decisions that are more extreme when they are in a group as opposed to a decision made alone or independently.

Groupthink

Conform opinions to what you believe is the consensus; increases when… Isolation of the group High group cohesiveness Directive leadership Homogeneity of members’ social background and

ideology High stress from external threats with low hope of a

better solution than that of the group leader Vietnam, Bay of Pigs, space shuttles

Making CognitiveAttributions

Fundamental attribution error: Tendency to emphasize internal causes and ignore external pressures (looking at others) Focus on dispositional factors

Self-serving bias: One takes credit for success but denies responsibility for failure (looking within you) Focus on situational factors

Interpersonal Attraction

Reward theory of attraction: A social learning view that says we like best those who give us maximum rewards at minimum cost – combo of Proximity Similarity Self-disclosure Physical attractiveness

Expectations and theInfluence of Self-Esteem

Matching hypothesis: Prediction that most people will find friends/mates that are about their same level of attractiveness

Expectancy-value theory: People decide whether or not to pursue a relationship by weighing the potential value of the relationship against their expectations of success in establishing the relationship

Loving Relationships

Romantic love: A temporary and highly emotional condition based on sexual desire and some intimacy Americans often believe that this is the basis

for long-term commitment What do you think?

Robert Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of Love

PassionPassion

IntimacyIntimacy CommitmentCommitment

Triangular Theory of Love Passion: erotic, physical attraction Intimacy: sharing feelings & confidences;

emotional, not physical Commitment: putting the relationship first in your

life Liking/friendship:

high intimacy, zero passion, zero commitment Romantic love:

high passion, high intimacy, low commitment Infatuation:

high passion, low intimacy, low commitment Complete love: balance of all three

Prejudice and Discrimination

Prejudice: A negative attitude toward an individual based solely on his or her membership in a particular group

Discrimination: A negative action taken against an individual as a result of his or her group membership

Cognitive, affective, and behavioral components Stereotyped thinking Hatred/anger Discrimination

Prejudice and Discrimination

In-group: The group with which an individual identifies

Out-group: Those outside the group with which an individual identifies

Social distance: The perceived difference or similarity between oneself and another person – easier it is to feel differently

Causes of Prejudice

Dissimilarity and Social DistanceDissimilarity and Social Distance

Causes of Prejudice

Dissimilarity and Social Distance

Economic CompetitionEconomic Competition

Causes of Prejudice

Dissimilarity and Social Distance

Economic Competition

ScapegoatingScapegoating

Causes of Prejudice

Dissimilarity and Social Distance

Economic Competition

Scapegoating

Conformity to Social NormsConformity to Social Norms

Causes of Prejudice

Dissimilarity and Social Distance

Economic Competition

Scapegoating

Conformity to Social Norms

Media StereotypesMedia Stereotypes

Combating Prejudice Research suggests that the possible tools for

combating prejudice include: Equal status contact Legislation New role models