CLASS 22

Social Psychology

We are a social species

….in three ways

1. We think about other people

2. We develop relationships with them

3. We are influenced by them

These are the three sections of chapter 13

Thinking about the social world SOCIAL COGNITIONSOCIAL COGNITION

SECTION 1

Connecting with other people RELATIONSHIPSRELATIONSHIPS

SECTION 2

KEY POINTS

Power of social situations

They affect everyoneFactors: power, persuasion, emotionSometimes unconsciouslye.g., INTERPERSONAL ATTRACTION

Classic Example

Capilano Bridge Study

(Dutton & Aaron,1974)

Purpose

to test the impact of emotional state on the development of relationships

recall Schachter’s 2-factor theory: Emotion = Affect & Cognition

Applied to Interpersonal Attraction

Effects of ambiguous arousal on interpersonal attraction

Feels like love

Illusion, delusion, or reality?

Basic Procedure

Young men walking across a bridge

are interviewed by a young female experimenter

Under one of 2 conditions

Condition A: high bridge

Condition B--same thing except that

the bridge is low

Procedure

Experimenter interviewed every guy walking alone across either bridge

She asked them to do a brief survey: All agreed

She requested interpretations of a T.A.T. picture: What is happening in this picture?

She gave the participant a debriefing sheet (including her phone number) to take home

Independent Variable

Conceptual variable Level of arousal (high vs. low)

Operationalization high bridge vs. low bridge

Dependent Variables

Conceptual variable Physical attraction

OperationalizationsA. Sexual & romantic content in

T.A.T. storiesB. probability of calling

experimenter for a date

Results

Both Dependent Variables worked as expected

i.e., attraction to the experimenter was higher among men who were interviewed on the high bridge

Problem with the study

Not a real experiment

Participants were not randomly assigned to conditions

A serious problem that ruins the validity of the study

Self-selection

The guys chose the bridge alternative explanation ?

The kind of guy who would choose to walk over a high bridge is the same kind of guy who would be willing to call up a woman he hardly knew for a date.

i.e., extraverted, confident, sensation-seekers

The opposite personality would choose the low bridge

Alternative Experimental Designs

How would we redesign the study to eliminate the self-selection problem?

NEW DESIGN 1

randomly assign guys to bridges as they enter the park

e.g., flip coin and then change signs or guide them to the right bridge

NEW DESIGN 2

Conduct the interview as guys approach the bridge

Shows whether different personalities choose different bridges

Suggest that original results caused by self-selection, not causal effect of arousal

BUT -- if conditions do not differ, then we can safely use the original design

Replication with other sources of arousal

Meston & Frohlich (2003)

Conceptual Replication

Roller coaster vs. non-threatening ride

Same results

But has same problems with self-selection

Other ways to create irrelevant arousal?

?

Implications for Dating

Where's the best place to meet romantic partners?

?

PROS & CONS ?

Lab Studies vs. Real World Studies

IT’S A TRADE-OFFLab studies are the most rigorous:

Many extraneous effects can be controlled

But do they generalize outside of lab? Real world studies more relevant to real

lifeBut often suffer from self-selectionWhy ? Because we can’t randomly assign

people to important life conditions