Units 37 39

Social PsychologySocial Psychology

AttitudesAttitudes

• Tendency to evaluate stimuli with some Tendency to evaluate stimuli with some degree of favor or disfavordegree of favor or disfavor

• 3 components of an attitude3 components of an attitudeo AffectiveAffectiveo BehavioralBehavioralo CognitiveCognitive

Theory of Planned BehaviorTheory of Planned Behavior

• Change specific attitude toward a Change specific attitude toward a behaviorbehavior

• Emphasize subjective normsEmphasize subjective norms• Increase perceived behavioral control Increase perceived behavioral control

PersuasionPersuasion

• The deliberate attempt to change The deliberate attempt to change attitudesattitudes

• Components of persuasionComponents of persuasiono Source – speakers more persuasive when Source – speakers more persuasive when

crediblecredibleo Message – fear appeals can be effective but Message – fear appeals can be effective but

often backfireoften backfireo Attitude strength – stronger attitudes Attitude strength – stronger attitudes

harder to changeharder to change


• Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)o How do characteristics of the message How do characteristics of the message

influence persuasion?influence persuasion?

o Two routes through which people are Two routes through which people are persuaded:persuaded:

o Central routeCentral route – involves inducing recipient of a – involves inducing recipient of a message to think message to think

carefully and weigh carefully and weigh the the arguments (systematic processing)arguments (systematic processing)

– – leads to more enduring attitude changeleads to more enduring attitude change

o Peripheral routePeripheral route – persuasion depends on – persuasion depends on nonmessage nonmessage factors factors


• Elaboration Likelihood Model (con’t)Elaboration Likelihood Model (con’t)o Use Use central routecentral route to change attitudes when: to change attitudes when:

• Recipient’s attitude strength is strong Recipient’s attitude strength is strong • Recipient motivated to think about message Recipient motivated to think about message

argumentsarguments• Recipient knowledgeable about the message sourceRecipient knowledgeable about the message source

o Receiver carefully attends to messageReceiver carefully attends to message

o Using distractions (glitzy campaigns, jingles) to Using distractions (glitzy campaigns, jingles) to impede impede

rational and conscious message processing will rational and conscious message processing will only only

cause annoyance cause annoyance


• Elaboration Likelihood Model (con’t)Elaboration Likelihood Model (con’t)o Use Use peripheral routeperipheral route to change attitudes when: to change attitudes when:

• Recipient not likely to engage in high-effort Recipient not likely to engage in high-effort cognitive thought processing (superficial cognitive thought processing (superficial processing)processing)

• Attitude is weakAttitude is weak

o Recipient will not carefully consider the pros/cons Recipient will not carefully consider the pros/cons of the issue or messageof the issue or message

o Use of distractions does not capitalize on rational Use of distractions does not capitalize on rational

thought processesthought processes


• Requests that shift from small to large:Requests that shift from small to large:

• ““Foot-in-the-Door” Foot-in-the-Door” o Small request first get compliance then Small request first get compliance then

larger requestlarger request

• ““Low-Balling” Low-Balling” o Reasonable request first get compliance Reasonable request first get compliance

reveal hidden costly details (i.e., mistaken reveal hidden costly details (i.e., mistaken price suddenly discovered)price suddenly discovered)


• Requests that shift from large to small:Requests that shift from large to small:

• ““Door-in-the-Face” Door-in-the-Face” o Unreasonable first request immediate Unreasonable first request immediate

smaller requestsmaller request

• ““That’s-Not-All” That’s-Not-All” o Large request discount/bonus immediately Large request discount/bonus immediately

followsfollows

• Scarcity Scarcity – Rare things are highly valued (Home – Rare things are highly valued (Home Shopping network, Shopping network, “Limited Time “Limited Time Only”/“Supplies Limited” sales)Only”/“Supplies Limited” sales)

• Reciprocity Reciprocity – – First the source gives you First the source gives you something. Once you something. Once you accept it, you accept it, you may feel obligated to give something may feel obligated to give something backback

• Comparison ruleComparison rule – – When others stop and stare, When others stop and stare, so do you so do you (“salting the (“salting the collection plate”, etc.)collection plate”, etc.)

Other Types of InfluenceOther Types of Influence

PersuasionPersuasion• Fear appealsFear appeals

o Arousing fear in order to facilitate a particular Arousing fear in order to facilitate a particular behavioral outcome can be useful behavioral outcome can be useful

o Two componentsTwo components• The threatThe threat – – perceived susceptibilityperceived susceptibility: convince recipient : convince recipient

they are vulnerable they are vulnerable

– – perceived negativityperceived negativity: convince : convince consequences are negativeconsequences are negative

o Recommended responseRecommended response

– – perceived self-efficacyperceived self-efficacy: convince recipient they : convince recipient they are capable of are capable of enacting the enacting the recommended response recommended response

– – perceived response efficacyperceived response efficacy: : convince the recipient the response convince the recipient the response actually works actually works

The SelfThe Self

• Social Comparison Theory (Festinger, 1954)Social Comparison Theory (Festinger, 1954)o We compare own attributes with similar othersWe compare own attributes with similar others

o People are motivated to know (1) if they are People are motivated to know (1) if they are correct and (2) their ability levelcorrect and (2) their ability level

o Upward social comparison – “Better off others”Upward social comparison – “Better off others”

o Downward social comparison – “Worse off Downward social comparison – “Worse off others”others”

The SelfThe Self

• Cognitive Dissonance TheoryCognitive Dissonance Theoryo Perceived discrepancy between an Perceived discrepancy between an

attitude and a behaviorattitude and a behavior o Leads to state of psychological tension Leads to state of psychological tension

similar to anxietysimilar to anxietyo Individual motivated to either change the Individual motivated to either change the

attitude, behavior, or perception of attitude, behavior, or perception of inconsistent informationinconsistent information

• Festinger & Carlsmith (1959)Festinger & Carlsmith (1959)o Monotonous task experiment ($1 vs. $20)Monotonous task experiment ($1 vs. $20)

• Festinger & Carlsmith (1959)Festinger & Carlsmith (1959)o Participants performed boring motor Participants performed boring motor

coordination task for 30 minutescoordination task for 30 minuteso Experimenter asked if subject would introduce Experimenter asked if subject would introduce

study to next participant (a confederate) to study to next participant (a confederate) to make $make $

o Subjects given either $1 or $20 to tell next Subjects given either $1 or $20 to tell next subject the boring experiment was funsubject the boring experiment was fun

o Afterward, subject filled out a survey to assess Afterward, subject filled out a survey to assess how they how they reallyreally felt about the experiment felt about the experiment

o Those paid $20 to lie evaluated the study as Those paid $20 to lie evaluated the study as much less favorable than those only paid much less favorable than those only paid $1….why?$1….why?

The SelfThe Self

The SelfThe Self

• Festinger & Carlsmith (1959)Festinger & Carlsmith (1959)o In the $20 condition, the dissonance (lying In the $20 condition, the dissonance (lying

about a boring task) was weaker – they about a boring task) was weaker – they know why they liedknow why they lied

o In the $1 condition, dissonance is higher In the $1 condition, dissonance is higher because subjects could not justify their because subjects could not justify their behavior on external groundsbehavior on external grounds

• Only option to reduce dissonance is to Only option to reduce dissonance is to modify attitude toward the task – “I modify attitude toward the task – “I guess it guess it waswas kind of interesting.” kind of interesting.”

The SelfThe Self

• Self-Affirmation Theory (Steele, 1988)Self-Affirmation Theory (Steele, 1988)o People strive to think of themselves in People strive to think of themselves in

positive termspositive terms

o People experience tension whenever they do People experience tension whenever they do something that violates these self-idealssomething that violates these self-ideals

o To reduce tension, simply reestablish positive To reduce tension, simply reestablish positive self image, global self-esteem, decency, or self image, global self-esteem, decency, or adequacyadequacy

o How does this differ from Cognitive How does this differ from Cognitive Dissonance Theory?Dissonance Theory?

The SelfThe Self

• Halo effectHalo effecto When we consider a person good (or bad) When we consider a person good (or bad)

in one category, we are likely to make a in one category, we are likely to make a similar evaluation of them in other similar evaluation of them in other categoriescategories

o Dissonance avoidance?Dissonance avoidance?• Attributing someone as good at one thing Attributing someone as good at one thing

and bad at another would make an overall and bad at another would make an overall evaluation difficultevaluation difficult

• Advertisers (i.e., toward iPod customers)Advertisers (i.e., toward iPod customers)• Hollywood starsHollywood stars

The SelfThe Self

• Fundamental Attribution Error (Ross, Fundamental Attribution Error (Ross, 1977)1977)o Attribute events which happen to other Attribute events which happen to other

people to their internal states (mood, people to their internal states (mood, personality, motivations) but attribute personality, motivations) but attribute events involving ourselves to external events involving ourselves to external influencesinfluences

o Especially true when we know little about Especially true when we know little about the other personthe other person

o Examples?Examples?

ConformityConformity

• Why do we conform?Why do we conform?o Maintain group cohesionMaintain group cohesiono Fear of being ridiculed or excluded Fear of being ridiculed or excluded o Normative influence – Adopting group Normative influence – Adopting group

consensus to be consensus to be liked/to liked/to belong to the groupbelong to the group

o Informational influence – Adopting group Informational influence – Adopting group consensus toconsensus to be right be right in the eyes of outgroup in the eyes of outgroup others others

• Zimbardo’s (1971) Stanford Prison Zimbardo’s (1971) Stanford Prison ExperimentExperiment

o 2 groups2 groupso ““Prisoners” picked up by California police on a Prisoners” picked up by California police on a

Saturday Saturday

morning, deloused, chained, and jailedmorning, deloused, chained, and jailedo ““Guards” wore uniforms, given billy clubs, Guards” wore uniforms, given billy clubs,

whistles, and whistles, and

instructed to maintain order in the prisoninstructed to maintain order in the prisono Experiment cancelled after only a few days as Experiment cancelled after only a few days as

guards became progressively sadistic/abusiveguards became progressively sadistic/abusive



• Milgram’s Obedience Experiments (1963)Milgram’s Obedience Experiments (1963)o Participants told study was about the effect of Participants told study was about the effect of

punishment on learning – really about conformity to punishment on learning – really about conformity to authority authority

o Paired associates task, with shock as punishment Paired associates task, with shock as punishment

o Confederate was the “learner” in other room, Confederate was the “learner” in other room, participant was the “teacher” who administered the participant was the “teacher” who administered the shocksshocks

o Shocking apparatus had 15v to 450v (lethal)Shocking apparatus had 15v to 450v (lethal)

o The more mistakes the confederate makes, the higher The more mistakes the confederate makes, the higher the shock the participant is asked to give the shock the participant is asked to give


• Results:Results:o 65% of participants “killed” the victim65% of participants “killed” the victim

o What determined such obedience to authority?What determined such obedience to authority?o participant heard by victim but not seenparticipant heard by victim but not seeno prestigious location (Yale laboratory)prestigious location (Yale laboratory)o high social status of “expert” authority high social status of “expert” authority

figure figure o authority figure present to push participant authority figure present to push participant

to continueto continue

o When participants in When participants in samesame room, only 30% room, only 30% lethally lethally shocked victimshocked victim

GroupsGroups

• Social facilitationSocial facilitationo Individual performance (esp. competitive Individual performance (esp. competitive

tasks) is altered due to the presence of tasks) is altered due to the presence of othersothers

Performance improves on simple or Performance improves on simple or familiar tasksfamiliar tasks

Performance may Performance may notnot improve on improve on complex or new tasks complex or new tasks

GroupsGroups

• Social loafingSocial loafingo Individual effort decreases as size of Individual effort decreases as size of

group increasesgroup increaseso Influenced by:Influenced by:

- Diffusion of responsibilityDiffusion of responsibility- Decreased evaluation apprehensionDecreased evaluation apprehension- Group productivity illusion (“They’re Group productivity illusion (“They’re

doing fine”)doing fine”)- Personal interest toward taskPersonal interest toward task- Level of identification with the group Level of identification with the group

GroupsGroups

• DeindividuationDeindividuationo In a crowd, people:In a crowd, people:

- Lose sense of self/less self-awareLose sense of self/less self-aware- Experience sense of anonymity Experience sense of anonymity - Become more impulsive Become more impulsive - Become less rational and more suggestibleBecome less rational and more suggestible- Behave in more extreme waysBehave in more extreme ways

• StereotypesStereotypeso Generalizations about the "typical" characteristics Generalizations about the "typical" characteristics

of members of a group (can be + or -) of members of a group (can be + or -) o ““The cowboy and the Indian” are American The cowboy and the Indian” are American

stereotypes stereotypes

• PrejudicePrejudiceo Unreasonable feelings/opinions (negative Unreasonable feelings/opinions (negative

attitudes) regarding racial, religious, or national attitudes) regarding racial, religious, or national groupsgroups

• DiscriminationDiscriminationo Treatment (action) toward others based on class Treatment (action) toward others based on class

or category rather than individual meritor category rather than individual merit

Perceiving GroupsPerceiving Groups

• Mere Exposure Effect (Zajonc, 1968)Mere Exposure Effect (Zajonc, 1968)o The more we are exposed to something, The more we are exposed to something,

the more we come to like itthe more we come to like it

o ““Familiarity breeds liking”Familiarity breeds liking”

o There is some benefit to simply hanging There is some benefit to simply hanging around or being near someone you’re around or being near someone you’re interested in!interested in!

Close RelationshipsClose Relationships


• Sternberg’s 7 Types of LoveSternberg’s 7 Types of Love - - Non LoveNon Love (absence of commitment, intimacy, or (absence of commitment, intimacy, or

passion)passion)

- - Empty LoveEmpty Love (commitment but no intimacy or passion) (commitment but no intimacy or passion)

- - InfatuationInfatuation (passion but no commitment or intimacy) (passion but no commitment or intimacy)

- - CompanionateCompanionate (commitment and intimacy but no (commitment and intimacy but no passion)passion)

- - FatuousFatuous (commitment and passion but no intimacy) (commitment and passion but no intimacy)

- - RomanticRomantic (intimacy and passion but no commitment) (intimacy and passion but no commitment)

- - ConsummateConsummate (intimacy, passion, and commitment) (intimacy, passion, and commitment)


• Attachment Theory Attachment Theory (Bartholomew & (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991)Horowitz, 1991)

o Closeness/intimacy processes key in the Closeness/intimacy processes key in the development and maintenance of trust development and maintenance of trust and security and security

o Types of AttachmentTypes of Attachment • SecureSecure• PreoccupiedPreoccupied• Dismissing-AvoidantDismissing-Avoidant• Fearful-Avoidant Fearful-Avoidant

Education

Units 37 39