Social Psychology

Interaction between us and our social world

Social development
Influence of relationships
Identity

How our thoughts, feelings and
behaviours
influence others
as well as how theirs
influence us
The social context
Macro level: Social systems,
social stratification, culture as
constrain
Meso level: Social
institutions, socialization,
social control and deviance
Micro level: Social
interaction, social networks,
social roles, social self and
looking-glass-self


Psychology:
Mechanisms and the Individual Perspective


How do we understand our
self and others accuracy?
Social influences?


Outline

Social cognition
Attitudes
Social influence
Group dynamics
Student presentations
How do we understand others and our self?
Cognition
Cognoscere: to know / recognize

Refers to how we process
information and apply knowledge

Sensation
Perception
Learning
Memory
Thinking
Language
Attention
Intelligence


Why did they do that?
Give us the ability to be social =
Understand, predict and affect our social setting
Causal attribution:
1. Situational attribution:
factors external to the
person
2. Dispositional attributions:
persons traits,
preferences, etc


Cause Effect:

Consistency?
Distinctiveness?
Concensus?



The fundamental attribution error
Individualistic

Individual unique identity
View our self and others as
independent
Ties between single persons
are loose
Individual choice
Decisions = personally
responsible for our own
decisions
Collectivist

Identity rooted in social
networks.
From birth integrated in a
group
One depend on/ depended on
you
collective choice
decisions = responsible to the
group
1. Think about the last time you were
late for an appointment or did not
finish a job on time. How did you
explain your lateness?

2. Now think of the last occasion where
you were kept waiting for somebody.
In your opinion, why was that person
late/did not deliver on time?

The actor observer difference
What sort of person is Joe?
Indicate your impression of Joe on each of the adjectives below using a 5-
point scale. 1= not at all and 5= very much like this


Intelligent ____
Kind ____
Warm hearted ____
Dominant ____
Charming ____


Extroverted ____
Competent ____
Good looking ____
Impulsive ____
Popular ____
Persons schemas
Implicit theories of personality
Make judgments of unknown
characteristics based on known
Prototypes and stereotypes
Cognition, socialization & benefits
We do not so much believe what
we see as see what we believe
Inaccurate and self-fulfilling



Evaluation our self and others?

Halo effect Causal attribution

Fundamental attribution error

Actor observer difference

Stereotypes Confirmation bias

The halo effect
If we see a person first in a good light, it is difficult
subsequently to darken that light

Oct 14th 2009
The existence of the so-called halo effect has long been recognised. It is the
phenomenon whereby we assume that because people are good at doing A they will
be good at doing B, C and D (or the reversebecause they are bad at doing A they will
be bad at doing B, C and D). The phrase was first coined by Edward Thorndike, a
psychologist who used it in a study published in 1920 to describe the way that
commanding officers rated their soldiers. He found that officers usually judged their
men as being either good right across the board or bad. There was little mixing of
traits; few people were said to be good in one respect but bad in another.
Later work on the halo effect suggested that it was highly influenced by first
impressions. If we see a person first in a good light, it is difficult subsequently to
darken that light. The old adage that first impressions count seems to be true. This is
used by advertisers who pay heroic actors and beautiful actresses to promote
products about which they have absolutely no expertise. We think positively about the
actor because he played a hero, or the actress because she was made up to look
incredibly beautiful, and assume that they therefore have deep knowledge about car
engines or anti-wrinkle cream.


Workplace Diva
How managers see their employees tends to
become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Monday, November 4, 2013

It's the conclusion of a new study by Thomas Sy, assistant professor of psychology at
UC Riverside and a longtime business leadership consultant.

If managers view followers positively -- that they are good citizens, industrious,
enthusiastic -- they will treat their employees positively. If they think of their
employees negatively -- that they are conforming, insubordinate and incompetent --
they will treat them that way," he said.

Managers tend to see what they want to see, while negatively-viewed employees
know they've been typecast as the bad egg of the office. So these employees stop
working as hard -- thereby confirming the manager's initial doubts -- and they also
start plotting their exit, which with any luck won't involve a trap door, geese and a
garbage chute. Yes, it is a self-fulfilling prophecy, and one that's really not at all
surprising to anyone who has seen it or experienced it on the job.



Attitude
Combination of beliefs,
feelings and some
predisposition to act in
accordance with those
feelings and beliefs

Attitude change
Action Feeling - Belief
Persuaded by others:

Directly:
The central route to persuasion
We mentally elaborate on the
arguments

Peripheral:
Not attentive to the message
Important = how, by whom, in
what surroundings
Persuaded by our self:

Cognitive dissonance:
Inconsistency between beliefs,
feeling and behaviour
Emotional stress and disturbed self-
concept

Self-perception:
How we think of our self and
interpret our own actions
Do I make sense? Identity
Compleiance












With a request

Norm of reciprocity

Thats-not-all
technique. Largely
used by
advertising- and
sales-people. How
and why is that?


Conformity
Change in behaviour or belief
as a result of real or imagined
group pressure or tendency of
adopting behaviour, attitudes
or values of reference group =
go along
http://www.youtube.com/wat
ch?v=qA-gbpt7Ts8
The bystander effect
http://www.youtube.com/wat
ch?v=OSsPfbup0ac
Degree of conformity
Independence and anti-conformity

Variation in conformity:
Other participants
The size of the majority
Loosing or gaining a partner
The nature of the task
Mode of response
Obedience
Reacts in response to direct
order
http://www.youtube.com/wa
tch?v=y6GxIuljT3w
Personality
Legitimate authority
Gradual commitment
Agency theory


Disobedience:
Feeling responsible
Moral reasoning
Disobedient models
Questioning motives
Education
Reactance


Q: Pros and cons of
conformity and obedience?











Group Dynamic
1: The mere presence effect
Social facilitation and social inhibition

2: Social loafing
Less total effort = less responsible, less
motivated, dont feel their contribution is
vital
Diffusion of responsibility - the bystander
effect

3: Group polarization
Tendencies are magnified
1: The restatement of arguments =
commitment
2: confirmation bias
3: collective vs. individualist

4: Group think
Overestimating own abilities

5: The wisdom of groups
Diversity and independence of judgment