• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Modules 37-39 PowerPoint Slides

Modules 37-39 PowerPoint Slides






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



1 Embed 71

https://shoreline.blackboard.com 71



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Modules 37-39 PowerPoint Slides Modules 37-39 PowerPoint Slides Presentation Transcript

    • Social Psychology
    • Attitudes• Tendency to evaluate stimuli with some degree of favor or disfavor• 3 components of an attitude o Affective o Behavioral o Cognitive
    • Theory of Planned Behavior• Change specific attitudes toward a behavior• Emphasizes subjective norms
    • Persuasion• The deliberate attempt to change attitudes• Components of persuasion o Source – speakers more persuasive when credible o Message – fear appeals, content/information o Attitude strength – stronger attitudes harder to change
    • Persuasion• Elaboration Likelihood Model o Use central route to change attitudes when: • Recipient attitude strength is strong • Recipient motivated to think about message arguments o Using distractions (glitzy campaigns, jingles) to impede rational/conscious processing causes annoyance
    • Persuasion• Elaboration Likelihood Model o Use peripheral route to change attitudes when: • Recipient not likely to engage in high-effort cognitive thought processing (“superficial processing”) • Useful when attitude is weak o Recipient will not carefully consider the pros/cons of issue or message
    • Persuasion• Requests that shift from small to large:• “Foot-in-the-Door” o Small request first get compliance then larger request• “Low-Balling” o Reasonable request first get compliance reveal hidden costly details (i.e., mistaken price suddenly discovered)
    • Persuasion• Requests that shift from large to small:• “Door-in-the-Face” o Unreasonable first request immediate smaller request• “That’s-Not-All” o Large request discount/bonus immediately follows
    • Other Types of Influence• Scarcity – Rare things are highly valued (Home Shopping network, “Limited Time Only”/“Supplies Limited” sales)• Reciprocity – First the source gives you something. Once you accept, may feel obligated to give something back• Comparison rule – When others stop and stare, so do you (“salting the collection plate”)
    • The Self• Cognitive Dissonance Theory o Perceived discrepancy between an attitude and a behavior creates psychological tension/anxiety o Individual motivated to either change the attitude, behavior, or perception of inconsistent information• Festinger & Carlsmith (1959) o Monotonous task experiment ($1 vs. $20)
    • The Self• Festinger & Carlsmith (1959) o Participants performed boring motor coordination task for 30 minutes o Subjects given either $1 or $20 to tell next subject the (boring) experiment was fun o Those paid $20 to lie evaluated the study as much less favorable than those only paid $1 • Why?
    • The Self• Festinger & Carlsmith (1959) o In $20 condition, dissonance (lying about a boring task) was weaker – subjects knew why they lied o In $1 condition, dissonance was higher – subjects could not justify their behavior on external grounds (only $1) • One option to reduce dissonance was to modify attitude toward the task – “It was kind of interesting.”
    • The Self• Halo effect o A person considered good (or bad) in one category is likely to be similarly evaluated in other categories o Dissonance avoidance? • Attributing someone as good at one thing and bad at another would make an overall evaluation difficult
    • The Self• Fundamental Attribution Error (Ross, 1977) o Attribute events which happen to other people to their internal states (mood, personality, motivations) o Attribute events involving ourselves to external influences o Especially true when we know little about the other person
    • The Self• Mere Exposure Effect (Zajonc, 1968) o The more we are exposed to something, the more we come to like it o “Familiarity breeds liking” o There is some benefit to simply being near someone you’re interested in
    • Conformity• Zimbardo’s (1971) Stanford Prison Experiment o 2 groups o “Prisoners” detained by California police on a Saturday morning, deloused, chained, and jailed o “Guards” wore uniforms, given billy clubs, whistles, and instructed to maintain order in the prison o Experiment cancelled after only a few days as guards became progressively abusive
    • Conformity• Milgram’s Obedience Experiments (1963) o Participants told study was about the effect of punishment on learning o Confederate was the “Learner” in other room, participant was the “Teacher” who administered the shocks o Shocking apparatus operated with 15v (mild) to 450v (lethal) o The more mistakes the “Learner” made, the higher the shock the participant/“Teacher” was asked to give
    • Conformity• Results: o 65% of participants “killed” the victim o What determined such obedience to authority? o Participant heard by victim but not seen o Prestigious location (Yale laboratory) o High social status of “expert” authority figure o Authority figure present to push participant to continue o When participants in same room, only 30% lethally shocked victim
    • Groups• Social facilitation o Individual performance (esp. competitive tasks) is altered due to the presence of others  Performance improves on simple or familiar tasks  Performance may not improve on complex or new tasks
    • Groups• Social loafing o Individual effort decreases as size of group increases o Influenced by: - Diffusion of responsibility - Decreased evaluation apprehension - Group productivity illusion (“They’re doing fine”) - Level of identification with the group
    • Groups• Deindividuation o In a crowd, people: - Become less self-aware + feel anonymous - Become more impulsive, less rational and more suggestible - Behave in more extreme ways
    • Groups• Stereotypes o Generalizations about the "typical" characteristics of individuals or members of a group (can be + or -) o Ex: “Someone who wears glasses is intelligent”• Prejudice o Unreasonable feelings (negative attitudes) regarding others’ racial/ethnic, sexual, political, or religious group status• Discrimination o Behavior (action) toward others based on negative attitudes
    • Bystander Effect• Latane and Darley (1968) study o Participants told to discuss problems faced by students in a high pressure urban environment o Discussions took place over intercoms to maintain “the absolute importance of anonymity” o Participants believed they were talking to 1, 2, or 5 other people