0
Social Psychology
Attitudes•   Tendency to evaluate stimuli with some degree of favor    or disfavor•   3 components of an attitude        o...
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 per...
Persuasion•   Elaboration Likelihood Model       o   Use central route to change attitudes when:            •   Recipient ...
Persuasion•   Elaboration Likelihood Model       o   Use peripheral route to change attitudes when:            •   Recipie...
Persuasion•   Requests that shift from small to large:•   “Foot-in-the-Door”    o   Small request first    get compliance ...
Persuasion•   Requests that shift from large to small:•   “Door-in-the-Face”    o   Unreasonable first request   immediate...
Other Types of Influence•   Scarcity – Rare things are highly valued (Home Shopping network,              “Limited Time On...
The Self•   Cognitive Dissonance Theory       o   Perceived discrepancy between an attitude and a           behavior creat...
The Self•   Festinger & Carlsmith (1959)       o   Participants performed boring motor coordination task           for 30 ...
The Self•   Festinger & Carlsmith (1959)       o   In $20 condition, dissonance (lying about a boring task)           was ...
The Self•   Halo effect    o   A person considered good (or bad) in one category is        likely to be similarly evaluate...
The Self•   Fundamental Attribution Error (Ross, 1977)    o   Attribute events which happen to other people to their      ...
The Self•   Mere Exposure Effect (Zajonc, 1968)    o   The more we are exposed to something, the more we        come to li...
Conformity•   Zimbardo’s (1971) Stanford Prison Experiment       o   2 groups            o   “Prisoners” detained by Calif...
Conformity•   Milgram’s Obedience Experiments (1963)    o   Participants told study was about the effect of punishment on ...
Conformity•   Results:    o   65% of participants “killed” the victim    o   What determined such obedience to authority? ...
Groups•   Social facilitation        o   Individual performance (esp. competitive tasks) is            altered due to the ...
Groups•   Social loafing        o   Individual effort decreases as size of group increases        o   Influenced by:      ...
Groups•   Deindividuation       o   In a crowd, people:            -   Become less self-aware + feel anonymous            ...
Groups•   Stereotypes       o   Generalizations about the "typical" characteristics of           individuals or members of...
Bystander Effect•   Latane and Darley (1968) study    o   Participants told to discuss problems faced by students in a    ...
Modules 37-39 PowerPoint Slides
Modules 37-39 PowerPoint Slides
Modules 37-39 PowerPoint Slides
Modules 37-39 PowerPoint Slides
Modules 37-39 PowerPoint Slides
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Modules 37-39 PowerPoint Slides

1,084

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,084
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
10
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "Modules 37-39 PowerPoint Slides"

  1. 1. Social Psychology
  2. 2. Attitudes• Tendency to evaluate stimuli with some degree of favor or disfavor• 3 components of an attitude o Affective o Behavioral o Cognitive
  3. 3. Theory of Planned Behavior• Change specific attitudes toward a behavior• Emphasizes subjective norms
  4. 4. 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
  5. 5. 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
  6. 6. 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
  7. 7. 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)
  8. 8. 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
  9. 9. 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”)
  10. 10. 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)
  11. 11. 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?
  12. 12. 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.”
  13. 13. 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
  14. 14. 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
  15. 15. 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
  16. 16. 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
  17. 17. 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
  18. 18. 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
  19. 19. 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
  20. 20. 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
  21. 21. 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
  22. 22. 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
  23. 23. 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
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×