Psychology 102: Social processes, society & culture

Psychology 102: Social processes, society, and culture Dr James Neill Centre for Applied Psychology University of Canberra 2009

Reading Gerrig et al. (Chapter 17): Social processes, society, and culture

NOTE: A related previous Psy101 chapter reading (not covered here) Gerrig et al. (Chapter 16): Social cognition & relationships
Constructing social reality
Social cognition
Attitudes
Persuasion / Social influence
Prejudice & Stereotypes
Relationships & Attraction

Overview
About social psychology
Power of the situation (social influence)
Conformity
Obedience
Group influence
Group polarisation
Aggression
Prosocial behaviour & altruism
Conflict & peace

What is social psychology? Influence of social processes on the way people:
Think (cognition)
Feel (emotions)
Behave (actions)

Person to Person

Group to Person Person to Group

Group to Group

Why is Social Psychology Important? Why does social psychology matter? … we need to get along – or we'll conflict

Topic matching activity Prejudice Aggression Group dynamics Crowd behaviour Social exclusion Allocate one of these topics to each of the following sets of slides... Environmental Relationships Prosocial behaviour Conformity Leadership

Power of the situation (Social influence)

Social influence questions
How do we influence each other?
How are we affected by pressures to conform and obey?
How are we affected by group interaction?
How do groups affect our behaviour?

Social influence The most significant contribution of social psychology is its study of how our attitudes, beliefs, decisions, and actions are moulded by social influence .

Video: The Power of the Situation Annenberg (1989). The Power of the Situation (Program 19) . [27 min video] Annenberg: Santa Barbara, CA.

The power of the situation
Social role
Social-defined pattern of behaviour
Rules
Behavioural guidelines
Can be explicit or implicit
Social norms
Expectation a group has for its members

Conformity When a person adopts a social role , follows a rule , or bends to a social norm , then s/he is, to some extent, conforming to social expectations.

Conformity
Tendency for people to adopt behaviours, attitudes, and values of other members of a group.
Adjusting one’s behavior or thinking to coincide with a group standard.

Conformity: Informational influence
Wanting to be “correct” and to behave in the “right way” in a given situation
Why?
Group may provide valuable information.
When the task is difficult or you are unsure, it makes sense to listen to others.
e.g., Sherif’s autokinetic effect

Conformity: Normative influence
Desire to be liked, accepted, and approved of / not rejected by others
Why? Price may be severe if not normative behaviour is not followed.
Also known as the “Asch effect”

Asch’s conformity studies (1950's)

Asch’s conformity studies (1950’s)
Subjects asked to judge line lengths while working in a group.
7 subjects; the 6th was real, rest were confederates.
Confederates consistently gave obviously wrong answers.
The subject often conformed and gave the same wrong answer.
On average, 37% of participants conformed .
Some never caved .

Conformity
Conformity in everyday life
Minority influence and nonconformity
Serge Moscovici

Conditions that  conformity
Feelings of incompetence, insecurity, low self-esteem.
Group size > 2
Group is unanimous (lack of dissension).
Group status desirable & attractiveness.

Conditions that  conformity
Group observes one’s behaviour.
No prior commitment to response.
Culture strongly encourages respect for social standard.

Obedience
People comply with social pressures. But what about outright command?
Milgram designed a study that investigated the effects of authority on obedience.
Stanley Milgram (1933-1984)

Milgram’s obedience studies

Milgram’s Study

Milgram’s obedience studies
63% complied with administration of shocks
Depending on subtle changes in conditions, however, compliance varied between 0 & 93%
Degree of obedience influenced by:
Physical proximity of authority figure
Status of authority figure
Depersonalisation of victim
Lack of defiant role models

Zimbardo’s prison study (1970’s)
Subjects played either prisoners or guards.
Prisoners were arrested, fingerprinted, dressed, and referred to by number.
Guards were dressed and given control over prisoners.
Subjects became their roles in action, thought and feeling.

Resistance
~  a third of individuals resisted social coercion (Milgram).
One dissenter can have a disproportionate effect on reducing the compliance of others. (e.g., Asch)

The tendency of groups to make decisions that are more extreme then the decisions that would be make by the members acting alone
Two underlying process
Information-influence
Social comparison
Group decision-making: Group polarisation

Group decision-making: Groupthink (Irving Janis)
Tendency of group to filter out the undesirable input so that a consensus may be reached
Factors leading Groupthink
High level of group cohesiveness
Isolation of group from outside information or influences
Dynamic, influential leader
High stress from external threats

Aggression, prosocial behaviour, altruism, conflict, and peace
Aggression
Prosocial behaviour
Altruism
Conflict & cooperation
Peace

Physical or verbal behaviour that causes (or is intended to cause) harm.
Emerges from the interaction of:
Biology
Genetic
Neural
Biochemical
Experience
Aversive events e.g., misery, temp, frustrate
Operant conditioning
Social learning
Scripts
Aggression

Aggression

Aggression
Individual differences
Impulsive aggression
Instrumental aggression
Situational influences
Frustration-aggression hypothesis
Temperature and aggression
Direct provocation and escalation

Cultural constraints
Construals of the self and aggressive behaviour
Richard Nisbett
Norms of aggressive behaviour
Aggression

Unselfish, intentional behavior that is intended to benefit welfare of others.
Behaviours which have no obvious gain for the provider
Behaviours which have obvious costs for the provider (e.g. time, resources)
Altruism

Is there really altruism?
Altruism is often for self-benefit e.g., power, status, reward, psychological gain.
What matters in judging the act is the actor's intended outcomes.
Altruism

Equity / Reciprocity
Give to relationships in proportion to what we receive (Social Exchange Theory)
Social responsibility norm
Reciprocal altruism
Natural selection favors animals that are altruistic if the benefit to each is greater than the cost of altruism
Altruism

Bystander intervention
Bib Latané and John Darley
Willingness to assist a person in need
75% help when alone vs. 53% in presence of others

Diminished sense of personal responsibility to act because others are seen as equally responsible.
Bystanders are less likely to help in presence of more people (e.g. part of a large crowd)
"Diffusion of responsibility": The larger the number of bystanders, the less responsibility any one bystander feels to help
Bystander effect

Bystander must notice the emergency
Bystander must label events as an emergency
Bystander must feel responsibility

Prosocial behaviour
Carried out with the goal of helping people
Altruism
Pro-social behaviours without consideration for self safety or interests
Reciprocal altruism
Altruism & prosocial behaviour

Motives for prosocial behaviour
C. Daniel Batson’s forces that prompt people to act for the public good:
Altruism
Egoism
Collectivism
Principlism

Superordinate goals
Communication
Graduated & Reciprocated Initiatives in Tension-Reduction (GRIT)
Peacemaking

Genocide: Systematic destruction of other groups - Ervin Straub
Concepts and images of the “enemy”
Peace psychology: Interdisciplinary approach to conflict prevention & peace maintenance
Psychology of genocide, war & peace

The 8 stages of genocide (Stanton, 1998)
Classification
Symbolisation
Dehumanisation
Organisation
Polarisation
Preparation
Extermination
Denial

Peace psychology
Analysing forms of leadership and Government
Kurt Lewin
Group dynamics
Fostering contact to facilitate conflict resolution
Reconciliation
Mabo
‘Sorry’
Herbert Kelman

Perceived incompatibility of actions, goals, or ideas.
Conflicting parties, each rationally pursuing their self-interest, become caught in mutually destructive behavior  “ Social Trap ”:
Win-Lose
Lose-Win, or
Lose-lose.
Game theory

Game theory

Gerrig, R. J., Zimbardo, P. G., Campbell, A. J., Cumming, S. R., & Wilkes, F. J. (2008). Psychology and life (Australian edition). Sydney: Pearson Education Australia.
Myers, D. G. (2001). Social Psychology (Ch. 18). In D. G. Myers (2001). Psychology (6th ed.) (pp. 643-688). New York: Worth.
Myers, D. G. (2007). Social Psychology (Ch. 18). In D. G. Myers (2007). Psychology (8th ed.) (pp. 723-771). New York: Worth.
References

http://www.slideshare.net	27
http://www.health.medicbd.com	1
http://webcourses.lexisnexis.com	1

Psychology 102: Social processes, society & culture

by James Neill

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

3 Embeds 29

Statistics

Psychology 102: Social processes, society & culture Presentation Transcript