Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to L14_SocialPsy_Ch.pptx
Similar to L14_SocialPsy_Ch.pptx (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
L14_SocialPsy_Ch.pptx
- 5. What position does someone occupy in society? – What behaviors are expected from him or her? Social Roles
- 6. The power of “social role” • Stanford Prison Experiment – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZwfNs1pqG 0 • 近期，有人質疑這個實驗結果並不可信 – https://medium.com/s/trustissues/the-lifespan- of-a-lie-d869212b1f62
- 7. The power of “social role” • 這種現象是怎麼發生的？ – 在團體當中，有很多社群規範SOCIAL NORMS – 而我們每個人都被分配到一個 SOCIAL ROLE
- 9. Why did somebody behave in a particular way? What caused the behavior? Attributions Internal (dispositional) External (situational)
- 10. Attributions • 人在歸因時的偏誤 – Fundamental attribution error – Actor-observer bias • 這些偏誤可能會形成事實 – Self-fulfilling prophecies自我實現預言
- 11. Attributions • 人在歸因時的偏誤 – Fundamental attribution error – Actor-observer bias • 這些偏誤可能會形成事實 – Self-fulfilling prophecies自我實現預言
- 12. Attributions • Attribution Theory – Fundamental attribution error (Ross, 1977) • People tend to underestimate situational factors – E.g., She is angry now, so she must be a bad-tempered person
- 13. Attributions • 人在歸因時的偏誤 – Fundamental attribution error – Actor-observer bias • 這些偏誤可能會形成事實 – Self-fulfilling prophecies自我實現預言
- 14. Attributions • 人在歸因時的偏誤 – Fundamental attribution error – Actor-observer bias • 這些偏誤可能會形成事實 – Self-fulfilling prophecies自我實現預言
- 15. Attributions • Attribution Theory – Actor-observer bias • tendency to attribute others’ actions to internal factors, while attributing our own actions to external factors.
- 16. Attributions • 人在歸因時的偏誤 – Fundamental attribution error – Actor-observer bias • 這些偏誤可能會形成事實 – Self-fulfilling prophecies自我實現預言
- 17. Attributions • 人在歸因時的偏誤 – Fundamental attribution error – Actor-observer bias • 這些偏誤可能會形成事實 – Self-fulfilling prophecies自我實現預言
- 18. Attributions • Attribution Theory – Sometimes, your interpretations can actually shape the reality • Self-fulfilling properties (Merton, 1957)自我實現預言
- 19. Attributions • Attribution Theory – Self-fulfilling prophecies (Merton, 1957) • 老師被告知某一群學生是“黑馬” (但事實上隨機抽出 的學生) – 在學年度的最後 » 這些隨機選出的“黑馬”在IQ分數上多了22分 • 顯著高於控制組
- 20. How you interpret social events • Leads to your Attitude
- 21. May include cognitive, affective, and behavioral components Attitudes Attitude on gun control Cognitive (beliefs, ideas) “Gun owners are more likely to shoot a loved one than a criminal.” Affective (emotions, feelings) “Guns just make me sick” Behavioral (actions) “I vote for gun- control politicians.”
- 22. Persuasion • Attempt to change attitudes – Communicator: • person presenting arguments or information – Message: • content of communicator’s arguments – Audience: • person or group to whom a persuasive message is directed
- 23. Effective Persuasion: The Communicator • Persuasion is more effective if the communicator – Is likable, expressive, trustworthy, an expert on the topic, and similar to the audience in some respect – appears to have nothing to gain if the audience accepts the message
- 24. Effective Persuasion: The Message • Persuasion is more effective if the message – appeals to emotions, particularly to fear or anxiety – provides a clear course of action that will, if followed, reduce fear or produce personally desirable results – states clear-cut conclusions – is backed up by facts and statistics – is repeated frequently
- 25. Effective Persuasion: The Audience • Persuasion is more effective if – both sides of the argument are presented in the case of a well-informed audience – only one side of the argument is presented in the case of a poorly informed audience
- 26. An uncomfortable state that occurs when behavior and attitudes do not match How can this state be resolved? Cognitive Dissonance 認知失調 Change your Attitude!
- 27. Attitude change due to the inconsistency between the attitude and behavior Cognitive Dissonance Theory
- 28. Festinger & Carlsmith 1959 Cognitive Dissonance Theory
- 29. The leader Is there other thing that might change our attitude?
- 30. Conformity • Matching your behavior to the perceived social norms – Asch Experiment • Subject sit with other people • The first 3 trials – Everyone agrees on the correct answer • The 4 trial – Other people give a wrong answer Which one of these is the same as the one on the left F70.1
- 31. The power of the situation • Conformity – Asch Experiment
- 32. Some interesting exp • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8BkzvP 19v4
- 33. Complying with instructions given by an authority figure Obedience
- 34. Obedience • Obedience of authority – Milgram’s experiment • https://vimeo.com/89396290
- 35. A type of flawed decision making in which a group does not question its decisions critically Groupthink
- 36. Brainwashing
- 37. Brainwashing • Generally three steps – Unfreezing • loosening of former values and convictions through physical and psychological abuse, lack of sleep, humiliation, and isolation – Change: • when the brainwashed person reaches “breaking point” and abandons former beliefs – Refreezing: • Rewarding new attitudes and beliefs
- 40. Cult recruitment • People tend to join a cult when – Undergoing mile depression (Hunter, 1998) • After a breakup • Struggling with an exam • Trying to be independent from families (Sirkin, 1990) • Teenagers seeking for a replacement for parental authority (Richmond, 2004) – Pimps use these strategies to recruit women into prostitution (Kennedy et al., 2007)
- 43. Cult conversion • “Love bombing” – Intense display of affection and understanding • Rituals – Wear down physical and emotional resistance, discouraging critical thinking.
- 44. Concluding remarks • Humans are social animals – So we were born with these “social instincts” • These social instincts are not necessary bad – They help us “blend” into the group – Thanks to these social instincts, we pay tax, we obey the law • But next time, when you find your “social instinct” might harm other people. You need to be cautious. – How could it be harmful??
- 45. Concluding remarks • Historical tragedies due to “social thinking”
- 46. Concluding remarks • Historical tragedies due to “social thinking”
- 47. Concluding remarks • Historical tragedies due to “social thinking” – Mass Suicide at Jonestown
- 48. 下週 • 期末考 – 線上考試：用e3平台 – 請開攝影機
Editor's Notes
- IMAGE: Chapter 13, page 646 (Cacioppo) [From the BBC Prison Study, Copyright © BBC. Photograph courtesy of Alex Haslem Ph.D.] Social Cognition 3 of 13 We all belong to many overlapping social groups: Groups can based on family, activities, status, occupation, and other factors. Groups help us classify people based on various characteristics In each group, we occupy a particular position Daughter, son, brother, cousin, student, athlete, band geek, overachiever, girlfriend, rebel Social roles are patterns of behavior expected of persons in various social positions and include gender roles For example, think of how you expect teachers to behave. You’d probably expect them to know their subject matter, to be honest and accurate, and to provide assistance when you ask for help. The expectations of the roles that you occupy can influence your behavior. A change in role can lead to a change in behavior. Think of someone who is given new responsibilities and “rises to the challenge.” The Stanford Prison Study (conducted by Philip Zimbardo) examined how social roles and expectations can have a dramatic impact on behavior Young men who had been randomly assigned to prisoner or guard roles quickly adopted behaviors consistent with those roles, leading to such inappropriate behavior that the study was stopped after only 6 days instead of the planned 14 days Some guards became abusive in demonstrating their power and authority. Some prisoners became meek and submissive Zimbardo argued that the roles of guard or prisoner overwhelmed individuality The fake prison turned into reality for the participants in the experiment. They lost sight of the outside world and fell into patterns consistent with their roles.
- IMAGE: Social Cognition 4 of 13 Our success in the social world begins with our ability to perceive the characteristics and intentions of others We not only “size up” other people very quickly in terms of their personal characteristics, but we also ask “why” they behave the way they do Being able to predict the behavior of others has significant survival value Judgments about the causes of a person’s behavior are known as attributions Internal attributions are judgments assigning the cause of a person’s behavior to his or her personal qualities or characteristics Thoughts, personality, needs, abilities Situational attributions are judgments assigning the cause of a person’s behavior to his or her environment Factors that lie outside of a person.
- IMAGE: Based on Figure 12.4 (Weiten) [© Cengage Learning] Social Cognition 7 of 13 An attitude is a mixture of belief and emotion that predisposes a person to respond to other people, objects, or groups in a positive or negative way The cognitive component of an attitude is what you believe about a particular object or issue The affective component consists of your feelings toward the attitudinal object The behavioral component refers to your actions toward various people, objects, or institutions. Attitudes are formed via: Direct experience with the attitudinal object Chance conditioning as a result of a small number of contacts with an attitudinal object Interaction with others, including families and other groups The media including newspapers, television/radio, and the Internet
- IMAGE [© Colin Young-Wolff/Photo Edit] (Pastorino, p. 415): Because smoking is inconsistent with being health conscious, this person is likely to experience dissonance that may lead to attitude or behavior change. Social Cognition 9 of 13 Cognitive dissonance is the uncomfortable state that occurs when behavior and attitudes do not match We want consistency in how we see ourselves, dissonance motivates us to seek resolution. The discomfort can be resolved in several ways: Changing one’s attitude entirely Adding qualifiers that help “excuse” your behavior Changing your behavior Choosing to smoke in spite of constant warning messages can produce a sense of cognitive dissonance. How might this smoker reduce her dissonance? She might think of examples where smokers lived a long life. She might view her actions as a rebellion against “nanny-state” laws She might reject research showing the link between smoking and cancer She might say, “I only smoke when I’m really stressed out.” The result of these strategies is to bring her attitudes and behaviors more inline with one another. Think of an example in which your behavior was inconsistent with your attitudes or beliefs Were you motivated to reconcile these discrepancies? Or did you simply ignore them?
- IMAGE: [© Joseph Reid/Alamy] (Pastorino, p. 435) Social Influence 4 of 11 Obedience is defined as compliance with the request of an authority figure. Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram developed a unique and controversial research program to find out whether ordinary Americans would perform clearly immoral actions if they were instructed to do so. Participants in the Milgram studies were led to believe that a “learner” would receive electric shocks following each wrong answer. No actual shocks were ever administered. The study proceeded as follows: The participant was told they were taking part in a study looking at how punishment affects learning Participants were always assigned to be the “teacher” while a confederate was assigned to be the “learner.” When learners answered a question incorrectly, the teacher was instructed to administer a series of electric shocks With each wrong answer, the shocks increased in intensity. The shock generator went from 15–450 volts Labels went from “Slight Shock” to “Danger: Severe Shock” When you reach the 100V level, the learner begins to scream in response to the shocks Around 300V, the learner goes silent and stops responding. Although most participants showed signs of stress and verbally stated their concerns about the procedure, all of Milgram’s original 40 participants went as far as 300 volts, and 26 out of the 40 (65%) fully complied by administering the maximum shocks (450 volts) If you were a participant, would you have obeyed the experimenter even as the learner cried out for help? In follow-up studies, Milgram found some factors that influenced the level of obedience shown. Some things that reduced obedience: Increasing the proximity between the participant and the learner. Increasing the distance between the participant and the authority figure Moving from the Yale campus to an office in Bridgeport, CT Observing someone defy the authority figure Some people have argued that Milgram’s results were a product of his time, but in 2006, a researcher named Jerry Burger attempted a partial replication of Milgram’s experiment. Some aspects of the study were changed for ethical reasons, since the original procedure caused great stress for participants. Burger found that modern participants showed slightly lower levels of obedience than Milgram found. Interestingly, seeing someone defy the authority figure did NOT have a significant impact on the modern participants. Obedience varies across cultures, but none is immune No society can exist without any obedience at all; however, history is full of instances where blindly following orders leads people into highly unethical behavior See Milgram’s study: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCVlI-_4GZQ (9:53) For a contemporary take on Milgram’s research: http://www.npr.org/2013/08/28/209559002/taking-a-closer-look-at-milgrams-shocking-obedience-study and http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2013/10/02/the-shocking-truth-of-the-notorious-milgram-obedience-experiments/#.VAxe0_ldWVM
- IMAGE: [© SIPA/USA/SIPA/Newscom] (Nevid, p. 478) Social Influence 8 of 11 If group members suppress dissenting opinions in the interests of group cohesion, the group may fall into a state of groupthink This type of flawed decision making might account for a number of unfortunate group decisions throughout history including the Challenger explosion and the pre-emptive strike on Iraq based on the conviction at the time that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction If people are afraid to speak out or “rock the boat,” the flaws in a plan may never come to light. In some cases, the leaders of a group are unwilling to tolerate dissent. In other cases, there may be implicit pressure to present alternative views. Groupthink is especially likely in cohesive groups with high morale whose members already share similar attitudes “One of the dangers in a White House, based on my reading of history, is that you get wrapped up in groupthink, and everybody agrees with everything, and there’s no discussion and there are no dissenting views. “(Barack Obama, 2008) How did groupthink contribute to the Challenger explosion? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mG8BPB_oPlg (7:23) In group polarization, a period of discussion actually pushes group members to take more extreme positions in the direction they were already inclined Two pressures appear to push individuals to take more extreme positions following a group discussion Conformity and the desire for affiliation contribute to group polarization Exposure to discussion on a topic introduces new reasons for holding an attitude