Prepare for your exams
Get points
Guidelines and tips
Sell on Docsity
Docsity AI

Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity

Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan

Guidelines and tips

Sell on Docsity

Docsity AI

Log in Sign up

Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity

Find documents

Prepare for your exams with the study notes shared by other students like you on Docsity

Search for your university

Find the specific documents for your university's exams

Docsity AINEW

Summarize your documents, ask them questions, convert them into quizzes and concept maps

Explore questions

Clear up your doubts by reading the answers to questions asked by your fellow students

Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan

Share documents

20 Points

For each uploaded document

Answer questions

5 Points

For each given answer (max 1 per day)

All the ways to get free points

Get points immediately

Choose a premium plan with all the points you need

Study Opportunities

Choose your next study program

Get in touch with the best universities in the world. Search through thousands of universities and official partners

Community

Ask the community

Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts

Free resources

Our save-the-student-ebooks!

Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors

Social Psychology Key Concepts: Theories, Attributions, and Social Influence, Lecture notes of Social Psychology

Ohio State University (OSU) - Newark Social Psychology

A concise overview of key concepts in social psychology, including theories, attributions, and social influence. It covers topics such as hypothesis formation, operationalization, schemas, priming, attribution theory, persuasion, self-concept, social norms, conformity, obedience, ostracism, group dynamics, stereotypes, and prejudice. The notes also touch on experiments like the milgram study and the autokinetic effect, offering a structured approach to understanding social behavior and cognition. It is useful for students studying social psychology.

Typology: Lecture notes

2023/2024

Uploaded on 10/21/2025

annika-osu 🇺🇸

4 documents

1 / 28

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

Social psychology - defined as the scientific study of how people’s thoughts, feelings, and

behaviors are influenced by others

- Science of subjective experience

Confirmation bias

- People tend to see ambiguous evidence as confirmatory evidence

Affect (emotional) - ex: familiarity effects

Behavior (action) - ex: self-fulfilling prophecies (think you’ll fail, won’t study, actually fail)

Cognition (thought) - ex: going with gut versus careful deliberation

Our perception, interpretation, and memory of things are influenced by our needs, wishes, and

expectations

Research Methods

Science is a method of asking questions in the following four ways: (core req’s of scientific

procedure)

- Objective

- Ability of something to be measured or observed from a third party (measurable)

- Verifiable

- Most claims are verifiable (results that indicate “yes, I am correct”)

- Not verifiable when the outcomes are not measurable

- Falsifiable

- Ability to find results that indicate “no, I’m not correct”

- Pseudoscience, faith, and conspiracy theory

- Repeatable

- Can the procedure be replicated by others?

- Was it recorded?

Five steps of the scientific method

- Hypothesize: prediction about the relationship between variables

- Must involve at least one variable

- Variable(s) must be measurable (objectivity)

- Must be verifiable (testable)

- Must be falsifiable

- Must be repeatable

Theory: organized set of principles explaining phenomena

- Operationalize: specifically define what you’re interested in measuring; making a

variable concrete and measurable (objective)

- Experiment: randomly assigning people to listen to aggressive screaming music

versus calming white noise (manipulating aggression)

- Manipulate and measure: conduction of study using proper procedure and materials

Discover Lecture notes of Social Psychology Ohio State University (OSU) - Newark

Partial preview of the text

Download Social Psychology Key Concepts: Theories, Attributions, and Social Influence and more Lecture notes Social Psychology in PDF only on Docsity!

Social psychology - defined as the scientific study of how people’s thoughts, feelings, and

behaviors are influenced by others

Science of subjective experience Confirmation bias
People tend to see ambiguous evidence as confirmatory evidence Affect (emotional) - ex: familiarity effects Behavior (action) - ex: self-fulfilling prophecies (think you’ll fail, won’t study, actually fail) Cognition (thought) - ex: going with gut versus careful deliberation

Our perception, interpretation, and memory of things are influenced by our needs, wishes, and expectations

Research Methods

Science is a method of asking questions in the following four ways: (core req’s of scientific procedure)

Objective
- Ability of something to be measured or observed from a third party ( measurable )
Verifiable
- Most claims are verifiable (results that indicate “yes, I am correct”)
- Not verifiable when the outcomes are not measurable
Falsifiable
- Ability to find results that indicate “no, I’m not correct”
- Pseudoscience, faith, and conspiracy theory
Repeatable
- Can the procedure be replicated by others?
- Was it recorded?

Five steps of the scientific method

Hypothesize: prediction about the relationship between variables
- Must involve at least one variable
- Variable(s) must be measurable (objectivity)
- Must be verifiable (testable)
- Must be falsifiable
- Must be repeatable Theory: organized set of principles explaining phenomena
Operationalize: specifically define what you’re interested in measuring; making a variable concrete and measurable (objective)
Experiment: randomly assigning people to listen to aggressive screaming music versus calming white noise (manipulating aggression)
Manipulate and measure: conduction of study using proper procedure and materials

Observational/descriptive research (does something exist?, and to what amount?)
- Methods: observing in field or lab, historical records
- Ex: “Do” “Has” “How much” (ONE VARIABLE of interest)
- “People sleep roughly 7.5 hrs a day”; variable is sleep )
Correlational research (is there a relationship between 2+ variables?) (does not mean causation) - Ex: as people age, they sleep fewer hrs per day - “Predicts” “Assoc with” “related” “linked to” - Pearsons’ R: indicates the size and direction of the relationship between two variables (ranges between -1 and 1) - -1 = perfectly negative correlation and 1 = perfectly positive correlation - Negative correlation: as one variable decreases, the other increases - Zero correlation: value of one variable is unrelated to that of another - Positive correlation: as one variable increases, the other also increases - “As people age, they sleep fewer hrs per day”; variables are age & sleep )
Experimental research (is one causing another to happen?)
- “ Manipulate hours of sleep, measure (markers of) age”
Evaluate
Analyze data to test predictions from the hypothesis
Determine whether data supports or rejects a hypothesis
Critique the design
Critique the measures and manipulations
Revise or replicate
Fix any problems with study design and/or alter hypothesis
If results do not support hypothesis
It is a poorly designed study, OR theory is incorrect..?
If results support hypothesis
Replication; redo the study to show similar results in a new situation to ensure the results hold up a second time Variable: anything that can hold
Experimental research
Manipulates one variable to see its effect on another variable
Answers the question: “does x cause y?”
Independent variable; (manipulated, “the cause”)
Dependent variable; (measured, “the effect”)

Ex: people come into the lb and are given chocolate ice cream. Or given grapes. Then, their helping behavior is measured. Independent variable: the food Dependent variable: helping behavior

Dispositional attribution; an inference that a behavior reflects internal characteristics - Caused by something about the person
Situational attribution; an inference that behavior reflects situation (behavior caused by something about the situation)
Limitations and Power
Power:
Thin slicing
Limitations
Halo effect
Primacy effect
Relate to the ways in which we perceive, interpret, and remember information about people
Our disambiguation of the reasons causing others’ behavior and our own behavior Thin-slicing: The ability to form accurate attributions from only minimal information
Attributions: our disambiguation of the reasons leading to someone’s behavior Primacy Effect: tendency for information we first learn to be more heavily considered than later information
Nice traits in a list come first (biased towards someone), nice traits come last (biased against someone) Valanced information; “bad is stronger than good”
Negative information: draws greater attention Correspondent inference model: when will people make either a dispositional or situational inference?
Job A: high pay, good benefits, good hours AND Job B: low pay, no benefits, bad hours
A choice of job A seems to indicate something about the person , but a choice of job B indicates something about the situation Attribution theory is not concerned with whether the actual behavior was a result of situation or person, but rather the attributions that others form about a person based on that behavior
More likely to make dispositional rather than situational inferences when:
High choice: “how voluntary was their behavior?”
Is unexpected: “how typical is the behavior among people in general?”
Has uncommon effects: “did the behavior have a unique (or undesirable) outcome Free choice:
Low: giving money at gunpoint
High: donating money to charity Expectedness:
Low: punching professor
High: handing in homework Uncommon effects:

Low: taking good job
High: taking awful job

FAE (fundamental attribution error)

- Reason 1: it’s automatic

Reason 2: just-world beliefs
Reason 3: people (vs environments) are most noticeable

THEME: we can often counter automatic processes when we are motivated and able to deliberate

Functions of Dispositional Attributions

Control
Easy and efficient

Correction Model of Attribution E x: (steps 3&4 only when paying attention)

Behavior: frowning man pushes past you to get to airline ticket counter first (1→ automatic first step)
Personal attribution: judging him to be inconsiderate and rude (2→3 effortful second step)
Situational attribution: you overhear him say that he is traveling to his mom’s funeral
Situational inference: you realize he may not always be so rude

Illusion of transparency

We overestimate the degree to which others understand our mental states

EXAM 2 START HERE:

Attitudes

Attitude = an association in memory between an object and a summary evaluation of this object

Refer to the extent to which we like and/or dislike something Can be
Positive
Negative
Neutral
Mixed (ambivalent) Objects (people, places, animals, abstract concepts) change across time and context

Attitudes matter… why?

Attitude-behavior consistency (the connection between evaluation and what people actually do)

Specificity Principle: a person's attitude towards a specific behavior will be a better predictor of that behavior than a general attitude towards a broader category, meaning the more specific an attitude is, the stronger the correlation will be with a corresponding specific behavior Example:

Climate: Anti-chinese racism in the US
Hotel/restaurant owners: 92% said they would not serve a Chinese person
LaPiere and a Chinese couple traveled around the country
Of 66 hotels, one refused and of 184 restaurants, zero refused them
Point of the study by LaPiere: (prejudice v Chinese) attitudes do not predict behavior

Theory of Planned Behavior

The factors increase the likelihood that attitudes will predict behavior
- Perceived control
  - How much control people think they have over their behavior
  - When control is low, attitudes do not predict behavior
  - People do not form intentions when they doubt their ability to carry out the actions.
- A specific attitude towards a specific behavior
- Subjective norms
  - Perceptions of what we think others do
  - Strong subjective norms lead attitudes to be less predictive of behavior
    - Social pressures may override attitudes Can I Behave?
Can = perceived control, specific attitude, subjective norm
I = intention
Behave = behavior

An issue of measurement regarding attitudes

How to operationalize attitude?

Attitudes are measured via direct and indirect measures

Direct (self-report measures)
- Likert scales
Indirect

Nonverbal
Physiological
Implicit measures What about attitudes people may not wish to report?
Race,gender, sexuality, religion, addictions, etc
Narcissism? Direct measures may be biased by socially-desirable responding , so we measure indirectly ; measures make an inference about an attitude by observing something else, reducing socially-desirable responding Indirect measures
Facial EMG: records muscles in face
EEG: records electrical activity of brain from scalp
Nonverbal behavior: eye contact, seating distance
Implicitly-measured attitudes: evaluative priming, IAT Evaluative Priming Procedure (goal: to capture this attitude)
Prime: elicit positivity or negativity, depending on one’s attitude (primes people with good or bad, and it does so by showing the attitude object)

Evaluative priming procedure : Participants of a procedure are shown a word before establishing it as either a positive or negative word. Which result would best display the effect of the evaluative priming procedure?

A) Participants respond faster when the prime and target word have the same valence. B) Participants take longer to respond regardless of the prime. C) Participants consciously recognize the prime before responding. D) Participants just randomly guess their responses.

Persuasion

Why does persuasion matter?

Goal: make an evaluation of an object more or less favorable
“Who” - source
- Source credibility (honest, those arguing against their self interest)
- Source likability (halo effect, similarity)
“says what” - the content/message
“to whom” - the audience/recipient Ex: Arguing against self-interest
Read meeting transcript in which a mayoral candidate advocates for cleaning a river
IV: Background of source
a) business or b) environmental
DV: Attitude towards cleaning the river

When people are thinking/elaborating: memory for the specific arguments are irrelevant, but the valence of thoughts matter

Strong arguments (logical, sensible) → positive thoughts
Weak arguments (illogical, senseless) → negative thoughts Degree of elaboration determines the **route to persuasion
Consequences of elaboration: -** Central route of persuasion leads to stronger attitudes that are less likely to change
Peripheral route of persuasion leads to weaker attitudes that are more likely to change Central route - persuasion focusing on strength and quality of the message (high elaboration/when people are thinking) Peripheral route - persuasion through superficial cues/features of the situation (occurs with low elaboration/when people aren’t really thinking)

Multiple roles of variables

Any variable that serves as a peripheral route cue under low elaboration can serve a central route argument under high elaboration - When not elaborating, one might like something because it is endorsed by someone who is liked - When one is elaborating, one might consider that the expert is forming a weak argument
Sometimes, peripheral cues can induce a person to elaborate Inoculation: weak arguments make people resistant to later arguments (because a) weak arguments prompt counter arguments, b) counterarguments strengthen attitudes, and c) strong attitudes are resistant to change)
Weak argument: vaping makes you look dumb
Counter argument: no it doesn’t
Strong argument: vaping causes cancer and diseases

T or F:

Physical attractiveness can serve as a peripheral cue : T
Physical attractiveness can serve as a central merit: T
Peripheral cues generally improve persuasion

Pros and cons of living forever:

Cons:
- Can’t say yolo
- Feeling of fulfillment lack

Cognitive Dissonance

An uncomfortable state of arousal resulting from two thoughts contradicting each other Dissonance reduction
Insufficient justification
What happens when there is no good reason for doing something hypocritical?
Hypocrisy can lead to attitude change, but only if people feel like the hypocrisy was freely chosen
Effort justification
Thought 1: “I put a lot of effort to get into this group”
Thought 2: “This group is boring”
Dissonance reduction: “This group is actually interesting”; changing thought 2
Spreading of alternatives How to resolve/reduce dissonance
Change a cognition (thought) ex: “Exercise isn’t that important”
Add a consonant cognition (I’m going to go for a jog tomorrow)
Add a new thought, or add a new behavior
Minimize conflict’s importance (“It’s more important for me to focus on diet right now”) Steps to dissonance (dissonance → discomfort)

If thoughts are relevant, then: a. “I believe that exercising is important. My favorite artist is Doja Cat” (not relevant) b. “I believe that exercise is important. I rarely/daily exercise” (relevant)
Dissonance or consonance; if dissonance, then:
Negative arousal
Motivation to reduce this arousal:
Which may lead to a change in behavior

System Justification Theory

In the face of negative information about their social systems, people can feel more positive towards the system

Self

I am a student
I am 19
I am a friend
I am tired

Importance of self-concept Optimism

Belief that good things will happen to oneself in the future Valence weighs bias
Tendency to evaluate things as good or bad
Not part of self-concept
Most people have negative valence weighting bias Ex: lottery ticket
Optimism: I believe good things tend to happen to me
Valence weighing bias: the cost of ticket ($20)
Potential winnings: $1M Self-views and behavior
Gambling affected by optimism when self-reflecting
Gambling affected by vWB when not self-reflecting Self concept vs Experiential reactions
Self-concepts predict behavior when thinking of “me”
Experiential reactions (ex: vWB) predict behavior when responding without self-reflection Self-esteem: one’s overall self-evaluation. An appraisal of perceived self-worth
“I feel that I have a number of good qualities” versus “All in all, I am inclined to feel that I am a failure” What distinguishes the “Self-Concept” from “Self-Esteem”? A - Self-esteem B - Self-perception C - Self-concept Self-esteem stability
Not just the amount of self-esteem that matters, but some people have a stable or unstable self-esteem “Defensive” self-esteem: unstable high self-esteem
React negatively to threat Self-esteem is associated with
Life satisfaction
More friends
Assuming own needs more important than that of others
Blindness to own faults
Impulsivity

Sociometer theory

Self-esteem measures whether one is socially accepted
Self-esteem monitors for potential rejection
- Self-esteem raises most when accepted, decreases most when rejected Cost and benefits of self-esteem
More positive outlook
Social benefits Central costs
Can increase sensitivity to threat
Illusion of ability and competence Self-motives 4 goals
Accuracy: we want to know the true information about ourselves
Consistency: we want to find information consistent with our self-concept - Enhancement: we often seek information that will make us feel good (even if it isn’t true)
Self affirmation: When feeling threatened, affirm self-worth on a separate domain.
Change focus to an unrelated topic
“I might have failed the test, but I’m still popular”
Basking in reflected glory
Aligning yourself with successful others. Drawing self-esteem from group membership
After victory: “we won!”
After loss: “they lost!”
Self-serving attributions
Dispositional attributions for success (I aced the test because I studied)
Situational attributions for failure (I failed because my teacher sucks)
Intelligence pill study
Participants take an extremely difficult intelligence test, after, experimenters say “you did excellent, now take a second test”
DV: offered choice between two pills before the second test
Pill A: performance enhancing
Pill B: performance inhibiting
Improvement: when we seek information that can help us obtain our self-related goals

Social influence: the ways in which we are influenced by other people Behavior changes based on:

What others tell us to do (compliance/obedience)

Only 25% of people never conformed
Exceptions
When answers were private, non conforming pressures/social influence
When a single person gives a correct answer, there is no more conformity Compliance: a change in behavior after a request
Explicit: (“go clean the dishes”) verbally said
Implicit (* silent treatment * bc you won't do the dishes, and you know that’s why they’re ignoring you)
Copy Machine Study: confederates walk up to people making copies…
3 different ways to ask to use the copy machine cutting people in line
60% compliance: basic request; no reason
85% compliance: “because…”
Inducing compliance; (Robert Cialdini) exploits norms of…
Reciprocity (people tend to return favors; Christmas card study, CocaCola study)
Social validation (unsure of how to act, look to other people assuming they have more info than we do in times of uncertainty)
Consistency (people generally do not contradict themselves; once committed we follow through with the idea of not wanting to be hypocritical)
Four walls technique: 4 questions (boxing people in to comply)
“Are your children important to you?”
“Is your child’s education important?”
“Would you do anything to help your child’s education?”
“Then will you purchase your child some encyclopedias?”
Foot-in-the-door technique (Lawn Sign Study)
Group 1 of homeowners asked to display giant “drive carefully sign on their front lawns” (17% compliance)
Group 2 of homeowners asked to display tiny bumper sticker with same message (100% compliance)
Liking (we help those we like; people are more compliant to those they like, even relative strangers)
Factors that increase liking: familiarity, attractiveness, similarity
Authority (we obey authority figures, authorities have more training and knowledge, therefore they know better)
Scarcity (limited-number tactic, “while supplies last”, toilet paper shortage, deadline tactic, making people believe there is a short supply → more buying) Obedience: behavior resulting from the command of an authority figure; compliance toward an authority figure Milgram study: WWII still recent, people wondering how did Germans comply to such atrocities, wanted to experiment on Americans, hypothesized they wouldn’t obey
Administrator gave instructions to participants

Participants called “teachers” instructing confederates
Confederates were “learners” connected to shock machine
80% continued to give shocks after learners complained of heart problems
63% showed complete obedience (administered the highest possible shock)
Most reached technical lethal threshold Ostracism: being left out from a group/society; we have an inherent motivation to belong (sociometer theory (ostracism increases conformity; normative social influence )
Consequences of ostracism:
Emotional distress
Negative mood
Lower perceptions of belonging
Lower perceptions of control
Cyberball online study
Half participants were included (3 way ball exchange)
Half were excluded (changed to 2 way ball exchange after some time) KEY DIFFERENCES:
Conformity: No request, yet behavioral change
Compliance: A request + acquiescence
Obedience: A request from authority figure + acquiescence

Group Processes (exam 3 start here)

Collective Processes; processes instigated by the mere presence of others
- Presence of others → arousal
- Quiz question: for people who don’t know how to ride a bicycle, would the mere presence of others a) enhance performance, b) inhibit performance , or c) neither Triplett (1898); discovered that bicycle races posted faster times when riding with others versus riding alone Fishing reel study; Wind-fishing alone versus small groups (people in groups wind faster)
Social facilitation; tendency to do better on simple tasks but worse on complex tasks when in the presence of others
Presence of others increases arousal (arousal can facilitate easy tasks, and inhibit hard ones)
Arousal increases dominant response (Dom response: The reaction elicited most quickly and easily by a given stimulus)
Easy task → performance enhancement
Hard task → performance inhibition Weightlifting study; participants lifted weights with either no observers or two observers; resulting in participants lifting more weight with observers around

Lifestyle: urban v rural divide
Gender: feminism as an example; difference is wider than in prior generations
Reduction of polarization can have personal consequences
Challenges fitting in with ingroup
Ambivalence is uncomfortable
May not be perceived as credible (you changed opinion to opposite)
Middle-ground fallacy; argument → moderation (just because it’s middle ground, doesn’t make it ‘right’)
Information does not change minds on polarized topics (can in fact polarize further), educational campaigns do not generally reduce polarization
Groupthink: maintaining group solidarity and cohesiveness influences decision-making process
Causes:
High cohesiveness (group is attractive and wants to maintain itself)
Group isolation (group is protected from hearing alternative viewpoints)
Directive leader (demands obedience)
High stress (the group is threatened)
Symptoms:
Self-censorship (people don’t voice contrary opinions to maintain group cohesion) ; motivation to belong
Illusion of invulnerability (group thinks it is strong resistant to threat)
Illusion of unanimity (everyone thinks they are agreement by overlooking or ignoring those in disagreement)
How to avoid:
Leaders should not voice an opinion early in discussion
Invite outside perspectives
Have a “devil’s advocate”
Groups are more likely to find the correct solution than individuals, but only when there is a factual answer
Undermines decision-making
Closed-minded, resisting alternatives, doesn’t examine all information, options don’t make contingency plans
Two heads are not always better than one
Two potential pitfalls to effective problem solving
Group polarization and groupthink

1961 Bay of Pigs Invasion (bad group decision making)
- Cold War: threat of communism
- John F Kennedy and advisors decide to invade Cuba; DISASTER
- “How could we have been so stupid?”
Challenger Disaster
- Challenger broke apart one minute after launch; all seven members on crew died
- Launch occurred despite near disaster of earlier flights, and warnings from engineers, designers

Stereotypes and Prejudice

Stereotypes can lead to prejudice, which can motivate discrimination
Stereotype (schema): a specific belief about a person based on their group membership ( C ognition)
Prejudice: is a negative summary evaluation about a person based on their group membership ( A ffect)
Discrimination: Behavior that has a negative consequences and motivated by stereotypes or prejudice ( B ehavior) Example:
Stereotype: nurses are feminine
Prejudice: Negative attitude toward male nurses (because of a violation of a stereotype)
Discrimination: (refusing to be seen by a male nurse) Sexism Types
Hostile Sexism: negative evaluation about men or women
“When women lose fairly, they claim discrimination as an excuse” or “Most men cannot be trusted to remain faithful in relationships”
Benevolent Sexism: positive evaluate about women who fit a feminine stereotype , but a negative evaluation of women who violate it
Women are pure, and require protection Illusory Correlations: when two rare things happen to co-occur, we tend to overestimate the likelihood that they are connected
Availability heuristic: rare events come to mind easily, and we overestimate probability that they occur
Ex: plane crashing Cultural Transmission: the passing of information through others (parents, friends, social media)
Media provides association, person learns association
Faceism; face=powerful, body=sensual
Measuring cultural transmission:
Implicit association test (IAT)
Measures of attitudes
Captures the “cultural association”

Social Psychology Key Concepts: Theories, Attributions, and Social Influence, Lecture notes of Social Psychology

Related documents

Partial preview of the text

Download Social Psychology Key Concepts: Theories, Attributions, and Social Influence and more Lecture notes Social Psychology in PDF only on Docsity!

Social psychology - defined as the scientific study of how people’s thoughts, feelings, and

Research Methods

Five steps of the scientific method

EXAM 2 START HERE:

Attitudes

Persuasion

Group Processes (exam 3 start here)

Stereotypes and Prejudice