You are on page 1of 18

# Intro

1/9/2013 7:42:00 AM

Change of behavior is conformative, where you get people and try to change their behavior. Attraction and intimacy Scientific method – It is a science because you follow the scientific method. 1. You make some observations. 2. Formulate a hypothesis about what you have observe 3. Test the hypothesis by making further observations Then formulate more hypothesis and test them, repeat many times, this is called replication. Human mind is very complex. Relationships Everything has a relationship. Variables are attributes or characteristics of individuals which vary. We usually measure these things into numbers. Measurement is the process of assigning 2 things according to certain rules. Scales are sometimes used to measure. What constitutes a good measure is understanding the difference between your score on a scale, and your actual score on the test. GSR – Galvanic skin response, used to measure arousal level. People get aroused and release sweat within a second, which is measured via electricity that is conducted through it. Characteristics of good measure:    1. Reliability – refers to consistency of measurement. Must have an instrument that gives you the same scores every time. 2. Validity – refers to whether it measures what its supposed to measure. Relationship, you cannot have validity without reliability. But you can have reliability without validity. In other words, you can measure the wrong thing. Does the test of the measure behave the way it‟s supposed to.

They key is that YOU manipulate one of the two variables. Control group -> no film or irrelevant film No pretest –film – post test No pretest – no film – post test Compare the attitudes of the groups An intervening variable is bad. A leads to B 2. Experimental group – sees a film Group 2. B leads to A 3. Weed (A) Cocaine (B) Drug friends (C) 3 things can happen. What if the subjects were different to begin with? Random assignment is used to eliminate many extraneous variables that may affect the results of the test. Correlation studies are used to find if there‟s a relationship at all. Between groups vs repeated measures experiments Between groups studies or Post test only experiment – randomly assign subjects to the various groups. or use X1 or X2 Experiment  Can also use r or t test to measure strength. . Friends influence you to do A or B. Group 1. That‟s what makes it an experiment. 1. and A can influence B. Correlational measure just measures how the two variables track each other. or vice versa. You could use r or t to represent correlation. Correlation vs Correlational Study. they are two very different concepts.Correlation DOES imply causation.  Correlation is a statistical mathematical measure of the strength of the relationship between two variables.  Correlational study does not need to use a correlation. which all implies caustation.

statistical power. Social desirability – Anonymity is key.Repeated measures (or protest – post test design) or experiment Pretest -> Film -> Post test You‟re looking at changes in people before and after the experiment. Evaluation apprehension . Going to be on test *Expectancy effect is a significant disadvantage of repeated experiment results Testing effects – Power.

people often express attitudes that get them the most rewards. Affective component – refers to basic gut level feelings towards “attitude objects”. We are attracted to similar attitudes because they are rewarding.Attitudes Attitudes – a pro or con favor towards something. etc. Behavior predictions. Metis – a descendent who is from an aboriginal and a French. 3. Rewards . Behavioral component – Prediction of behavior towards certain attitude objects based on the individuals attitude. Can also be your perception. The journal of personality and social psychology is where you wanna publish. or any other subject. 1/9/2013 7:42:00 AM Attitudes towards the attitude objects predict future behavior. 1. Cerc type attitude – Attitudes – 3 related concepts. People conform to the normality of society and answer based upon such. Relationship between attitudes and behaviors. Specificity of attitudes increases predictability in attitudes. Social pressure gets in the way of predicting behavior. Priming – You can prime people to bring their attitudes to money. Cognitive component – refers to some fact that you have or think you have. American. about the attitude object. . referred to as behavior consistency issue. 2.

Prejudice people tend to have lower self-esteem. Ego defensive function – Sometimes we have an attitude to protect our self-esteem. This is called prejudice. 1. we feel better about ourselves. etc oriented. . they defend themselves. Life. it makes you look relatively better. object.A lot of our attitudes are formed by experience. it goes against our attitudes towards that action. and by having this attitude. Said if you want to change these attitudes. or the attitudes help us to avoid something we don‟t want. you must understand them. Values vs attitudes: attitudes are always towards an attitudes object. Value expressive function of attitude – We decide which values we have based upon our attitudes. Attitudes more personal. If you can make someone else look bad and think they‟re beneath you. must always be towards something. Instrumental function – we have the attitudes we have because they get us what we want. which is why when you kill someone. and he talked about the functions of attitudes. We choose the values that best express our attitudes and vice versa. They are fundamentals of life that we hold. we can‟t understand. We value life. Sometimes. 2. Knowledge function – Our attitudes help us to explain things that otherwise. Projections are negative characteristics you see others in. and the pursuit of happiness are values. liberty. 3. Katz is from 1960‟s. Many people will formed attitudes towards everyone based on one experience. Noted the „instrumental function‟. Attitude cannot exist alone. 4. This is called an anecdote. finding fault with others.

Trying to convince their target that their attitude is inconsistent with some value or values they cherish. Rokeuch presented „Value confrontation‟ as a technique for attitude change. or is consistent with something they now they don‟t value.People will take on the attitude of pro life (for abortions) to be consistent and expressive of their values. .

When the person is likable and seems similar to you. Going to Drown. etc) One-sided message. you get more credibility. 2. but the line is really long. When you talk fast. I can‟t stop it. you‟re more likely to believe that person..) Source credibility  Conventional  Expectancy Petty and Cacciopo – business of central vs peripheral roots to persuasion  What techniques do you see being used and how effective is it? (fear. Talking slow can be a disadvantage. joy. then trash the other – Inoculation effects. Inoculation effect – Denial – Despair – 1. glaciers melting is peripheral. Central vs peripheral Routes to persuasion Movie. or two sided message where you present the other side.Attitudes 1/9/2013 7:42:00 AM Cognitive dissonance (Festinger) – Two thoughts the conflict with each other (I want a coffee. Polar bear . even if they don‟t have source credibility. High authority people are easy to believe. Faster talkers are more believable or „credible‟ than slow talker.

group 2 didn‟t. or even idea that‟s wrong. obeying even if you disagree. talked about how people will conform partly because they tend to agree with something over time. even if you know it. Obedience. Compliance means saying yes.inconvenient truth Between groups experiments (post test) (gr1 saw it before.  Recency occurs when u hear the most recent argument. Acceptance Leon Festingers (cognitive dissonance) Self perception theory vs cognitive dissonance (one guy fought with Leon) Central routes vs persuasion (Peggy and Cassiogis) Know the important people Sherif from 1930‟s. post–test)(know for test) One sided vs two sided messages – (test to inconvenient truth)  Inoculation – present a weak argument Cognitive dissonance (contradicting thoughts) Primacy vs Recency (Ch3)  Primary – argument first presented has strongest impact. test them pre. you conform. show film. We conform and copy movements and actions. Milgram‟s experiments. A form of conforming. people conformed a lot to authority. Chameleon effect – we do what others around us are doing. show them film. People can get you to conform to something that doesn‟t exist. then test) vs repeated groups experiments (within groups) (1 group. . First impressions. When someone asks you to do something.1/9/2013 7:42:00 AM Ceiling effect* .

If you‟re nonconformant. and they‟re institutional authority is higher (like the government. in their lawns. Groups can counteract. instead of York exec). and obey a law. than you will be more likely to comply. Authority – The more you have an authority figure to tell you to do something. In some states you can get away with murder. If the person is close to you (in person rather than e-mail). In the control group. except on the internet. you more likely you‟re going to apply. In experimental group. Foot in the door technique (FITD) (Freedman and Fraser. some you can‟t. then another larger request.Behavioral Contagion – Imitation of things that become famous in the media We conform because we are afraid of stepping out of line Factor affecting obedience  *Emotional distance – Bringing issues close that are meaningful to you.   Door in the Face (DITF) . Legitmacy of the authority figure makes higher chances of compliance as well. Group Influence – Wanting to conform within a group. Netiquette – behaving appropriately on the internet. nobody showed up 2 weeks ahead of time. DON‟T DO THAT is the equivalent of yelling. Institutional authority – If someone tells you to do something. the compliance rate was 17% compliance. They got people to get “Drive Carefully” sign. In the control group. an ugly sign. it‟s easy for you to resist. than you will be more likely to comply. 1966)   Make a small request. 76% complied for the sign.

the lousier the learner is going to do  Or told that shocks would help performance  Electro Compulsive Therapy (shocking people into unconsciousness)  is supposed to help you IV: Provocation: o Provoked o Not Provoked Used a 2x2 ANOVA Gave higher shocks to people who were provoked. there‟s a need to make a request back. for kid supervision.  Had 56% compliance for the experimental group  Control group 32% complied. Rule + Leger: I. The more shock. 53% complied. they‟ll be more likely to say yes. Bargaining between the unions and the employers. btw. In control group. they used the low ball technique.V Functional value of aggression (shocks)  Subjects told that shocks would hinder performance. Norm of reciprocity – When someone makes a request on you. Withdrew the shocks to those who were provoked    . Get them to agree first. and lower shocks to people who weren‟t shocked.  Experimental technique. followed by a small request. but instead with the small. Low Ball – Hide the real cost of the request until they have made a decision or comply. when they weren‟t asked with the initial large request. 24% complied. Provide your real request by an unreasonably large request. then get them to say what they agreed to. and then they reveal the real cost of the request such as. you have to  wake up at 7am. o Cialdini etal (1975) – asked for a large request. When you ask for something smaller afterwards.

How much was your choice of noise levels determined by:  Desire to help receiver (1 2 3 4) [not very much – very much]  Desire to hurt receiver  Desire to help experimenter  Social Desirability can suppress answers. ask them. so those who wanted to help were irrelevant to the test. So he created Revised ESP Aggression Paradigm. Didn‟t want non provoked subjects. See whether subjects can learn ESP. We only wanted to see people who wanted to be aggressive or not.  Reported desire to help due to social desirability didn‟t involve any aggression at all. Baron did similar research and conclusion. CH 3 9    10 plus readings 15 from each chapter no questions from applied judgments applied questions to law and courtroom with aggression . PEQ – Post experiment Questionnaire Used PEQ with revised ESP Procedures. o See whether they can modify behavior (with no learning cues). This intended procedure is used to lure out aggression after being nice. Wanted insulted subjects. but you only care about if it suppresses answers equally because you want to measure differences between other people.   Increased shocks to those provoked. o If you want to know what people‟s perceptions are.

Aggression used as a means to an end. Offered men a choice on what they want women to do:  ask – 50%  hint – 49%  wait – 1% 1/9/2013 7:42:00 AM Men would respond very positively when asked if the guy likes or doesn‟t mind the girl. Teacher and learner. Aggression might be for surviving (killing prey. but to get something for someone else or for society at large. Different types of aggression: Nesdale and Rule talked about differentiating types of aggression: Instrumental . Prosocial instrumental – goal isn‟t to get something or avoid. Designed the Bogus ESP Aggression Paradigm. etc) 2. Teacher instructed to punish learner for mistakes (aggression). *Bus teacher – learner aggression paradigm (is a general term for a procedure. Can include capital punishment. 80% chance he‟ll say yes. Malamuth and Check used a type of Buss Paradigm. Teacher gets to choose level of punishment.  Hostile – anger motivated aggression. a way of doing things) Invented by Arnold Buss. Years later.Violence and Aggression Muehlenhard + McFall 1. Key element is that you allow the teacher to choose level of punishment.  Lying to the subject. Personal Instrumental – non-personal aggression. you might save others. Teacher teaches learner something.  . Father of David Buss. but receives shock (actually a confederate). Goal is to harm. Detergence – if u kill this person. Learner never gives any shock. to get something we want or to avoid something we don‟t want   1.

‟ o Bus paradigm is flawed and sued since 50‟s. Then start trials. . o 20 trails. Demonstrates that learning is greater when reward or punishment is immediately followed by response. a negative review.o How it works and types of aggression interested in: person sitting next to you (confederate) and u are assigned to be the teacher. Many will do a „Pilot‟ Bogus ESP Aggressive Paradigm. usually 15 get wrong. Punishes through noise. Writes attitudes down and exchanges it with the subject. a test run. and thus are opportunities to punish. o Extra sensory perception – ability to read someone‟s perception o Right answer is „Don‟t know. Then write how much ESP and expectations and expressions they think they‟re gonna have.

friend got upset Just because you help. Don‟t call out “someone call an ambulance” because no one will call. Publish an article on Psychological bulletin or psychological review. no one helped. 30 people saw it. Point “You call an ambulance”. .1/9/2013 7:42:00 AM Test on April 23 Altruism Women murdered. doesn‟t mean good things will happen. This helps eliminate the diffusion of responsibility (who provides help) Donor -> Aid -> Recipient 1) Help blind -> angry shut door 2) Help avoid trouble -> Angry Condo building 3) Help 2 friends who were fighting -> stupid understanding 4) Help suicidal friend -> found out he squealed & reaction was hopeless 5) Help friend chat -> justified/mad 6) Lend money to brother -> Denies need for money with anger 7) Matchmaker blamed for a lousy match 8) Help grandma “Do you think I‟m old” 9) Get a job! Don‟t give money to the person so they get a job 10) Help friend “relate” to daughter. to get famous.

If they‟re doing A. Say “You buy this time. people are uncomfortable with this. I‟ll buy next time” so that people will not argue over who buys next time. + Whitcher – Alagna. 27-54 Theory:  Equity theory o 1. When equity is threatened (unbalanced). to choose what they want.. We call this psychological reactance. they realize they can‟t do what they want to do. o 2. We desire freedom of choice in particular. This discomfort motivates people to restore equity. J. o If the helping situation communicates to them. S. then the person being helped all the time will be uncomfortable with it and want to do something about it. People aspire or wish to have equity in their interpersonal relationships (balance. Psychological Bulletin 91. A. and helps them. o 3. o 2. (1982): Recipient Reactions to Aid.D. o 3. We like to be able to choose.  Attribution Theories     . and u want them to do B. Nadler. fairness). Analyze the situation: Are you creating an imbalance here? Reactance theory o Jack Brehm o 1. o Reverse psychology works great on kids. Any reduction in freedom is uncomfortable. Motivates people to restore their freedom. such as simply refusing to help. If helping creates an imbalance.Recipient reactions to aid  Fisher. tell them they can‟t do A like: “You can‟t go to your room” o Reactance theory affects perception of whether the helping act signals a restriction on their freedom.

liked more. the donor is then perceived as more caring. 3. Factors:  A. One issue that arises when people give lots of help. o E. have a need to help others.  and more likely to reciprocate. and the recipient is more likely to reciprocate. Who you are matters. etc. You can max out the recipient of help if he thinks positively of it. o In a particular social reaction. they‟re very religious. o Attributions you make can be very important. What does this say about me? Factors affecting actors recipient reactions to aid. Intent of the donor – Whether the help is deliberate or accidental or forced  If deliberate. they‟re not gonna react positively  2.x “I love you daddy” “What do you want?” There is an ulterior motive. Donor characteristics. Cost to the donor: If it costs the donor more. is that people can become dependent on you  B. If the reason is good. more concern for the recipient. Perceived donor attributes o If they hate you. and will benefit from it. Donor is liked more. wants it. you‟ll realize your doing the exact same thing.o An attribution is a perceived cost o It‟s an answer to the question “Why did this happen” or “Why did she do this” or “Why do I need help” You need to get into people‟s head and find out the cause of why people do them. o If their attribution for helping bad.  Threat to self-esteem model o Basic assumption of Fisher‟s and Nadler‟s model: when we are helped. o 1. They like you. than to help. we extract self-concept information from the help. Aid Characteristics . they ain‟t gonna react bad. then they‟ll react good.

I don‟t need enemies” Sometimes that help comes at a cost. we are attracted to them. Cost can be feeling stupid. but you help anyways. etc. motivated. D. Context characteristics  The context of the situation o Interpersonal similarity – how similar you are to the recipient . recipient  Self-Esteem o Low self esteem people react positively to help. the more threats they perceive. When help is embarrassing. and you ask if they need help. Is the help needed? If the help isn‟t really needed. o We have a sense of obligation to help o People can feel resentment towards recipient because they‟re obligated to help. o Low self-esteem people perceive their situations as needing help. The more selfesteem one has. Can this cost affect the recipient something? A big cost is when the help must be requested. high self esteem people don‟t o High self esteem people don‟t like being helped because they experience cognitive dissonance (two different cognitions [beliefs]). You‟ll encounter resistance. and will accept help more willingly. o It‟s a threat to their self-esteem. This is what made Nandler to make the “Threat to self-esteem model”. it won‟t be looked upon positively C.     Need    Amount of aid o Concerned. Donor can feel hate for now “having to owe him” Cost to recipient – “With friends with you. you are looked upon positively If help is clearly needed.

People can blunt the emotion to think more logically and work out the solution. o When your depressed. certain emotions will well up inside and overwhelm you. o If you‟re similar. There are things you can do about your social behavior. Info about the nature of the problem – does the recipient think this is a helpable problem? Depressed people don‟t think it is because they‟re hopeless. they‟re gonna react more negatively. o Put a placebo in it. o A-A model (anonymous model) Once a drunk. The liquor lets them misbehave. attributions (people will attribute negative behavior to liquor and won‟t apply sanctions as much). and make you unable to think straight. always a drunk. or you will end up binging. Ability to repay – if they can pay you back. and have proceed lower intelligence or ability o Social comparison theory – judging ourselves by comparing ourselves to others. and you can have people acting like their drunk when they‟re really not. they‟re more likely to accept the help. since they‟re more likely to attribute the need internally. such as by expectations to misbehave.  . so you must be absinthe of it.