Week i :
Social psychology the scientific of how think to influence
study relate another
= and
people about , ,
one ,
either interpersonally or within groups .
Intrapersonal
•
→ social has levels of
analysis
psychology 4 processes
Interpersonal
•
relations
•
Intra -
group processes
Intergroup
•
relations
Social psychology relies on 3 axioms
⑦ Human cognition
,
emotion & behavior =
An interaction between individuals 4 the situation ( ffpersonx situation ) )
↳ Different situations activate different roles of a
person
↳ People choose situations they get into
↳ Situations "
choose
"
the ( aka physical limitations basketball)
person e -
g ,
↳ People &
change situations situations change / influence people
Study of the role of the person Study of the role or the situation
•
Social neuroscience
•
Marketing
•
Evolutionary psychology ••
Group psychology
•
Cultural psychology
⑦ People construct their own reality
-
D human cognition ,
emotion & behavior is
strongly influenced by their
interpretation of the given situation (due to
past experiences genetics nurture etc )
↳
.
, ,
leads to :
•
Self serving interpretations interpreting reality in a that benefits
way you personally
-
=
•
Motivated reasoning =
selectively interpreting evidence that supports their worldview I
ignore non -
supporting evidence
•
Ideological conflict = different parties see their moral worldview as the objective truth ,
difficult to comprimise
③ People are social animals → others influence most of what people think ,
feel I do
↳ Because we have a need to
belong
why ? -
D It was evolutionary adaptive → The social brain
hypothesis ( Dunbar ) = our complex human brain evolved
brings
→
It & emotional
well-being result of complex social life
psychological as a our
↳ The
↳
herding instinct = it is in our nature to desire meaningful Only correlation
relationships with others & exclusion from
social relationships is therefore painful
-
→ literally ,
activation of same brain area
as with physical pain
, There are 3 theories on ostracism f- social exclusion )
⑦ Williams Zadro Stages to
& :
Distinguish 3 in
response ostracism
7) Reflexive painful response not influenced by individual differences
2) A threatened need for belonging self esteem -
control and/or meaningful existence
, ,
↳ what is threatened influences the With threatened relational needs (belonging I self esteem )
response .
one will behave pro -
socially .
However when it concerns control and/or meaningful existence
individuals can become controlling or even anti -
social .
3) Reflective stage where their to the event I their
people attach personal meaning use
coping strategy
↳ Here individual differences will show -
D
fight ( act hostile) , flight ( avoidance of
any possible rejection)
& freeze ( to give up ) responses
② Pickett & Gardner : suggest we have a
physical social monitoring system that helps regulate feelings of belongingness
→ low belonging = more motivation to attend to social cues & act pro -
socially .
③ Baumeister & Dewall : suggest that social exclusion causes a
temporary state of cognitive deconstruction
→ would explain why there can be no
signs of mood impact &
why people have
trouble with self -
regulating (e.g unhealthy . eating ) after being excluded
Ostracism has been studied with
the cyber ball Study → found that emotional pain activates the same brain area as physical pain
the / exclusion / accident feedback found ( intelligence ) performance
connection -
prone study → that social exclusion affects ,
life that
made more
people feel like is meaningless & showed
those '
excluded
'
gave louder noise blasts to
strangers
↳ almost like revenge explains shooting innocent strangers
,
during school shooting is
mostly done by outsiders
Smaltgroupprocesses
Humans form groups = two or more people who interact I influence eachother t perceive eachother as
"
US
"
→
Groups have structure
→
Groups are dynamic
L L
Power differences between individuals Members influence each others performance
L L
Status differences between individuals Members influence each others
opinions
L Members influence each others decisions
Theinfluenceofgroupsonperforma
The influence of
groups on the individual performance can be seen through :
① Social facilitation = the enhancement of performance by the mere
presence of others
Leg . people row faster when there's another person than when alone ( Triplett)
⑦ Social inhibition = the
worsening of performance by the mere presence of others
→ What determines whether social facilitation or inhibition will occur ? → Zajonc social facilitation model
pres →ffac"itatesthedominantrespo#
\lnhibitsthenon-dominantrespo#
, Yourdom.in#sponsedifferspertask theory ( Zajonc)
'
the
'
→
.
explained by drive
→ Tasks we know well = facilitation
→
Otherspreserce@le.g
Tasks
.
good
that
VS.
are
bad
new
pool
= inhibition
players )
t
Physician
→ The level of arousal is however for tasks t for difficult
also important for performance
we know we"
Dominantrespon# or new tasks
& this differs p g
for difficult easy tasks l
f
or
b
= Yerkes -
Dodson law socialfacilitat.io# socialinhibit.io#
↳ correct dominant response ↳ incorrect dominant response
why do people feel arousal when others are watching ?
① Evaluation apprehension
iBook
↳
T.FI?.::..:i;aesu*ertrontoocittie
. ②m÷÷÷÷mIIi%E::::at÷I:÷÷
L other is to arousal
peoples presence enough create
( illustrated by cockroach experiment )
③ Social loafing less effort
=
people exert
individually as
group size increases
L
e.g . rope pulling ( Ingham )
L also if let believe it's collective task (e.g hand
works
you merely people a .
-
clapping experiment)
whydopeoplecommitso-iaoafing.tl .
⑦ Often '
(
'
there is a lack of evaluation apprehension as you 're not judged individually )
( you're
⑤
There is a diffision of
responsibility not held accountable
individually )
People have the
tendency to choose for their short -
term self - interest vs .
the long - term collective interest
↳ This leads to social dilemmas (e.g .
not
paying taxes , pollution )
Peopleconalsobelieveothersareloafingtsutthispe
windsock's
£0
that too much talent
'
in have adverse
'
The group is more cohesive (closer bonds) But note a
group can effects
→
The entire ↳ too 's detrimental to cohesiveness
group is more competitive many ego =
group
LD = too -
much -
talent effect
Youcanreducesocialloafingingroupsthroug.IO
Making individual contributions visible ( reinstates evaluation apprehension & reputation )
LD note that this is not always possible in practice
⑦ ( increases / competitiveness )
'
Make tasks
'
appealing / challenging motivation
③ Increase group cohesion
④ Increase the perceived importance of the
group goals ( increases motivation / competitiveness)
'
Theinfluenceofgroupsonopinionsthe
influence of groups on the individual opinion can be seen through :
② Group polarization =
Through group discussion ,
the average opinion of individual group members will become more extreme .
↳ How ? •
Echo chambers form closed discussion communities with like minded people
=
people -
•
Confirmation bias =
people selectively search for information that confirms Halidates one 's own opinion
Social psychology the scientific of how think to influence
study relate another
= and
people about , ,
one ,
either interpersonally or within groups .
Intrapersonal
•
→ social has levels of
analysis
psychology 4 processes
Interpersonal
•
relations
•
Intra -
group processes
Intergroup
•
relations
Social psychology relies on 3 axioms
⑦ Human cognition
,
emotion & behavior =
An interaction between individuals 4 the situation ( ffpersonx situation ) )
↳ Different situations activate different roles of a
person
↳ People choose situations they get into
↳ Situations "
choose
"
the ( aka physical limitations basketball)
person e -
g ,
↳ People &
change situations situations change / influence people
Study of the role of the person Study of the role or the situation
•
Social neuroscience
•
Marketing
•
Evolutionary psychology ••
Group psychology
•
Cultural psychology
⑦ People construct their own reality
-
D human cognition ,
emotion & behavior is
strongly influenced by their
interpretation of the given situation (due to
past experiences genetics nurture etc )
↳
.
, ,
leads to :
•
Self serving interpretations interpreting reality in a that benefits
way you personally
-
=
•
Motivated reasoning =
selectively interpreting evidence that supports their worldview I
ignore non -
supporting evidence
•
Ideological conflict = different parties see their moral worldview as the objective truth ,
difficult to comprimise
③ People are social animals → others influence most of what people think ,
feel I do
↳ Because we have a need to
belong
why ? -
D It was evolutionary adaptive → The social brain
hypothesis ( Dunbar ) = our complex human brain evolved
brings
→
It & emotional
well-being result of complex social life
psychological as a our
↳ The
↳
herding instinct = it is in our nature to desire meaningful Only correlation
relationships with others & exclusion from
social relationships is therefore painful
-
→ literally ,
activation of same brain area
as with physical pain
, There are 3 theories on ostracism f- social exclusion )
⑦ Williams Zadro Stages to
& :
Distinguish 3 in
response ostracism
7) Reflexive painful response not influenced by individual differences
2) A threatened need for belonging self esteem -
control and/or meaningful existence
, ,
↳ what is threatened influences the With threatened relational needs (belonging I self esteem )
response .
one will behave pro -
socially .
However when it concerns control and/or meaningful existence
individuals can become controlling or even anti -
social .
3) Reflective stage where their to the event I their
people attach personal meaning use
coping strategy
↳ Here individual differences will show -
D
fight ( act hostile) , flight ( avoidance of
any possible rejection)
& freeze ( to give up ) responses
② Pickett & Gardner : suggest we have a
physical social monitoring system that helps regulate feelings of belongingness
→ low belonging = more motivation to attend to social cues & act pro -
socially .
③ Baumeister & Dewall : suggest that social exclusion causes a
temporary state of cognitive deconstruction
→ would explain why there can be no
signs of mood impact &
why people have
trouble with self -
regulating (e.g unhealthy . eating ) after being excluded
Ostracism has been studied with
the cyber ball Study → found that emotional pain activates the same brain area as physical pain
the / exclusion / accident feedback found ( intelligence ) performance
connection -
prone study → that social exclusion affects ,
life that
made more
people feel like is meaningless & showed
those '
excluded
'
gave louder noise blasts to
strangers
↳ almost like revenge explains shooting innocent strangers
,
during school shooting is
mostly done by outsiders
Smaltgroupprocesses
Humans form groups = two or more people who interact I influence eachother t perceive eachother as
"
US
"
→
Groups have structure
→
Groups are dynamic
L L
Power differences between individuals Members influence each others performance
L L
Status differences between individuals Members influence each others
opinions
L Members influence each others decisions
Theinfluenceofgroupsonperforma
The influence of
groups on the individual performance can be seen through :
① Social facilitation = the enhancement of performance by the mere
presence of others
Leg . people row faster when there's another person than when alone ( Triplett)
⑦ Social inhibition = the
worsening of performance by the mere presence of others
→ What determines whether social facilitation or inhibition will occur ? → Zajonc social facilitation model
pres →ffac"itatesthedominantrespo#
\lnhibitsthenon-dominantrespo#
, Yourdom.in#sponsedifferspertask theory ( Zajonc)
'
the
'
→
.
explained by drive
→ Tasks we know well = facilitation
→
Otherspreserce@le.g
Tasks
.
good
that
VS.
are
bad
new
pool
= inhibition
players )
t
Physician
→ The level of arousal is however for tasks t for difficult
also important for performance
we know we"
Dominantrespon# or new tasks
& this differs p g
for difficult easy tasks l
f
or
b
= Yerkes -
Dodson law socialfacilitat.io# socialinhibit.io#
↳ correct dominant response ↳ incorrect dominant response
why do people feel arousal when others are watching ?
① Evaluation apprehension
iBook
↳
T.FI?.::..:i;aesu*ertrontoocittie
. ②m÷÷÷÷mIIi%E::::at÷I:÷÷
L other is to arousal
peoples presence enough create
( illustrated by cockroach experiment )
③ Social loafing less effort
=
people exert
individually as
group size increases
L
e.g . rope pulling ( Ingham )
L also if let believe it's collective task (e.g hand
works
you merely people a .
-
clapping experiment)
whydopeoplecommitso-iaoafing.tl .
⑦ Often '
(
'
there is a lack of evaluation apprehension as you 're not judged individually )
( you're
⑤
There is a diffision of
responsibility not held accountable
individually )
People have the
tendency to choose for their short -
term self - interest vs .
the long - term collective interest
↳ This leads to social dilemmas (e.g .
not
paying taxes , pollution )
Peopleconalsobelieveothersareloafingtsutthispe
windsock's
£0
that too much talent
'
in have adverse
'
The group is more cohesive (closer bonds) But note a
group can effects
→
The entire ↳ too 's detrimental to cohesiveness
group is more competitive many ego =
group
LD = too -
much -
talent effect
Youcanreducesocialloafingingroupsthroug.IO
Making individual contributions visible ( reinstates evaluation apprehension & reputation )
LD note that this is not always possible in practice
⑦ ( increases / competitiveness )
'
Make tasks
'
appealing / challenging motivation
③ Increase group cohesion
④ Increase the perceived importance of the
group goals ( increases motivation / competitiveness)
'
Theinfluenceofgroupsonopinionsthe
influence of groups on the individual opinion can be seen through :
② Group polarization =
Through group discussion ,
the average opinion of individual group members will become more extreme .
↳ How ? •
Echo chambers form closed discussion communities with like minded people
=
people -
•
Confirmation bias =
people selectively search for information that confirms Halidates one 's own opinion
