WHAT YOU 'LL LEARN
What social psychology is
How social psycholog h
W
y as evolved over t.
hether social s
ime
P ychology ls reau I
How social psycho!
Y ust common sense
ogy is connected t
How social psycholo
o other fields
subcultures
gy applies across cultures and
PREVIEW
. . . .. . . ...
... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . .
The ''D·d
V
I
iou Ever Wonder
,•••••••••
~,,
.• • • • • • • • • • . • .... • . • . • • • • • • . • . • . • . • .
·al
• • • • questions all dd
•••
soc1 psychologists-and this b k th r
a ress real-world issues that are examined b
00
•
ererore explore th
d th .
Y
peop1e interact in the social wo Id . fl
.
s ese an o er issues that relate to ho
defines social psychology and th r , l~fiuenc~ It as well as are influenced by it. This chapter 6rw
st
e spec1 c topics that
· d • h"
psych ology. Next, you'll learn ab
h
'al
are examine in t is area, or sub-discipline of
out ow soo p h I
h
'
nects to other disciplines and final! h. fi Id' src o ogy as evolved over time and how it conthe impact of culture on both th y, t
e s reliance on foundation in the scientific method and
eory an research in social psychology.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... ........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . .. .. .
WHAT IS SO CIAL PSYCHOLOGY?
t
John Donne, the 16th-century English poet, wrote:
"No man is an island, entire of itself;
every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main .. :•
Donne, No Man Is an Island
Four hundred years later, these words still ring true, though we might now say "person" or
"human" rather than "man:• Our lives are connected by hundreds of threads, and our survival and
well-being depend on these connections. Social psychology is the study of understanding our social
connections to each other-how they influence and are influenced by what we think, feel, and do.
Social psychology is the scientific study of how people's thoughts, feelings, and behaviour are
influenced by factors in the social wo'rld. Social psychologists study how people explain their own
and other people's behaviour (e.g., attributions), how they influence others (e.g., persuasion), and
how they connect with others (e.g., attraction). A classic and widely used definition of social psychology was given by Gordon W. Allport in 1954 as follows: "an attempt to understand and explain
how the thought, feelings and behavior of individuals are influenced by the actual, imagined, or
implied presence of other human beings" (p. 5).
We can understand and present any phenomenon through ·many ways such as an artistic
perspective, a documentary approach, folk wisdom, or a scientific inquiry. All these capture differ·
ent aspects of social psychology. For example, Angie Thomas, a contemporary African American
author, examines police brutality, race relations, and systemic oppression in her book The Hate
U Give. Her approach, although valid and intelligent, lacks scientific value and method. It i~ one
person's fictional accounr and therefore reBecrs only one person's perspective rather than
beinL
What is Social Psychology?
5
. observation. Similarly, British documentary filmmaker Orlando von Einsiedel examsyscemattc
.
. .
.
.
.
.
. l ce and altruism of the Syrian Civil Defense m movies such as The White Helmets. His
ines v10 en
.
.
. . .
.
·e although powerful and mformat1ve, lacks the obJect1v1ty and systematic observation that is
1110
~ ' d . scientific inquiry. Religious beliefs, in turn, offer explanations for many things (from
.
·verse was created to why a person suffers pam), but these are based on a doctrine
how t he u nl
.
~lanations that one must simply believe-they are not amenable to scientific tests or
that gives e..•
objective verification.
USING THE SCIENTIFIC ~ETHOD_
.
'al s chology provides an alternative perspective to these approaches to explain a phenomeSoCIb pusing
y scientific inquiry, wh'1ch mvo
· 1ves t he cro11owmg:
· a commitment
·
· accurate
to co11ectmg
non Y
·
b'
·
·
d
11
·
b'
c
d
•nformation; a commitment to o ~ectivity an co ectmg ias-rree ata; and a comand error-free l
.
..
.
.
.
.
t co verifying information empmcally. To meet these commitments, social psychologists
1111cmen
follow che scientific method, a research method for investigating phenomena, acquiring new
knowledge, and evaluating and integrating previous knowledge. Social psychologists form an
educated guess, called a hypothesis, about the relationship between events and examine the accurac of che hypothesis by collecting data through observation and/ or experimentation, to determi!e whether the hypothesis is supported by the data (i.e., whether the initial guess was a good
one). You will read more about research methods in Module. Social psychology therefore uses the
scientific method to evaluate hypotheses as other scientific fields, such as biology, chemistry,
~cient_ific _m ethod - a teehnique for
mvesngattng phenomena, acquiring
new knowledge, and/ or correcting
previous knowledge
hypothesis - a testable prediction
about the conditions under which
an event will occur
and physics.
This research process helps us find objective answers to questions about why people think, feel,
and behave as they do.
In some cases, this research leads us to quite surprising conclusions. If, for example, I told you
that competitors who receive a bronze medal (third place) are happier than those who receive a silver medal (second place), you might be quite puzzled. But this is exactly the finding of considerable
research on errors we make in social cognition, as you'll learn in Chapter 4. Similarly, although it
is often assumed that children from upper-class families face fewer problems than those from lowincome backgrounds, some research suggests exactly the opposite: one study found that adolescents
from high-income communities actually report significantly more anxiety and depression than do
those from inner-city, low-income communities (Luthar & Latendresse, 2005). Moreover, adolescents from high-income communities have also reported higher rates of substance abuse for alcohol
and cigarettes, as well as for marijuana and other illegal drugs. Using the scientific method is crucial
as it allows researchers to test whether our beliefs are actually correct.
In ocher cases, hypothesis testing simply leads researchers to accept findings that one would
expect to find it true. For example, a widely accepted finding in social psychology is that men are
more interested in casual sex than women are (you'll read more about this in Chapter 13). This is
unsurprising as it conforms with socially recognized gender stereotypes (which are discussed in
Chapter 10).
·
social psychology - A scientific
study of the way in which a P_Crson'!
thoughts, feelings, and ~VJo~rs
are influenced by the real. mtagmed
or implied presence of others
. B~sed on Gordon W. Allport's classic definition, we could now say that social psychology is a
scientific study of the
. h. h
'
th eal . .
way 111 w IC a persons thoughts, feelings, and behaviours are influenced by
er ,1magm d · l" d
will th £ e ' or imp Ie presence of others. As an introduction to social psychology, this book
ere ore focus on thre d"1st .
b .
e
mct, ut inter-related topics that social psychologists address:
• How we th'In k about ourselves
• How we think fe 1 d
.
, H
. ' e ' an act In the social world
ow our attitudes and heh .
aviour shape the social world (imagined or real)
lheseth
.
·
each ree topics are highlighted in Th . .
chapter's topics
e Big Picture at the end of each chapter to help you see how
big ·
re1ate to these th
b d
picture of social psy h
, ree roa themes and contribute to an understanding of the
c O1ogy. Lets n
·
ow examine each of these topics in turn.
o •
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCING SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
HOW HAS SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY EVOLVED OVER TIME?
Social psychology
. ly new field in the discipline of psychology. It was first
.
d" . is
. a relattve
bl" h
as a uruque isciph
nl
th
esta 1s ed
.
.
ne o Y at e start of the 20th century, with the publication of th fi
•
b
e rst textb ook. in .soaal psyeh o logy written
y Floyd Allport (1924). Early research in social psych0 l
• ractors:
c.
.
•
h eavily influenced b Y th ree m:yor
behav1our1sm,
Gestalt psychology, and historicalogy was
Subsequencly, In
· th e late 20 th century, social psychology saw the more number of studies events.
ul
O
tural contex~ and the importance of culture in human experience. It is important to note that :o:i~
psychology is deeply rooted in the intellectual and cultural environment of North American d
.
European societies.
BEHAVIOURISM
In the early 20th century, many psychologists believed that for psychology to be truly scientific, it
should only focus on measurable phenomena. As thoughts and feelings are unobservable, and
therefore (it was argued) unmeasurable, psychologists focused on the impact of positive and negbehaviourism - a theory oflearning ative events on behaviour. Known as behaviourism, this discipline described people's behaviour
that describes people's behaviour as
as being determined in a very straightforward way. Behaviour that was followed by a reward, it
acquired through conditioning
was argued, would continue, which is referred to as conditioning. Behaviour that was followed by
punishment would not continue. This perspective was very influential in much of the early work
on understanding animal behaviour. For example, using a reward to reinforce target behaviours,
renowned American behaviourist B. F. Skinner trained pigeons to turn in a circle, nod, and "play"
the piano.
The beh~viourist approach is still influential in social psychology today. As you'll learn in
Chapter 5, the social learning perspective describes how people form attitudes and behaviour
through both receiving reinforcements for their own attitudes and behaviour and watching other
people's attitudes and behaviour. Children who watch movies in which actors are smoking are more
likely to form positive attitudes toward smoking (as you'll learn in Chapter 5), children whose
parents show prejudice toward people form negative attitudes about others (as you'll learn in
Chapter 10), and children who watch aggressive cartoons ai'e more likely to behave aggressively (as
you'll learn in Chapter 11).
Although the behaviourist approach clearly explains some behaviour, it ignores the role of peo•
ple's thoughts, feelings, and attitudes, and therefore is too simplistic to explain other behaviours.
Giving a child a reward for reading a book, for example, can actually backfire and reduce his or he~
interest in reading-because the child then sees reading as driven only by the prospect of a reward
and not as driven by the pure enjoyment of reading. This is one example of how people's interpreta·
tion of their behaviour matters, as you'll learn in Chapter 2.
GESTALT PSYCHOLOGY
Gestalt psychology - a theory
that proposes objects are viewed
holistically
In part due to the limitations inherent in the behaviourist approach, other psychologists in the early
1900s examined the influence of people's perceptions of objects and events in the world, not simply
their objective appearance. This sub-discipline, called Gestalt psychology, which means "whole
form;' emerged from Germany. Gestalt psychology emphasized the importance of looking at the
whole object and how it appeared in people's minds, as opposed to looking at specific objective parts
of the object. For example, in the classic Dog Picture shown in the photo here, people don't recognize
the dog by individually identifying all of its parts (head, ears, nose, and so on). In fact, if you look at
a small enough area of the picture and ignore the rest, it is very difficult to determine that these
seemingly random marks are part of a dog. In contrast, when you look at the picture all together, you
simply perceive the dog as a single object all at once.
Gestalt psychology was in sharp contrast to behaviourism as it focused on how people interpret
their surroundings and the cognitive processing that was involved in people's interpretations. A
key idea in Gestalt psychology is that we sometimes experience more than what is supplied by our
HEALTH CONNECTIONS
Why University Students Don't Always Practice Safe Sex Although
They Know They Should
:es
To help you make connections between research in social psy~hol- sexual activity that could result in pregnancy, HIV, or STI. Overall,
and real-world issues, in each chapter there are Connections males were more willing to engage in sexual activity and risk getting
that show how principles in social psychology relate to HIV and/or an STI than females (Collado et al., 2017).
education, law, health, business, the media, or the environment.
Similarly, Muehlenhard, Humphreys, Jozkowski, and Peterson
In Chapter 5 you will read more about the link between. attitudes (2016) conducted a literature review that aimed to explore how coland behaviour: although attitudes do help predict behaviour, they lege students perceived and understood sexual consent. The results
do not guarantee future actions. This is important when it comes indicated that those who are ambivalent about having sex but engage
to for example, promoting healthy behaviour such as having pro- in sex tend not to take responsibility. In other words, they view sex
'
.
tected sex. Intentions to use a condom do not always translate into as something that happened to them rather than it was planned.
actual condom use, and researchers have attempted to establish Consequently, ambi~alent individuals who have sex tend not to use
some of the reasons. According to the data produced in a study by condoms. Perhaps this is a reflection of having mixed feelings about sex
Tara MacDonald of Queens University and Michaela Hynie of York and the possible consequences attached to sex (Muehlenhard et al.,
University (2008), a high proportion of young Canadian adults are 2016). The study also noted that people generally acknowledge two
aware of the possible negative consequences of having unprotected types of consent. (1) The traditional consent is based on the assumpsex, including the risk of pregnancy or contracting HIV and other tion that no resistance is defined as consent. In terms of heterosexual
sexually transmitted infections (STls). Almost a decade later, Collado, relations, the traditional consent tends to place most of the responsibilJohnson, Loya, Johnson, and Yi (2017) reported a similar finding ity of explicitly stating that one does not consent on women and, therethat knowledge of the potential negative consequences of unpro- fore, problematic. (2) The affirmative consent is based on the notion
tected sex often fails to lead to actual condom use. Collado and · that until consent is verbally expressed it cannot be assumed. These
colleagues (2017) examined factors that increased the likelihood of findings highlight implications in relation to the guidelines of consent,
using condoms. Participants were college students (N = 260) from especially when it comes to understanding how someone with mixed
a large Mid-Atlantic public university in the United States. The study feelings about sex give affirmative consent (Muehlenhard et al., 2016).
found that college students, especially males, did not always use
condoms, and knowledge about HIV was not always the deciding
factor in engaging in sexual activity. In other words, when the sexual
partner was perceived to be highly attractive, people were more willing to have sex, and take chances with getting pregnant, and/or
E
0
u
contracting HIV and/or STI. However, if a person believed that their
u
potential sexual partner was very likely to have an STI, they were
.9
....en
s
more likely to use protection, a condom, if they were to have sex
s
.c
with that person. In addition, people were more concerned about
en
0
what sexual disease or infection their sexual partner may pose and
C
(I}
.c
were less concerned about the potential of sharing their own HIV or
en
·;::
STI wtth another
I
c..
person. twas also found that females who were
5i
educated ·On sexual d'
•
E
t
iseases and nsk perceptions were more likely
0
o delay sexual activity d h
.
a:
an ad a lower likelihood of engaging in
-.Z z
:rception - how w ..L!_1
oursdVes
e
UllllJ(
. ·-•Y
VVt:
THINK AB
Social psychology examines h~UT ~URSELVES
how our vi
f
we think about
I
ews o ourselves depend
ourse ves, or self-perception, and in pa....: ul
attend.in
•
.
on our soc· I al
.
,
•• c ar
g university feel rather g d b
iocu tur environment. Many first year stud ,
most athletic, or most artistt'
oob a out themselves. They may have been one of the smart ents
· th
c mem ers of th · h'gh h
est, or
in e university envi
h
eir i sc ool class. However, they quickly realize h
ronment, t e comp .
. d'
t at
d reds, or thousand f
anson group 1s ifferent. Once you are surrounded by h
s, o people wh h
1
h
unmembers of th .
h'
o t emse ves were t e smartest, or most athletic, or most a....: .
e1r own igh h I l
•••Stlc,
hack in hi h school . . sc oo c ass, you may not feel quite as good about yourself as you did
. g
• Similarly, you may feel quite confident about your own appearance. But aft
ski mming through C
.
er
a osmopo1ttan or Maxim magazine, you may feel rather insecure. These
•
some of th
· h' h £
are Just
. e ways in w 1c actors in the social world influence how we think about ourselves.
Social psychology also examines self-presentation, or how we present our ideas about ourselves
to others. We use many strategies to convey impressions about ourselves to others-the car we d •
h 1 h
.
nve,
t e c ot es or Jewellery we wear, even the model of our cell phone, or the size of our television. Even
the casual references we make in conversations-where we are going on vacation, parties weve
attended, and items weve bought-convey information about our habits, interests, and resources.
1
~presentation - how people
k to convey certain images of
mselves to others
HOW WE THINK, FEEL, AND ACT IN THE SOCIAL WORLD
ocial perception - how people
orm impressions of and make infer:nces about other people and events
n the social world
social cognition - how we think
about the social world, and in
particular how we select, interpret,
and use information to make judgments about the world
ocial influence - the impact of
,ther people's attitudes and behav:>urs on our thoughts, feelings,
nd behaviour
e
Social psychology also examines how people form impressions and make inferences about other
people and events in the social world, a process called social perception. We form these impressions
easily and frequently-we decide why our favourite hockey team won the game, why a grade on a
test was lower than we expected, and why our best friend's dating relationship probably would not last
A particular type of social perception, social cognition, describes how we think about others
and the social world. At times, we see the world accurately. For example, you might assume that
expensive restaurants serve better food than do cheap restaurants-and this is a pretty good rule of
thumb (or heuristic). But in some cases, we tend to make errors in our judgments about people and
events. For example, many people are more afraid of air travel than road travel. In reality, every year,
the number of people who die in car accidents is greater than that in airplane accidents, suggesting
that our fear of air travel isn't well founded.
Another central issue examined by social psychologists is social influence-the impact of
other people's attitudes and behaviour, or even their mere presence, on our thoughts, feelings, and
behaviour. In some cases, social influence is very direct: advertising messages are a good example of
deliberate efforts to influence our attitudes and behaviour. In other cases, however, social influence
is very subtle. We are, for example, less likely to help a person in need if we are in a large group than
if we are alone with the person, in part because we don't feel personally responsible for helping when
there are others around us.
b al
·
nl
h
·
f
l
'
'tud
s
and
behaviour
ut so
Social psychology examines not o y t e impact o peop es am e
·
f
h
1
'
·
d
d
b
h
·
ut
In
other
words,
peothe impact of a person's perception o ot er peop es attltu es an e avio ·
.
b
.
.
d
l b h Oth
eople think or do ut
not on Y Yw at
er P
cl
Ple's thoughts, feelings, and behaviour are influence
. k
d L , ak
le that occurs frequen y
also by what they imagine other people thin or o. et s t e an examp
sk h th r
·h
·
f the lecture and a s w e e
fi
in university classes. Imagine that your professor ms es a section
d
.
k b
he material that was JUSt presence ,
anyone has a question. You might have a question to as a out t
. d v. th decide
• h
l has a hand raise • J.OU en
but when you look around the room, you notice t at no one e se
ska question,
e
l00k · st ·d for being the only person to a
not to ask your question because you rear
mg upi
e
b li that they must
h
questions and thererore e eve
d
h
In this case, you assume t h at no ot er stu ents ave
h th 't is accurate or
·
f th · knowledge-w e er 1
have understood all the material. This perception
eir
. fl
attitudes and
.
f:
b
t
the
social
world
can
m
uence
our
not-influences your behaviour. 0 ur b e1ie s a ou
.
alth C
crions box shows.
.
e
·
as
the
following
He
onne
•·
behaviour even when these b e1iers are inaccurate,
h
h'ch are cogn1ove
.
f
t (including thoug ts, w 1
d
Social psychology also examines the impact O even s
• a bad moo
.
h .
H
u ever noticed that when you are m
events) on our attitudes and be av1ours. ave yo
.
e el'
all hot can lead you co
nr. uld
believe
that
JUSt
re
mg
re
Y.
you are more likely to act ru d e1y? vvo
you
°
°
.
How Has Social Psychology Evolved Over Tim
sensory percep tion. For example, if we see
. a series. of images in quick succession,
.
·
moving
image,
not
a
senes
of static ones. We also organize our
we perceive a
al xp erience. For instance, in Figure 1.1 (a), we see three horizontal
•
(b)
d
Perceptu e ther than 14 vertical groups of three. In Figure
1.1 , we
lines Of scars, ra
.
. ten.
· a di'agonal line of Os in a field of
to perceive
. Xs. We do .chis
. not only with
. dia.
grams but also with all our sensory experience. Organizing our experience is
•
fl
h we make sense of our world.
of modem social psy-owKurt Lew i·n, who is often considered the founder
.
as
che
sub-disciplines
of
organizational
and applied psycholcho1ogy (as well
ogy), was erai·ned in che Gestalt approach. Born. in Poland,
. .Lewin served in
the German army during World. War I. Foll~wmg a war
~e attended
the University of Berlin and received a PhD m 1916. Lewm mmally worked
within the schools of behavioural psychology, and then in the Gestalt school
of psychology, but his largely Jewish ~eading group. was forced to disband w~en
Hitler came into power in Germany m 1933. Lewm then moved to the United This picture is a c
States, where his commitment to applying psychology to society's problems led perspective: with<
picture, it is virtua
to the development of the M.I.T. Research Center for Group Dynamics. Lewin object by looking
had a keen sense of the importance of perception in determining attitudes and picture. When yoL
behaviour, and he proposed one of the earliest theories in cognitive social psy- quite easy to recc
together form a pi
chology. His research focused on the role of social perception in influencing
people's behaviour, the nature of group dynamics, and the factors contributing to stereotyping ar
prejudice (you'll learn more about his work on these topics in Chapters 8 and 9).
HISTORICAL EVENTS
A notable psychologist, Mamie Phipps Clark (1917-1983), is recognized for her research on raci
identity, self-esteem, and child development. Originally majoring in mathematics and physics, sl
switched to psychology after meeting her husband, Kenneth Clark, a noted social psychologi~
Together with Kenneth, Mamie published a number of studies-the most notable one being cl
Clark Doll Test, in which they presented African American children with two dolls that looke
alike-the only difference was that one doll was white and the other one was black. They asked cl
children many questions about the dolls, including which one they preferred to play with and whic
on~ resembled them. Surprisingly, Clark and Clark (1940) found that not only African America
~hildren were more likely to label the black doll as "bad" and the white doll as ''.nice;• but they als
nd
ou that the children thought they shared resemblance with'the white doll. This particular stud
among others went
'd
th h
fi
•
on to provi e support ror e arm ul effects of segregation based on ski
(a)
**************
(b)
oxxxxxxxxxx
xoxxxxxxxxx
xxoxxxxxxxx
xxxoxxxxxxx
xxxxoxxxxxx
xxxxxoxxxxx
xxxxxxoxxxx
xxxxxxxoxxx
xxxxxxxxoxx
xxxxxxxxxox
XXXXXXXXXXO
Is Social Psychology Really Just Common Sense?
11
. telli
10
ence should be modified and expanded to include these cultural variations. On the other
d gb identifying cultural similarities, shared psychological mechanisms are established. This
big ghyts the universality and the commonality of a certain psychological process, which helps with
h~hli'.
developing a global psychology (Berry, 2013; ~ang,_ 2017).
As ou read subsequent chapters, you will nonce that although many cultural and cross-cul-
ral s :hological research are described and discussed, they are far fewer than social psychological
researpchythat are conducted in the West. This is a reffection of the discipline that psychology is still
tu
mos tlyprOduced in the West and made available to the rest of the world. Local psychology is generally not valued, misrepresented, and not shared in the West. The outcome of the current state of
affair is that we have a limited knowledge of human psychology.
IS SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY REALLY JUST
COMMON SENSE?
This focus on practical, real-world issues is one of the earliest tenets of social psychology, in part
because early research in this field was prompted by horrific real-world events, such as Nazi
Germany. In fact, Kurt Lewin (1951), the founder of modern social psychology, saw the inherent
connection between social psychological theory and application to the real world as one of its greatest strengths: "There is nothing so practical as a good theory" (p. 169). Unfortunately, this ready
application of social psychological theories and research to daily life can also be a curse, in that
people may view social psychology as simply 'common sense:• In truth, we rely too heavily on this
notion of common sense as we tend to assume things to be more commonplace than they really
are, Common to whom is the first question. The answer is generally limited to the "us" of the group
that we see ourselves as being part of, as Chapter 9 on social identity will show. The context of the
situation is another limitation on how common something is. Is it common sense that completing
an assignment (i.e., doing what you are told) shows a degree of moral integrity and self-discipline:
If your assignment is writing an essay, it may; if your assignment is torturing a prisoner, it probably
doesn't. Do too many cooks spoil the broth or do many hands make light the work: Both are statements of"common sense;' but they are entirely contradictory. (Chapter 8 presents research on social
facilitation and inhibition that will show just how limiting the context can be in answering such a
question.) Let's now examine the biases that lead people to see the field of social psychology in this
simplistic, 'common sense" way, and the importance of thinking critically to combat such tendencies.
THE "I KNEW IT ALL ALONG " PROBLEM
If!
0 ,'•Id you that scientific research suggests that"opposites attract." you'd probably believe me. But
Y ud have had the
fid
.
,
same con ence, and agreement with the statement, if Ia said the reverse1r so a feather flock togeth "s· il 1 'f I Id
"b
fu d "
that Would
er. im ar Y, 1 to you, a sence makes the heart grow n er,
probably sound quite 1 1'bl B
.
.
. "
of sight' out of mind:'
.
P aus e. ut once again, so would the opposite expression, out
"b· d f
1hese examples illustrate b.
h
Hindsight bias, or t he "I kn ew it
.
aall ias
t
al
"at hpeople fall prey to frequently-the hindsight bias. hindsight bias - th~ t~dency to see
th
ong Ph enomenon, refers to people's tendency to believe, once a given outcome as meVJtable once
th·ey've learned the outcome of so
h'
the actual outcome is known
is
bias
can
lead
met
mg,
t
at
that
particular
outcome
was
obvious.
Unfortunately,
1
th ,
peop e to see social
h 1
O
ogy as little more than common sense because once
p· eyve
h heard so"'eth·
... ing, t h ey
. psyc
b
O
isc hoff, 1977). What h dse~ it as vious (Richard, Bond, & Stokes-Zoota, 2001; Slovic &
sounded b 1·
t ey on t recogni., . h th
.
al h
e 1evable.
...e is t at e exact opposite statement would so ave
Here's an ex
1
sall\e beh .
amp e of this problem· If I
tio b . aviour, which reward
·
offered to pay you either $20 or $1 to perform the
n eheved h
Would make
lik th
di
1
t at people Would lik
. ou e at behaviour more~ Tue behaviourist tra e engaa,ng . b h .
.
d
o·
in e av1our that was reinforced with a big rewar
~ca
--• u1e (
- · Lflat Was
. r
h ,- surely
,
re1nrorced w·th
P enorneno
Youif rather receiv $
I
a srnaII reward-and oucl
$1 f,
n of cognitive di
e 20 than $1). But the
y
probably agree with this
I or engaging in a b h . ssonance revealed the revers . resul~s of a classic experime11t on th
earn more about th· e av1our report liking that beh . e, at least in some cases, people who re . e
IS experj
av1our rnore tha th
ce1ve
rnent by Festinger and Carlsmith (
n. ose who receive $20, You'll
Focu
19 59) in Chapter 5.
andtng Genc1s ON GENDER
er Differences tn Se
xua1 Behavtour
To help you
.
. h
exanune ow research in social s h
:;re
differences and similarities, most chapters :Jic£ology co;ribures to our understanding of gender
~Xarnines a particular gender-related issue in de
a esearch _Focus on Gender section that
It has been suggested that econorn1·c P . . I p . or example, using the sexual economic rheorv
.
rinc1p es can explain
f th ft
-,,
ences in sexual behaviour (Baumeister & Vohs 2004) A :~ny o _e o_ en-noted gender differbuying sex because sex is largely a no-cost ro , ositio • £ ccor ing to this View, men are interested in
potential cost of sex is high (pregnancy, chpildp . n or rnen.dFor wornen, on the other hand, the
.
•rearing,
• th) • and women
are Interested
in using sex to gain other, resources
Tu·or even
.
feath fro m childbir
b
d ,.
"
.
Is view o sex as a resource that is #bought"
Y rnen an sold by women explains many gender differences in sexual attitudes and beh ·
· l di th ' 'fi
•
aV1our,
inc u ng e s1gm cant gender imbalance in prostitution (women j11st aren't as interested in paying
for sex),_ the tendency for men to desire sex at earlier stages of relationships than women, and men's
greater Interest in one-night stands. Opponents of this theory on sexual behaviour have pointed
out limitations and faulty assumptions of the sexual economics (Rudman, 2017). This theory states
that women are responsible for repressing female sexuality. This implies that women are more sexist than men, which has not been found true across several studies conducted around the world
(Rudman, 2017). Furthermore, the theory asserts that women are more likely to endorse a sexual
double standard regarding women's attitude. However, this finding is based on attitudes collected
between 1966 and 1977 (Rudman, 2017). More recent research has revealed that although most
respondents did not show a double standard, men "lost respect for women ';ho ha~ a lot ~f sex"
far more than women did, indicating that gender differences do exist regarding societal attttudes
toward male and female sexuality (Allison & Risman, 2013). Therefore, there is a double standard
that condemns premarital sexuality for women but not for men.
EMPHASIS ON CRITICA~ TH~NKI~~
eans that you should carefully and
The focus on the scientific method m social p~yc
o(gy m ) b ok and especially those that
"
ented m this or any O •
h
Critically examine research fi n d mgs
pres
.
lly believe what you read or ear,
.
h
ds don't JUSt casua
.
f,
are presented.. in the media. In ot e~ wor d, hether there exist alternative explananons or a
11 think about the information an w
but rea Y
h · dicates
· s(researc m h v•
phenomenon.
, • b tween wealth andhappmes
Imagine that you learn ther~ is)anWhassyo:::; do happy people make more ~oneth\o~;::: ~at
, b
nl p to a pomt •
d
fully examine
that there is, ut o y u
h
. , Which is truei' You nee to care
. b h viours that lead
ake people app1err
. certain e a
h
ing more money m
'bi!. is that happy people engage m
ersisting throug
lead to this association. One pkoss1 Ihtyas getting along better with colleagueallsor f:icely, possibility is
. th . wor -sue
B
other equ y
,
f: to greater success m e1r l d to more financial success. utan
'bility is that some other ac
difficulties-which in tuyr~a:
_._, g more mone
:o greater·a1happiness.
Srilll.d
an:~::r::ppiness and inco~e·o:e;
port- ea s
th other, m
that m.uun
h
timism or soc1 sup
b not that one causes e
alcoarther-per aps op
late (or co-occur), ut
tor
o,
d income corre
happiness an
say th at
uld say that.
are
reqw·red befure we co
Is Social Psychology Really Just Common Sense?
13
bl. h d . The Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent
,_
the
PleA~~~~em
Let'• take ano
r exam ' hO e
d had dinner with their families reported lower 1CV•
h
d
M dlc/ne reporte t at adoleacenu w d d,requeni eYthoughts. They also had better grades (Blsenberg,
d kJ drug uae an epre11 v
d
idel
d
Ie 1
Y
an
e • of moklng. krin
S ng.
Iner Story,' & 8 ear1nger, 2004) , The media reported this •tu y w,
rad
Olaon, Neumar • zta
'
l h h Ir kid1 a, a way of preventing drug use and increaamg g es.
urged parents ro have dinner w t ltfyethe re1ulu. In one other study of 21,400 children between
d further 1tudle1 fO ver
al e
d
d ' o
'Jhis le to
.6
t relationihip between family me irequency an aca emic r
ages 5 and 15, however, no ~gnidca(Mn1'Iler Waldfogel, & Han, 2012). Subsequently, Harrison and
behavioural outco mes was ,oun ,
'
all
· · al stud'1es
15)
ducted a review of 1,783 article, and reported that over empiric
,
d
. ____ ., achool iucceas, and even decreased d1sordere eatcolleagues (20 d con · e symptoms, mcrc.ucu
indicate fewer epressiv
f: ii dinner (Harrison et al, 2015). It's also important to keep
. d with frequent am Y
h e
f: ii
ing are assooate lation IS
. not causation,
. . although these studies have found t at rrequent
ls am hy
in mind thatociated
corre with posmve
, . ou tco mes, it does not neceuarily mean that shared mea are t e
meals are ass
e these outcomes.
eth f:
tI
· I I
reason ,or
. ma be that families who eat dinner tog er requen y are s1mp y c oser
Furthermore,
It
Y
.
may
have
more
opportunities
to
learn
about
their
children
th f: milies Attentive parents
.
h
d
than ° er ·a warnmg
·. signs
.
of u nhealthy behaviours. If familiea spend more time toget er an
and 1recognize
hildren may sh are more with their parents. This pre-existing closeness could. be what
.
are c oser,
c posmve
. . outcomes while frequently earing together may be a product of a nght-kmt
leads
to more
family
dynamh
'.c·1me
. of reas oni·no-.
Along
t 1s
.,, a study examined the benefits of family meals (Meier & Musick,
Z0l4), Usmg
two
years
wo
.
. used
•
' rth of responses from a U.S. national
survey, Meier and Musick
measures of adoIescent well-being (delinquency, depression, and substance abuse) and, Its. con• to qua1·iry of family relationships with 17,977
youths (grades
7 to 12).
nect1on
. .
.
. Results
. 1nd1cated
,
that family dinners are not associated with posmve outcomes if parent-child relat1onsh1ps are
weak, but positive outcomes such as decreased delinquency and fewer symptoms of depression are present in stronger relationships (Meier & Musick, 2014). This study illustrates that
there are other measures within the family dynamic that are associated with positive outcomes
while also demonstrating that family meals may also provide some benefits, but under particular
circumstances.
This is also related to another important concept to consider: the first or most obvious answer
may not always be the best answer. Although there may be an association between having family
dinner on a regular basis and positive outcomes, it's important to think of alternative or underlying
explanations.
Another possibility is that simply spending time
with children is associated with better outcomes,
regardless of when it is. Research might show that
parents who spend more time with their children
each day, or each Week, have children who have better
rades and healthier behaviour. In this case, it would
e th~ amount of time that would influence these
behav1~urs, not whether that time was during dinner.
St1~l another possibility is that children who
:nga~e in unhealthy behaviour and show poor acaenuc performan
I
to eat d.
. ce are ess interested or willing
inner with their fa ii"
" h
who are "act1ng
• our.. in
. so m ies. r-er aps children
ner with their p
me way refuse to eat dinarenrs, even if th .
d
Uring the di nner h our 1b·
e1r parents are horne
, is example illustrates the
Research shows that having regular family dinners is associated ,
outcomes for children.
and de_p_ ~e c~rrelatio;·(~ahy is that eating f: .
- . ~«,rect in Precisely the
.
0
(
ress1ve h
en on .
a amily di
PPos,te d •
Variables) cau t oughts. Based e increases, the othnner correlates .... h
arection tha,,
"T"
ses
onth· ,
erd
~ 1t h· h
f,
LO help You l any of the others
is Information, We ecreases) With srn:t. er grades, and it sh
or conduct'
earn how to . . .
are not able to
ing, drinking, d ow,
,
tng
cr1t1ca1I
say wh · h
rug
tngs and th
research in so 'al
y examine inf,
le of these fa
use,
e concI .
c1 psych l
ormatio M
ctora or
f
o research
us1ons that ca b
o ogy as Well
n, odule will d
.
.
Studi th
n ed
as Vario f:
escribe .
n1ty to sharpen es at are discussed ;.awn from them. You us actors that influen:ar1ous methods
your critical th. lei
l"Oughout the h
are encouraged
e research findtn ng skills.
c apters, Think c fu to question the r I
ON DUCTIN
are IIY-thisi
csuts
S
G ETH
sanoppor
everal classical st .
ICALLY SO
tu1974; Zimbardo's sud1~s in Social psychoIUNo RESARCH
Participants in thesetan o~d Prison study,
(e.g., Milgrarn's experirne
comfort. However . studies Were subjected t
have been criticized for nt :n obedience,
to protect rese
, since the late 20th centu o armful circumstances a unet ical practices,
that review
arch participants. In North A ry, ~thical principles have b nd fychological dis.
and thei
hresearch proposals to ensure mer'.c~, all universities have ::n argchly established
r rig ts are protected T
. part1c1pants do not e
.
esearc ethics board
erned by the Canadian Ps choi ~e guidelines of ethical protec:~erience unnecessary stress
researchers are operat'
Y
ogical Association (CPA) C d fton ~or participants is gov.
0 e o Ethics
·
tng under fo
•
h' h
an d Peoples, (2) Respon "bl C . ur main principles: (1) Respect f, h • w. ic ensures that
Society (Canadia P
s1 e_ anng, (3) Integrity in Relatio h' or t e Dignity of Persons
cal prob!
1 . n sycholog1cal Association, 2017) Th
~s ,_ps, and (4) Responsibility to
.
em-so vmg and decision-makin in
. . ese pr111c1ples are used as tools in ethicons1derations warrant that each studygm psychho!oalg1cal research. Furthermore, these ethical
and
I
·
eets et 1c requ·
" h
no astmg physical and psychological h
.
irements ror uman participation
Table 1.1 for examples).
arms are imposed on research participants (sec
c
l;~l
@§f~• i •rC- o_n_c_e_p_t_s _i_n_C_o_ n_t_e_x_t_: -C-PA Cod,_e_o_f_E_t_h-ic-s-
-;;
C;;
O;;D;;E~O
~ F-;;E;:;T:;:
H;:;
,c
:::s; -.__,-,-_ _ _ _ _ _"'"-_'c'-'_ _ __;_;l..;,_....::..........,,W;_,...._.~ ~w.c.-
INCEPT
'NSENT
:;ATION
Principle II: Responsible Caring
.
.
.
.
te
1 t has
Principle II Instructs researchers to debrief participants immediately after a study 1s complete~ deception {o~;n~o~p~th
t
disclosure) Is used to offset any potential harm, clarify _any as~ect of th~ studv: address concerns or re-eS a ,s rus a
been lost. or Inform participants of how their contribution fits into the bigger picture of the research.
Principle Ill: Integrity in Relationships
f
. ays that would influence a participant's ability to
Principle Ill outlines the responsibility of researchers to _not_ u5;3 :ec~a~~~i: participant to believe they are participating in a
ro erl Ive Informed consent. An example of deception rnc u es e
~tu~y ~iut X while they are really participating in a study about Y.
.
Principle IV: Responsibility t~ s;~~etieir responsibility to conduct work in a way that ~up:rt:d~~:;~·::~r~i:::~•~rowth
Principle JV informs researc er
id be to actively participate and engage in .con nu
society. An example of education wou
and members of other disciplines.
of themselves, as well as students, colleagues,
d from httpe://cpa.ca/docslflle/Ethlcs/CPA.Cod•-2011dian Code of Ethics for Psychologists. Retrieve
Psyc hological Association (2017). ans
c
C c1na di an
ft
_ __J
Principle I: Respect for the Dignity of Persons and Peoples
Principle I ensures researchers are obtaining informed consent from independent indMduals and groups {e.g. participants fully
understand what they are agreeing to participate in) willingly. Ail potential risks must be outlined for the participant to review
and understand before consenting. This principle also allows participants to have the right to withdraw or refuse to participate
at any time during the study.
lRIEFIN O
EPTION
....,,....~~~---- - -....,.,__,
How Is Social Psychology Connected to Other Fields?
15
HOW IS SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY CONNECTED
TO OTHER FIELDS?
A• deacrlbed at the beginning of thla chapter, todal psychology examines how people think about
themaelvea; how people think, feel, and act in the aodal world; and how people'a attitudes and
behaviour 1hape the 1odal world. But theae, and related, quettiona are also examined in different
sub-dlaciplinet in the larger field of p1ychology and in ocher disciplines outside of psychology.
LINKS TO SUB-DISCIPLINES IN PSYCHOLOGY
Social psychology is closely connected co aeveral sub-disciplines in the field of psychology, including
personality psychology, clinical psychology, and cognitive psychology.
PERSONALITY PSYCHOLOGY. Personality psychologists focus on the role of individual diff,renctJ, meaning the aspects of people's personality tltat malce chem different from other people, in
explaining how different people feel and behave in cliatinct ways. We often use personality deactiptions to describe other people in our social world-my friend Darren is extroverted, my co-worker
Deirdra is arrogant, my boss Duane is neurotic.
Whereas personality psychologists emphasiu how people's individual differences influence
their attitudes, thoughts, and behaviour, social psychologists emphasize the role of the situation.
For example, if you observe a person driving very aggressively, you might immediatel 'ud
h
.
a1·
. 1 ('"Sh ,
1
• •
y J get at
per~ons person . 1ty negative y
es a care ess person or She only thinks about herself"). A
soctal psychologist, on the other hand, would try to examine the role of situati"o al t:
•
.
.
.
n ractors 111 producmg that behaviour; perhaps the person IS late for aJ ob interview or she
b
ki
, k
,
.
.
.
,
may e ta ng a sic
child to the hospical. When you consider the situation (the woman 5takin h
· k h'
.
.
.
wa
g ers1c c 1ldto
the.hospital), that might Influence your attitude toward the aggres · d ·
D
.
.
s1ve nver. o you still judge
her personality as careless or self-centredi Our preference for e l
·
(
"b .
.
xp anattons or attn utions) of
events based on personality or for explanations based on situa · al t:
•
b
non ractors vanes according to
our cu1tura1 ackground. It has been found that people from 1·nd" 'd al" ·
1
h .
1v1 u isttc cu tures tend t .
;o; (em~
to personality as an explanation for behaviour as they see the individual
o :v~
xe an
e environment as changeable), whereas eo le fro
. . .
as sta e
to give greater weight to situational expla .
dp h Pl' . m collecnv1st1c backgrounds tend
nanons an o ISnc persp ti
f. b h .
see the environment as stable/ fix d ( d h
lf
ec ves or e av1our as they
.
e an t e se as changeabl ) (Mill 198
.
1994; Tnandis & Suh, 2002),
e
er,
4; Morns & Peng,
0
:lS
Social psychologists examine how different
This part of social psychology "
h people react to different situations in distinct wa:ys
rocuses on t e int
•
f
·
esteem, need for cognition and pro .al .
. eractton o aspects of personality, such as selfI
•
soc1 orientano · ·nfl
· b
ssues of personality will be add
d h gh
n, 111 I uencmg ehaviour in a aiven situation
F
resse t rou out th' b k th
.,.
·
or ex~".1ple, in Chapter 6 you'll read about ho diffi IS oo as ey overlap with social psychology.
advert1s1ng messages, and in Chapter 12 y '1~ /r:nt people are persuaded by different types of
are more likely to donate money to som ou. rea da out how people with high levels of empathy
One area of research that combi
eon,' Ill nee •
trauma and coping. Many studies ha::: social and personality psychology is the connection between
:~r~:r:ocial n_etworks) is important:~: c:t social support _(i.e., the support of friends, family,
port in War~~dy1~g posttraumatic growth e!mf!~o~e coi e Wtth trauma. For example, Georgian
Results indica:::n~:d children and adolescents (ex e ~o e ~f personality factors and social suptionaJ variabi ( a _1 between personality fact
( penenc~g the 2008 Russo-Georgian War).
supp ) .
ors extraversion d
. .
Beelrnann Mes social
kv·
ort with posttraum .
an consc1ennousness) and situa.
• arts ishvili &
anc growth in hild
influenced the g
th
'
Chitashvili, 2019) I
h
c
ren and adolescents (Paniikidze
row amon th'
· n ot er words
•
'
'
g ts particular sample.
' personality and social support
'-'• -iMt"'
11::R 1 I
NTRODUCING SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
:hology - a recent
rcholoir that studies
trengths and virtues
I rtJ s
colour, which in
• fluenced th US
that mad
·al
e • • Supreme court
B
Sim~~~;,i St~:eg:~n in public ~ducation u:::~s~:::::.oard of Education, a historic case
dee 1 affi
y
gram, a social psycholo ·
" Py ected by the events in Nazi G
gtst who began his work in the late 1960s
cruel and il" G
ermany. Although
' was
ev
erman people Mil
many peop1e blamed these events on th
blame for the atrocities of N-.'71 ,G gram hwondered whether the people themselves were less te
Mil
""'• ermany t an th . .
Wh
o
gram conducted a series of
.
e situations.
ile a professor at Yale Universitv
·
experiments dem
·
h
-,,
ing to obedience. This resear h h. h
onstratmg t e powerful role of authority in leadpublished, is one of th
c w ic was greeted by much controversy when its results were first
e most ramous studi ·
'al
h
many real-world event . l di
.
es m soc1 psyc o1ogy, and has been used to explain
Mil
,
h
s, me u ng mistreatment of prisoners during times of war. You'll read ab
grams researc on the P
f th . .
out
ower o au onty m leading to obedience in Chapter 7.
I n part because early th
. social
. psychology was sparked by truly horrific
eory an d research m
events,. such as the Holocaust, much of t h e early work m
. social psychology focused on explaining
b eh aviour
that might b e regard ed as problematic,
. sueh as aggression,
.
. and prejudice,
.
stereotyping
and misplaced _o_bedience_ to authority. However, research in social psychology has also increasingly
fo~se~ on positive behaviour, such as altruism, attraction, and leadership. In fact, positive psychology,
which is a new sub-discipline within social psychology, was established in 1998 to focus specifically
on people's virtues and strengths (Peterson & Seligman, 2004). The roots of positive psychology are
in humanistic psychology, which has a focus on individual potential and fulfilment. Positive psychology is not about finding what is wrong with an individual or treating mental illness, but rather
aiming to improve and fulfill normal lives. Martin Seligman and Milhaly Csikszentmihalyi are two
prominent researchers in this sub-discipline. They argue that psychology should be about human
strength as well as weakness, building strength in the lives of normal people and nurturing talent.
Researchers in this field examine the traits that are associated with life satisfaction and that are
predictors of healthy human functioning (Table 1.1). Researchers then design interventions to
improve well-being.
Social psychologists continue to be interested in examining, and solving, real-world issues,
including decreasing prejudice and discrimination, helping communities regulate the use of natural
resources, and improving group decision-making.
CULTURAL PSYCHOLOGY
Psychology has its roots in Western Europe and the United States; therefore psychological know~edge reflects cultural traditions in these regions of the world. It has been argued that p~ology is
largely culture-bound, not only in terms of its origin but also in terms of its concepts and its resea~
findings, which represent only a particular and small part of the world (Ber'!, 20~3; Hennch,
Heine, & Norenzayan, 2010). Psychology has been critici~d for being c~ture blind as 1t has large!
ignored the influence of culture on human emotion, cognition, and behaviour (Berry, 2013). In fa '
sycholooical knowledge from many parts of the world including most African nation~, mos~ Ara~
i:::r
fi
•
· A
·
d Pacific regions is
P
countries, South America, Russia, India, China, and rst nations m mencas an
missing (Berry, 2013).
fo •
the rocesses that
Cultural psychology examines how culture shapes people by cusmg on
d h
C
h
2015)
Cultural
psychologists
stu
Y ow
people become encultured in their own culture ( o en,
. .
h
d l d in a culture.
d
. ul r patterns of behaviour ave eve ope
certain beliefs, attitudes, val ues, an partic a
f ·
d valuating peoSternberg (2014) has argued that various culture~ hav~ differe;:ay~ oh_s:;::e; in one culture
ple and interpreting their behaviours, goals, and mtelhgence.
at is ig
may be devalued, or looked down on, in anothe:i .d tify cultural differences but also highlight
Cultural and cross~cultural resear~h not o y i ; tifyin cultural differences, we can recogcultural similarities-both are equally important. By i en d g . al expressions. For example,
•
th ght processes, an emonon
f
nize the diversity of human b eh aviour, ou
ul
theoretical framework o
if intelligence is defined and understood differently across c tures, our
'
t:.R 1
- - - -- - --- - - - - - - ----._:......
.
INTRoouc1NG SOCIAL PSYCHO
Principle of
LOGY
. h
reverse causal·~ .
is YPothesized.
i • in which two factors are related in
.
In short, all We
.
precisely the opposite direction than
an in
can say is that eatin fa il
verse correlation ( h
g a m Ydinner correlat
· h h• h
and depressive th gh w en one increases, the other dee
)es :,Vh1t ig er grades, and it shows
ou ts B d
th' .
reases wit sm k' d ink'
(variables) causes any of th::thoen is information, we are not able to sayo ;~fch :f thing. 1rug uae,
T, h 1
rs.
ese ,actors or
o e P you learn how to criticall exa . .
~or conducting research in social psy~olo mi:: ::rmatio~, Module will describe various methods
mgs and the conclusions that can be draw~from ll as various factors that infiuence research find.
of research studies that are discussed thro gh
ththemh. You are encouraged to question the results
·
h
u out ec apt Th' k
nity to s arpen your critical thinking skills.
ers. m carefully-this is an opportu- . •r-,r I
C ON DU C:TI NG ETHICALLY SOUND RESARCH
Several classical studies in social s ch 1
(
.
•
1974; Zimbardo's Stanford Prison s~u~y: ~9o7gyl) he.g., bMilgra~_s. experiment on obedience,
P . .
,
ave een crmc1zed for u th" al
·
articipants in thes~ studies were subjected to harmful circumstances and ;:yc:olo~:::n~;::
comfort. However, smce the late 20th century, ethical principles have been largely established
to prote~t research participants. In North America, all universities have a research ethics board
that rev~ew~ research proposals to ensure participants do not experience unnecessary stress
and their rights are protected. The guidelines of ethical protection for participants is governed by the Canadian Psychological Association (CPA) Code of Ethics, which ensures that
researchers are operating under four main principles: (1) Respect for the Dignity of Persons
and Peoples, (2) Responsible Caring, (3) Integrity in Relationships, and (4) Responsibility to
Society (Canadian Psychological Association, 2017). These principles are used as tools in ethical problem-solving and decision-making in psychological research. Furthermore, these ethical
considerations warrant that each study meets ethical requirements for human participation
and no lasting physical and psychological harms are imposed on research participants (see
Table 1.1 for examples).
Table 1.1
[ CONCEPT
CONSENT
DEBRIEFING
DECEPTION
EDUCATION
CODE OF ETHICS
Pri~~ipl; I: Respect for the Dignity of P~n~ and Peo::sent from independent individuals and groups (e.g. pailicipants fully
Principle I ensures researchers are obta,nl~~ info~)ed ·11· gly All potential risks must be outlined for the participant to ~vie;te
understand what they are agreeing to part1c1pate in WI~~ • participants to have the right to withdraw or refuse to pa ,c1
and understand before consenting. This principle also
ws
at any time during the study.
.
It
,
t wdeception (or 1ncomp e 8
Principle II: Responsible Canng
d b . f articipants immediately after a study Is comp1e e s or re-establish trust that has
Princi le II Instructs researchers to e ne P
. an aspect of the study, address concern
discl:Sure) is used to offset any potentialhh~rm~~~~~tioi{fits into the bigger picture of the research.
been lost, or Inform participants of how t e r c
Id I fluence a participant's ability to
Principle Ill: Integrity In Relatlon~l~s
rchers to not use deCeption in ways that
~ieve they are participating in a
Principle Ill outlines the respons1blhty of resealof deception includes leading the pert1c1pan
. , f
d consent. An examP e
ut y
properly give 1n o,:me
all artlcipatlng in a study abo
·
.
study abOut X while they are re y P
t pports the well-being of people in roWth
Principle IV: Responsibility to Soc~e~elr responsibility to conduct work ·ln a w;;~':c,n~~ued education and professional g
Principle IV lnformf
would be to act~ely partt!~;
~':~fines.
2017society, An examp e II as students, colleagues, and mem
·II pa.caiciocs/File/Ethics/GPA..Cod•of themsalves, as we
" Psycho/09/sts. Retrieved from https. c
sdian code of Ethics or
A5SOciation (2017)- can
->lll lfC8 .. cenadlan Psychological
ithEd pdf.
, _.
.
ror
"'=ial Psychology Conn
I
Hows~
acted to Other Fields?
15
IS SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY CONNECTED
HOO~THER FIELDS?
. es how people think about
T
ia1 sychology examm
,
· d and
.
f this chapter, soc P
Id
d how peoples att1tu es
-, the beginning o
. th social wor ; an
d . different
/U de9'rlb- at
le think, feel, and act m e
d uestions are also examine m
themielves; how r p cial world. But these, and re~ate di;r disciplines outside of psychology.
behaviour ,hap~ t e •:
6eld of p,ychology and m o
dl,cipline• in the rger
OGY
,ub•
NES IN PSYCHOL
1
. l cling
O
SUB-DISCIPLI
al ub disciplinesinthefieldofpsychoogy,mcu
LINKS T
I
necced to sever s •
oc:ia1 psychology is close _Y ~n chology, and cognitive psychology.
S
. s chology, clinical pay
. . .
.
, fiocu s on the role of individual difPersonality P Y
. ____ 1,
sycholo gists
.
PSYCHOLOGY. PCBOI""'~ p tha
_, __ them different from other people, in
RSONA LITY
le' """°°'"'ty
t maiu:
. de .
PE
, g the aspects of peop a..---- . dis . t ways We often use personality scnp·
fi 1 d behave m one
.
ke
fi t$ meanm
g how different people ee anocial rid-my friend Darren is extroverted, my co-wor r
exp n1:escribe other people in our s
w~
tions to
bo Duane is neurone.
ual J,,r
• £l ence
. dra is arrogant, my ss
.
L--ize how people's individ
wnerences m u
De1r
a1·
ychologists empu.u
l f th · t' on
Whereas person tty ps
,
cial sycholoaists emphasize the ro e o
e s1tua l •
so
P
,,..
di l · d th t
h gh and behaviour,
d . . g very aggressively:, you might imme ate y JU ge a
th eir attitudes, t ou ts,
b
a person rivm
h
lf") A
For example, if you o serv~
"Sh • careless person" or "She only thinks about erse
.
erson's
personality
neganvdy
(
h
eds
a
ld
try
to
examine
the
role
of
situational
factors
in pro•
P
·
n the other an • wou
aki
· k
social psychoIogist, o
th
. late for a J. ob interview, or she may be t
ng a sic
h ·our· perhaps e person is
k hild
ducing th at be avi •
'd th "tuation (the woman was taking her sic c
to
th h "ta! When you consi er e s1
child to e ospt ·.
. fl
ttitud.e toward the aggressive driver. Do you still judge
your a
.
.
the_hospi•cat) ' chat might m uence
If
tred~ Our preference for explanations ( or attnbunons) of
her personality as care1ess or se -cen
.
.
din
. or fior explanations based on situational factors varies accor g .to
events based on personalicy
our cu Ituralb ackground . It h as been found that people from individualistic cultures
. . . tend to give
more emphasis co personality as an explanation for behaviour as they see-~e ~nd1v1dual as stable/
fixed (and che environment as changeable), whereas people from collecnv1snc backgrounds tend
to give greater weight to situational explanations and holistic perspectives for behaviour as they
see the environment as stable/fixed (and the self as changeable) (Miller, 1984;. Morris & Peng.
1994; Triandis & Suh, 2002).
ere: '.
Social psychologists examine how different people react to different situations in distinct ways.
This part of social psychology focuses on the interaction of aspects of personality, such as selfe,teem, need for cognition, and prosocial orientation, in influencing behaviour in a given situation.
Issues of pe rsonality will beaddresse
' d throughout this book as they overlap,with social psychology.
For e~".1ple, in Chapter 6 you'll read about how different people are persuaded by different types of
advernsmg messages d 10
· Ch
,
are
.
• an
apter 12 you ll read about how people with high levels of empathy
more likely to donate money to someone in need.
One area of research th t
b•
.
trauma and
. M
a c~m ines social and personality psychology is the connection betweer
coping. . any studies h
h
th
and other.social netwo ks) . .
aves. own at social support (i.e., the support of friends ,'famil)
r is important m helping P
l
.th
ruearchers studym
· g
.
cop e cope W1 trauma. For example, Geor<ria1
posttraumanc growth,
. d th
o·
B9rt in war-~xperienced childr
- , . - C?Carnme
e role of personality factors and social sup
~u:ks indicated a link betwe en and aald~lescents ( experiencing the 2008 Russo-Georgian War
t1onal variabl ( . · ·
en person ity factors (extra
·
d
.
.
B
es, social support) w·th
version an conscientiousness) and situ:
eelmann M kv'
i posttraumatic growth . hild
inR
d• arts ishvili, & Chitashvil· 2019)
inc
ren and adolescents (Panjikid.2
uence the
h
i,
In oth
ds
growc among this partic la
·
er wor • personality and social suppc
u r sample.