Social Interaction
September 30th, 2009 : Lecture 6
¡¡New Room
for Q&A
Review!!
✤
BV 363
✤
Can hold 75 students
✤
TAs will have example
questions to go over if no
one has questions
Lecture 6 Overview
✤
What are social interactions?
✤
What are social interactions like?
✤
How do social interactions go well?
What are social interactions like?
✤
Definition
✤
Modes of Social Interaction
✤
Theoretical Models of Social Interactions
Social Interaction
➡
Back-and-forth exchange of verbal or nonverbal behaviour between 2
or more people
✤
Average time span:
✤
Non-conflict interactions: 10 minutes
✤
Conflict interactions: 3 minutes
Modes of Social Interaction
✤
Methods of communication:
✤
In person
✤
Over the phone
✤
Online
Models of Social Interaction
✤
✤
Field Theory
✤
Doctrine of Interactionism
✤
Doctrine of Reciprocal Determinism
General Social Interaction Cycle
Field Theory
B = f(P, E)
✤
✤
Where,
✤
B = Behaviour
✤
P = Factors internal to the Person
✤
E = Factors in the external Environment
Chasing the function …
✤
✤
B = f(P + E)
Snow (1959, 1963)
✤
Person and Situation are independent factors
P
B=f(P)
B
E
B=f(E)
Chasing the function …
Doctrine of Interactionism
✤
✤
B = f(P x E)
Bowers (1973)
✤
The Person and the Situation interact
P
B
E
“Clever Hans”
✤
Classic effect of person on the
environment (Pfungst, 1911)
✤
Horse that could add
✤
No intentional cues given to
Hans
✤
… but cues nonetheless
Chasing the function …
Reciprocal Determinism
P
✤
✤
.
E
.
B = g(f(B x E) x f(P x B))
Bandura (1977, 1978)
✤
Triadic Reciprocity - All components affect each other
P
B
E
Where’s the Social Interaction?
P
P
B
E
E
General Social Interaction Cycle
✤
Cantor & Kihlstrom (1987) from Darley & Fazio (1980)
Enters
Situation
Actor
Forms
Impression
Interprets
Response
Target
Acts
Interprets
Action
Enters
Situation
Forms
Impression
Responds
General Social Interaction Cycle
✤
Describes Dyadic Social Interaction
✤
✤
✤
Can be generalized
Assigned roles
✤
Actor: Initiates interaction
✤
Target: Object of Actor’s Action
✤
Roles are arbitrary
Interaction Goal
✤
Mundane or monumental
Impression Formation
A
B
C
D
General Social Interaction Cycle
✤
Cantor & Kihlstrom (1987) from Darley & Fazio (1980)
Enters
Situation
Actor
Forms
Impression
Interprets
Response
Target
Acts
Interprets
Action
Enters
Situation
Forms
Impression
Responds
Cyclical Social Interaction
✤
“Noise Gun Experiment” (Snyder & Swann, 1978)
✤
Method:
✤
108 participants scheduled in groups of 3 strangers
✤
2 phases:
✤
Phase 1: Person 1 and Person 2 interact
✤
Phase 2: Person 2 and Person 3 interaction
P1
P2
P3
Cyclical Social Interaction
✤
“Noise Gun Experiment”
✤
(Snyder & Swann, 1978)
✤
Phase 1:
Cyclical Social Interaction
“Noise Gun Experiment” (Snyder & Swann, 1978)
✤
Phase 1 Results: P1’s Level of Noise Gun Intensity
% at Max Intensity
✤
Cyclical Social Interaction
“Noise Gun Experiment” (Snyder & Swann, 1978)
✤
Phase 1 Results: P2’s Level of Noise Gun Intensity
Noise Intensity
✤
Cyclical Social Interaction
“Noise Gun Experiment” (Snyder & Swann, 1978)
✤
Phase 1 Results: P1’s Perceptions of P2
Ratings of Hostility
✤
Cyclical Social Interaction
✤
“Noise Gun Experiment” (Snyder & Swann, 1978)
✤
Phase 2:
Cyclical Social Interaction
“Noise Gun Experiment” (Snyder & Swann, 1978)
✤
Phase 2 Results: P2’s Level of Noise Gun Intensity
Noise Intensity
✤
Cyclical Social Interaction
“Noise Gun Experiment” (Snyder & Swann, 1978)
✤
Phase 2 Results: P3’s Perceptions of P2
Ratings of Hostility
✤
What are Social Interactions
Like?
✤
Metaperceptions
✤
Schemas
✤
Expectancy Confirmation
Metaperceptions
✤
Transparency Overestimation (Vorauer, 2001)
➡
✤
Tendency to overestimate the extent to which one’s true self has
been revealed in social interactions
Spotlight Effect
➡
Tendency to assume your behaviours are more salient to others
than they actually are
Expectancy Confirmation
✤
What you expect is what you look for
✤
Confirmatory hypothesis testing
Expectancy Confirmation
✤
Snyder & Swann (1978), JPSP
✤
Method: 58 participants for a study on “how people come to
understand one another”
Expectancy Confirmation
Snyder & Swann (1978), JPSP
✤
Results:
#of Questions Asked
✤
How do social interactions go
well?
✤
Mimicry
✤
Self-regulation
Mimicry
➡
Mirroring an interaction partner’s behaviours
✤
Occurs automatically
✤
Influences liking
Self Regulation
✤
People who are good at self-regulation are:
✤
More liked by their peers
✤
Perceived by self and others as more sensitive and helpful
✤
More reciprocal friendship nominations
“If [humans] define situations as real, they are real
in their consequences”
-W. I. Thomas
✤
Next Lecture (10/2):
✤
Attitudes and Persuasion
✤
Discuss Midterm 1
✤
Discuss Extra Credit Assignment
✤
Battle of the Blades Premiere is October 4th!
✤
http://www.cbc.ca/battle