Myers’ PSYCHOLOGY
(7th Ed)
Chapter 18
Social Psychology
James A. McCubbin, PhD
Clemson University
Worth Publishers
Social Thinking
 Social Psychology
 scientific study of how we think about,
influence, and relate to one another
 Attribution Theory
 tendency to give a causal explanation for
someone’s behavior, often by crediting either:
 the situation or
 the person’s disposition
 The Lunch Date
Social Thinking
 Fundamental Attribution Error
 tendency for observers, when analyzing
another’s behavior, to underestimate the
impact of the situation and to overestimate
the impact of personal disposition
 Attitude
 belief and feeling that predisposes one to
respond in a particular way to objects, people
and events
Social Thinking
 How we explain someone’s behavior affects how
we react to it
Situational attribution
“Maybe that driver is ill.”
Tolerant reaction
(proceed cautiously, allow
driver a wide berth)
Dispositional attribution
“Crazy driver!”
Unfavorable reaction
(speed up and race past the
other driver, give a dirty look)
Negative behavior
Social Thinking
 Our behavior is affected by our inner attitudes
as well as by external social influences
Internal
attitudes
External
influences
Behavior
Attitudes and Actions
 Attitude
 belief and feeling that predisposes one to
respond in a particular way to objects, people
and events
Attitudes and Actions
 Do Attitudes Guide Actions?
 Yes, IF:
 Outside influences on are minimal
 Don’t feel pressure to act or say one way or the other
 The attitude is specifically relevant to the behavior
 Often general attitudes contradict behavior
 Attitudes about specific ACT do guide action
 We are aware of our attitudes
 Acting out or habit or others’ expectations then attitude
doesn’t come into play
 Repeatedly expressing an attitude make it come to mind
more quickly
 More likely to guide behavior
Attitudes and Actions
 Do Actions Guide Attitudes?
 TED talk
Attitudes and Actions
 Foot-in-the-Door Phenomenon
 Tendency for people who have first
agreed to a small request to comply
later with a larger request
 “Thought control” programs on prisoners of war
 A trivial act makes the next act easier
Social Thinking
 Cognitive Dissonance Theory
 we act to reduce the discomfort
(dissonance) we feel when two of our
thoughts (cognitions) are inconsistent
 example- when we become aware that
our attitudes and our actions clash, we
can reduce the resulting dissonance by
changing our attitudes
Social Thinking
 Cognitive Dissonance Theory
Cognitive Dissonance
Theory:
How do we deal with cognitive dissonance?
Thought 1 I smoke
Thought 2 smoking causes cancer (is bad)
Modify (thought 1): don’t smoke enough to
be worried ; I’ll quit tomorrow
Trivialize (thought 2): evidence is weak
Add (new thought): exercise to counter
effects
Deny (no connection): no evidence they’re
even linked
Social Thinking
 Cognitive Dissonance Theory
 In order to reduce this dissonance between belief
and behavior, he has a few difference choices:
 He can sell the car and purchase another one that gets
better gas mileage OR
 He can reduce his emphasis on environmentalresponsibility.
 In the case of the second option, his dissonance could be
further minimized by engaging in actions that reduce the
impact of driving a gas-guzzling vehicle, such as utilizing
public transportation more frequently or riding his bike to
work on occasion.
Social Thinking
 Cognitive Dissonance Theory
How to Reduce Cognitive Dissonance
Three key strategies to reduce or minimize
cognitive dissonance:
Focus on more supportive beliefs that outweigh the
dissonant belief or behavior
Reduce the importance of the conflicting belief
Change the conflicting belief so that it is consistent
with other beliefs or behaviors
Review
 Attribution Theory
 Fundamental Attribution
Error (FAE)
 Attitude (influence in action
and vice versa)
 Foot in the Door
Phenomenon
 Cognitive Dissonance
 Role (Zimbardo)
 Conformity (Asch)
 Normative Social Influence
 Informative Social Influence











Obedience (Millgram)
Social Facilitation
Social Loafing
Deindividuation
Group Polarization
Group Think
Prejudice
Discrimination
Stereotype
Bystander Effect
In Group Out group
Cognitive Dissonance
Social Thinking
 Role
 set of expectations about a social
position
 defines how those in the position ought
to behave
 Zimbardo Prison Experiment
 Follow-up
Social Norms
 Social Norm Violations…
 http://www.radford.edu/~jaspelme/social/examples
_of_norm_violations.htm
Social Influence
 Conformity
 adjusting one’s behavior or thinking
to coincide with a group standard
 Normative Social Influence
 influence resulting from a person’s
desire to gain approval or avoid
disapproval
Social Influence
 Normative Social Influence
 influence resulting from a person’s desire to
gain approval or avoid disapproval
 To be seen as NORMal
 Informational Social Influence
 influence resulting from one’s willingness to
accept others’ opinions about reality
 Alter the perception of INFORMATION
Social Influence
 Informational Social Influence
 influence resulting from one’s willingness to
accept others’ opinions about reality
Social Influence
 Asch’s conformity experiments
Social Influence
Milgram’s Obedience Experiment
Milgram knew people comply to social pressures,
but what about outright commands?
Obedience was highest when:
 The person giving the orders was close at hand
and a legitimate authority figure
Supported by a prestigious title or organization (Yale
researchers, for example)
 The victim was depersonalized or at a distance
No role models for defiance
Social Influence
 Milgram’s follow-up obedience experiment
Lessons from the Conformity
and Obedience Studies
Asch (normative and informational social
influences) and Milgram (obedience to
“scientist”) experiments
Demonstrate that strong social influences
can make people conform to falsehoods
or give in to cruelty
GROUP Influence: Individual
Behavior in the Presence of Others
 Social Facilitation
 improved performance of tasks in the presence
of others
 occurs with simple/well-learned tasks but not
with tasks that are difficult or not yet mastered
 Social Loafing
 tendency for people in a group to exert less
effort when pooling their efforts toward
attaining a common goal than when individually
accountable
GROUP Influence: Individual
Behavior in the Presence of Others
 Deindividuation
 loss of self-awareness and selfrestraint in group situations that
foster arousal and anonymity
 - example: RIOTS
Effects of Group Interaction
 Group Polarization
 enhancement of a group’s prevailing attitudes
through discussion within the group
 Groupthink
 mode of thinking that occurs when the desire
for harmony in a decision-making group
overrides realistic appraisal of alternatives
Social Relations
 Prejudice
 an unjustifiable (and usually negative) attitude
toward a group and its members
 involves stereotyped beliefs, negative feelings,
and a predisposition to discriminatory action
 Stereotype
 a generalized (sometimes accurate, but often
overgeneralized) belief about a group of
people
Social Relations
 Bystander Effect
 tendency for
any given
bystander to be
less likely to
give aid if other
bystanders are
present
 Video
Social Relations
 The decision-making process for
bystander intervention
Social Relations
 Ingroup
 “Us”- people with whom one shares a
common identity
 Outgroup
 “Them”- those perceived as different or
apart from one’s ingroup

Brown Eyed - Blue Eyed
Social Relations
 Ingroup Bias
 tendency to favor one’s own group
 Scapegoat Theory
 theory that prejudice provides an outlet for
anger by providing someone to blame
 Just-World Phenomenon
 tendency of people to believe the world is just
 people get what they deserve and deserve
what they get
Social Relations
 Aggression
 any physical or verbal behavior
intended to hurt or destroy
 Frustration-Aggression Principle
 principle that frustration – the blocking
of an attempt to achieve some goal –
creates anger, which can generate
aggression
Social Relations
Social Relations
 Conflict
 perceived incompatibility of actions,
goals, or ideas
 Social Trap
 a situation in which the conflicting
parties, by each rationally pursuing their
self-interest, become caught in mutually
destructive behavior
Attraction: liking and loving
Social Attractiveness: What makes us
attractive to each other?
Do birds of a feather flock together or do
opposites attract?
Does familiarity breed contempt or does it
intensify our affection?
Does absence make the heart grow fonder or
is it out of sight, out of mind?
What attracts us?
1. PROXIMITY
 Mere Exposure Effect
 repeated exposure to stimuli increases liking of them
2. ATTRACTIVENESS
 Conceptions of attractiveness vary by culture
 3. SIMILARITIES
Common attitudes, beliefs, interests, intelligence, age,
economic status
Attraction: liking and loving
Social Attractiveness: What makes us attractive to
each other?
Concept of Beauty 1
Attraction: liking and loving
Concept of Beauty 2
Attraction: liking and loving
Concept of Beauty 3
Attraction: liking and loving
Concept of Beauty 4
Attraction: liking and loving
Concept of Beauty 5
Attraction: liking and loving
Concept of Beauty 6
Social Relations
 Passionate Love
 an aroused state of intense positive
absorption in another
 usually present at the beginning of a
love relationship
 Companionate Love
 deep affectionate attachment we feel
for those with whom our lives are
intertwined
THEORIES OF LOVE: Hatfield
Companionate Love
affection
secure, intimacy
equity
self-disclosure
Passionate Love
physical arousal
cognitive appraisal
physiological
THEORIES OF LOVE
Rubin’s: Liking or Loving
Loving
- Attachment
- - Caring
- - Intimacy
vs.
Liking
- Evaluative
THEORIES OF LOVE
Sternberg’s Triangular Theory
Intimacy:
feeling component of love,
know each other well
Passionate:
motivating component:
arousal, sex
Consummate
Love:
Intimacy + Passion +
Commitment
Commitment:
thinking componentmarriage, com
When all are balanced – consummate love!
Social Relations
 Equity
 a condition in which people receive from a
relationship in proportion to what they give to it
– freely give & receive – Companionate love
 Self-Disclosure
 revealing intimate aspects of oneself to others
 Altruism
 unselfish regard for the welfare of others