Myers’ PSYCHOLOGY
(7th Ed)
Chapter 18
Social Psychology
James A. McCubbin, PhD
Clemson University
Worth Publishers
1
Ch. 18: Social Psychology
Social Thinking
 Social Psychology: scientific study of how we think
about, influence, & relate to one another
 Attribution Theory: How we “attribute” something to
someone…to us…or to others…
 tendency to give a causal explanation for someone’s
behavior, often by crediting either the situation or the
person’s disposition… situational vs. dispositional factors
 Fundamental Attribution Error
 tendency for observers, when analyzing others’ behaviors,
to underestimate how much of the situation is to blame…&
to overestimate the impact of personal disposition
 Attitude
 belief & feeling that influences us to respond in a particular
way to objects, people & events
2
Social Thinking
 How we explain someone else’s behavior affects
how we react to it …
“It’s because…..”
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 3the
other driver, give a dirty look)
Negative behavior
Social Thinking
NOW….Relates to Biopsychosocial
 Our behavior is affected by our inner attitudes as well
as by external social influences:
Internal attitudes + External attitudes =
Behavior effects
Internal
attitudes
External social
influences
Behavior
4
Social Thinking
 Attitudes
follow
behavior…
which follow
attitudes…
which follow
behavior...etc..
 Cooperative
actions feed
mutual liking…
...encouraging
us to like
another…
So...Smile at
someone! 
5
Social Thinking
 Foot-in-the-Door Phenomenon
 If you ask ppl 1st agreed for a small request…then
later make a larger request = more compliance
(going along..)
 Role (aka “social roles”): set of expectations
about a social position
 how ppl in a particular position should behave
 Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment:
Looked at social roles in his “prisoner/guard”
study using college students (p. b-700) D-M video
6
Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment
7
Cognitive Dissonance Theory: Leon Festinger
We try to reduce the discomfort (dissonance) we feel
when two of our thoughts (cognitions) are inconsistent
EX: When we become aware that our attitudes & our
actions clash, we reduce resulting dissonance
8
Dilbert Cartoon:
“Dogbert” strikes again...this time using Cognitive
Dissonance!
 changing our attitudes…Clemson/Carolina???
9
Cognitive Dissonance: Another Ex:
10
Social Influence: Effects of others on us…
Be sure you can differentiate!
 Obedience: following orders from someone in a position of
authority over us
 Compliance: going along w/ a request from someone who
is NOT in a position of authority…you just choose to do so
 Conformity: adjusting one’s behavior or thinking to
coincide with a group standard…there’s no request…you just
choose to
 Normative Social Influence: influence resulting from a
person’s desire to gain approval or avoid disapproval
11
Social Influence: Asch’s experiment on conformity…
 Informational Social
Influence: Conforming:
 influence resulting from
one’s willingness to
accept others’ opinions
about reality
 Participant shows
confusion RE: his
answer vs. others
answers…
12
Milgram’s Obedience Study:
Yale University
13
Social Influence
 Milgram’s follow-up obedience experiment
14
Social Influence
 Some individual resist social coercion (force).
Student stands up to tank in Tiananmen Square in
Beijing, China (translates literally to Gate of Heavenly Peace)
15
Individualistic cultures
vs.
Collectivist in Social Psy:
Discovering Psy Video: Prg. 26: Cultural Psych
16
Social Facilitation vs. Social Loafing:
 Social Facilitation: improved performance of tasks in
the presence of others…
-We do better around others…if ppl we know are watching
 occurs with simple or 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… do worse
around others
17
Social Facilitation: When others are working
hard, we don’t wanna’ be the “slacker” so we work
harder, too!
18
Social Loafing: aka “Water cooler effect:”
Others can influence us to goof off in order to
be “one o’ the gang...”
19
Social Facilitation ALSO relates to:
What we do well, we do better in front of an
audience …especially a friendly audience:
Home
court
advantage!!
20
Social Influence
 The chameleon effect: Human see, human do…
 If 1 shakes foot, etc., others around will copy (Yawning??)
 Moods & chameleon effect: we also “catch” others’ moods
Number
of times
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
Participant
rubs face
Confederate rubs face
Participant
shakes foot
Confederate shakes foot21
 Deindividuation
Loss of self-awareness & self-restraint in group situations
that foster arousal & anonymity (mob behavior..Halloween?)
 Can lose individual idea of responsibility…& feel no one will
know it was you…”It was ALL of us…” “But
EVERYbody was doing it!” “Nobody knows me
here... “
 Group Polarization: “Twelve Angry Men”
 enhancement of a group’s prevailing attitudes through
discussion within the group
 Tend to pull toward the group attitudes
 What can pull them over? If 1 will communicate w/ others &
hold fast to convictions, others may “change poles”
22
Groupthink: mode of thinking that occurs when the desire for
harmony in a decision-making group overrides realistic
appraisal of alternatives
 Leaders & “Yes-men”: big problem w/ powerful people who
only want those who agree w/ them
23
24
Social Influence p. 711)
If we can just DISCUSS an issue,
maybe we can get good ideas??
 Group
Polarization:
If a group is
like-minded,
discussion
makes those
ideas stronger…
 ”See we’re
right!!”
 Low-prejudice
groups tend to
lessen
prejudice…but
hi-prejudice
ones tend to
increase
prejudice… 25
Social Relations
 Discrimination: actual acts against people of a
particular group b/c they are a part of that group
 Prejudice
 an unjustifiable (& usually negative) attitude toward a
group & its members
 involves stereotyped beliefs, negative feelings, & a
predisposition to discriminatory action
 Stereotype
 a generalized (sometimes accurate, but often overgeneralized) belief about a group of people
 In-group
 “Us”- people with whom one shares a common identity
 Out-group
 “Them”- those perceived as different or apart from
one’s in-group
26
Stereotypes USA??

IN vs. OUT Group
27
Power of the individual vs. minority
influence:
When the few control
ideas/actions of the many...
 A few committed ppl can have tremendous influence on
others...and can be for good—or not so good.. (See
Margaret Mead quote...)
 Gandhi, Jesus, Dr. ML King, Hitler, K. Marx—and then
over-throw of czar in 1917...THEN down-fall of of
communist USSR in 1989.
---Can also be Jim Jones...David Koresh...& other cult
leaders (BTW: “cult” means to care strongly about
something)
Committed ppl can convince others—and bring great changes
Group think: how we pull to majority—
Minority influence: How some begin in small
Charismatic? Can equal very strong leadership ability 28
Central route to
persuasion:
persuasion that
occurs when
interested
people focus
on the
arguments and
respond with
favorable
thoughts.
Peripheral route
to persuasion:
persuasion that
occurs when
people are
influenced by
incidental cues,
such as a
speaker's
attractiveness.
29
Prejudice:
KNOW Browneyes/Blueeyes study
Jane Elliot
below, Left
30
Social Relations
 Does perception change with race?
 If you think not, read Black like Me…
31
Social Relations
Americans today express much less racial & gender
prejudice …voting for women OR keeping minorities
OUT… But subtle prejudice continues…
 ?: Do you think it is better to express it if you feel it…or
to know it should not be stated?
32
Social Relations
 In-group Bias
 tendency people have to favor one’s own group
 Scapegoat Theory
 theory that prejudice provides an outlet for anger
by providing someone to blame
33
 Just-World Phenomenon
 Tendency of people to believe the world is just
 Do you believe ppl get what they deserve...
& deserve what they get?
 “If ppl are poor, it is their own fault b/c they
COULD fix it…there are no excuses!”
 BUT...if bad happens to me/mine, it is out of my
control!
(situational vs. dispositional again??)
This can involve many aspects…
If someone is successful, it is due to his/her being
a deserving person
Think about Donald Trump…He deserves the
success he has, right?
34
‘Course it didn’t hurt that he was a kid of a wealthy
NYC real estate developer who supported his early
business efforts and left him a bunch of $$
Do you think he had an early belief in his ability to
succeed? Do you think this belief was supported
and encouraged?
Would these ppl have the same chance for success in
the USA?
A kid raised in a small mountain town with poor
schools and an abusive parent?
A kid in a high crime area of a large city w/ a single
parent who is hooked on drugs?
Do you believe these kids ever think they have a
chance at a “regular, successful” life?
How might that be true?
35
Just-world-phenomenon is not just about the
possibility of success—
It also addresses the idea that if bad things happen
to you, you did something to bring it on yourself
(EX: The Biblical Job—neighbors said he must have
made God angry)
If a young woman is wearing revealing clothing and is
flirtatious, is it her own fault if someone rapes her?
If someone is laid off of their job and loses their
house and ends up homeless, is it his/her own fault?
(Ever hear that most ppl are about “1 paycheck away
from homeless?”)
36
Social Relations
 IF you get on a plane and you see 2 men who look
“Muslim, ” would you get nervous?
 Vivid cases (9/11 terrorists) feed stereotypes
37
Violence and Aggression: Environmental
effects on aggression in society:
38
Social Relations and sexual
violence: pp.723-725
 Men who view
porn are less
likely to see a
rape victim AS
a victim
 But does porn
cause rape to
increase?
 Most studies
do not directly
support that
idea
39
Aggression: physical or verbal behavior
that’s intended to hurt or to destroy
Video games and violence (pp. 725-6)
Parallels betw. smoking/cancer & media
violence/aggression (top-726)
Evidence has been increasing media violence and
violent behaviors in children and adolescents
Paul Boxer, ass’t prof. of psy., Rutgers University , Newark, involved since
2004 in research funded by the CDC into media violence & its relation to
serious youth violence & criminal behavior:
“Even in conjunction with other factors, our research shows
that media violence does enhance violent behavior,” Boxer
states. “On average, adolescents who were not exposed to
violent media are not as prone to violent behavior.”
http://psychcentral.com/news/2008/11/20/media-violence-linked-toaggression/3379.html
40
Frustration-Aggression Principle: idea that
frustration (the blocking of an attempt to achieve some
goal) creates anger, which can generate aggression
--NOT supported strongly by evidence: causes
SOME...but NOT all
41
Aggression notes:
 Genetics/biology: Aggression “markers” (like genetic
traits) have been found on Y the chromosome:
 Affects temperament…autonomic (NS??) reactions…
 Environment: family? friends? Temperature?
 Aversive events: Frustration (frus./aggr. prin.)
 Sexual violence: War? Pornography? Group
factors?
 Catharsis Hypothesis? Remember this one?
 Media? What type (s) of learning could be involved?
Bobo…
 Group effects? De-individuation: Kitty Genovese:
By-stander effect?
How did the Kitty Genovese story and the study of
those events lead to the study of WHY altruism
42
comes about in other events?
Doing good ...for goodness sake:
Altruism: unselfish regard for the welfare
of others
 doing things for others… even if it puts us
at risk…
EX’s: ??
Kitty Genovese: What happened?
 Bystander Effect (p. 735)
 1964: Kitty Genovese situation led psy
to study this phenomenon
 tendency for any given bystander to be
less likely to give aid if other bystanders
are present
43
Kitty Genovese & the places she was
attacked…repeatedly.
44
Social Relations
 People were
horrified &
tried to blame
it on “the
city”…but it
can be seen
anywhere
 So what should
you do to keep
this from
happening?
45
 Diffusion of responsibility: Fact that when
others are present, we feel less responsibility
for others & for our own behavior
 The decision-making process for bystander
intervention… How to avoid the bystander
effect:
BE WILLING TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY…
46
Social Relations: Social
Conflict: perceived
incompatibility of
actions, goals, or ideas
p. 727
Social Trap
trap & game matrix:
Person 1
Person 2
Choose B
Choose A
Choose A
Choose B
Optimal
outcome
 a situation in which
the conflicting
parties, by each
rationally pursuing
their selfinterest, become
caught in mutually
destructive
behavior
In Social traps...
Probable
outcome
 by pursuing our
own self-interest
& not trusting
others, we can
ALL end up losers
47
Social Trap
Win-Win: Everyone wins!
Win-Lose: One winner, other loses
Lose-Lose: Both end up losing
If you try to get yourself more, you may
end up with lose-lose
48
Extra Credit Opportunity!!
I will give you an index card
Do not speak to anyone else or let them see what you
are writing.
Write your name onto it.
You will write one of the following things on your card—
IF the whole class writes "10" everyone gets 10
extra credit points
If one-to-three people write "15" ONLY THOSE
PPL. GET extra credit - the rest of class gets
NONE
If FOUR or more people write "15" and get selfish:
NO ONE IN THE CLASS GETS POINTS
49
*IF the whole class writes "10" everyone gets 10 extra
credit points-WIN WIN FOR ALL!
*If one-to-three people write "15" ONLY THOSE PPL.
GET extra credit - the rest of class gets NONE! These
students also have incentive of 15 points, not just 10!
this is a WIN for the "15ers" and LOSE for those who
wrote 10
*If FOUR or more people write "15" and get selfish: NO
ONE IN THE CLASS GETS POINTS (Lose-lose situation)
50
PEACE Psychology:
Enemy perceptions:
**US vs. THEM... Great Satan? The evil empire?
Biased perceptions: On p. 728: How do the
following terms relate to this?
 Mirror-image perceptions (see ** above!)
 Self-serving bias
 Fundamental attribution error
 Stereotypes
 Polarizing
 Groupthink
 Self-fulfulling prophecy
51
National & international Cooperation:
Making a better world?
Peacemaking Psychology:
How can ppl make peace?
Cooperation, communication, & conciliation
Can sometimes change antagonism that comes
from prejudice, aggression, & conflicts into
attitudes that promote peace…
 Cooperation: Work for good of both on
something—economics?
 Communication: Talks: at least listen...does
not require agreement
 Conciliation: Each gives a bit to get closer to
shared goal
NOTE: “Compromise” is NOT a 4-letter word!!52
 Reciprocity Norm: If you give me a present, I feel I
need to give you a present, too…
 Social Exchange Theory:
Win-win
Lose-win
Lose-lose
 says our social behavior is an exchange process, the
aim of which is to maximize benefits & minimize
costs
53
Super-ordinate Goals
 shared goals that override differences (are more important
than) among people & require their cooperation
“The need to solve this problem is bigger than both of
us”
EX: nuclear weapons?
G.R.I.T.: Graduated & Reciprocated Initiatives
in Tension-reduction
Among nations:
I give a bit, you give a bit…
 a strategy designed to decrease international
tensions
 one side announces recognition of mutual
interests & initiates a small conciliatory act… I’ll
do a bit here…
 opens door for reciprocation by other party…
Me, too…& then I’ll even…
54
LOVE & social relations:
 Forming Relationships: How we decide we like or do
not ppl
 Mere Exposure Effect: repeated exposure to novel
stimuli increases liking of them…more we are around
others, more we are used to them & like them…
Proximity…commonalities…
 WE PREFER WHAT WE ARE USED TO
 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
55
Social Relations:
What increases chances of strong relationships?
Equity: a condition in which people receive
from a relationship in proportion to what
they give to it
--each person works just as hard to make things
good for the other
Self-Disclosure: revealing intimate aspects
of oneself to others…..being willing to share
things about ourselves
 R-E-S-P-E-C-T each other…& TRUST
56
Social Relations: Attractiveness
 Conceptions of attractiveness vary by culture
 What is “average” for a culture tends to be the
most “attractive”
 This is thought to be “adaptive”
(evolutionary)…Why?
--b/c familiar = usually safe
57