DOC PREVIEW
UCLA PSYCH 10 - Final Study Guide

This preview shows page 1-2-3 out of 9 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 9 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 9 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 9 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 9 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

6.7.12Midterm 3 ReviewAnchoringOur judgments and perceptions are made relative to info given to usOne of the shortcuts to save thinkingAnswering is going to be swayed by a valueTendency to stick to close to anchors when adjusting our inferencesSome heuristics are helpful and some aren’tEx: anchoring toward what the number given is/ your friend wants to eat at 2:30so you anchor toward 2:30Framing: influence decision making process/ depending on what’s being focused on it will influence your decisionEx: when things are phrased as saved then you’re more likely to go with savingCreative problem solvingOur ability to produce novel solutionsRelated to fluid intelligence (instead of crystallized) and have to thin outside the boxMental set (stuck in a certain way of solving a problem) and functional fixedness can get in the way of solving thingsViews on intelligenceBinet and simoom-intelligence consists of higher mental processesReasoning, problem solving, decision makingFluid vs. crystalizedFluid-thinking on the flyCrystalized- a bunch of facts you memorizedCharles spearman-believed in general intelligence/ “g” intelligence/ ex: you’re smart across the board/ different intelligences should correlateGardner’s theory of multiple intelligences-there are different types of intelligences9ex: math verbal etc.) “s” is specific intelligence/ different intelligence may not correlate/ the criticism is that it is not scientifically proven because where do you draw the line/ specific intelligenceSternberg Triarchic Model- analytical, practical(social and street smarts), creative/ we can vary ateachbe good at one and not so good at another/Measuring intelligenceAvoid tests that discriminate against cultures and racesIntelligent quotient-mental age/ chronological age times 100Problem-as you get older, you don’t get smarter, but the denominater gets larger, so it looks like you’re getting dumberDeviation iq-compares your performance to others in your peer age groupInfluences on intelligenceGenetic influence-after they did studies using twins or related people they saw that nature plays a role/ when you’re identical and Schooling-good schooling=higher intelligenceNutrition-nutrients= higher intelligencePoverty-low income= lower intelligenceGender differences in intelligenceGreater variability in men than women/ there’s a few more men that are really dumbMens average on spatial tests are slightly better than menWomen on average do better on verbal tasksSelf-perceptionExplicit self-esteem- people’s conscious feeling of value and worthImplicit self-esteem-people’s unconscious self-associationsImplicit egotism-an unconscious preference for people, places, and things that resemble the selfDeindividuationIdentify with our personal characteristics less and identify with whatever role we’re put intoPersonal identities are not emphasized so we are capable of different thingsStanford prison studyUndergrads started acting out of charcter and took on the role as a guard or a prisoner/ Can be good sometimes, not always badFundamental attribution errorAttribute actions to situation if it’s ourselves but we think it’s their fault if it’s someone else and not the situationBehavior and attitudesNeeded to change an attitude to a behaviorNeed strong attitude, subjective norms, control(confident in how you’re going todo it), and an honest intent to do itCognitive dissonance theoryIf what we think doesn’t match up with our behavior then there’s a dissonanceChange your belief/ try to justify what you did/ can lead to a change in attitudeSelf-perception theoryYou let your behavior guide what is going on with you internally/ make a conclusion from your behavior/ there is no changing or resolving/ I did this so I must be like thisBystander noninterventionPeople helping when in a group was markedly lower than helping when alongDue to pluralistic ignorance and diffusion of responsibilityOthers affect our individual performanceSocial loafing-no apprehensionSocial facilitation-apprehensionGroup polarizationTendency of group discussion to strengthen the dominant positions of individual group members/ people polarize toward beliefSocial influences on interpersonal attractionProximity, preference for average faces, similarity, reciprocity, physical attractiveness, evolutionary influences, social roles (ex: have same role as a committee member, same interest)Sternberg’s model of loveIntimacy, passion, and commitmentWhy we helpSocial exchange theory: if you give someone help in class then they will do it for youAltruism: some people are just good peopleSocial normsWhen will we helpAdequate time to interveneIn a good moodHave been exposed to research on bystander noninterventionPerceive the other as similar to themStereotypeBelief, positive or negative, about the characteristics of members of a group that is applied generally to most members of the groupLead to prejudicePrejudiceDrawing negative conclusions about a person, group of people, or situation prior to evaluating evidenceEx: you have small eyes so I do not like you because you’re AsianLeads to In-group bias and out-group homogeneityUs vs. themDiscriminationNegative behavior toward members of outgroupsEx: harm small eyed peopleCauses of prejudiceScapegoat hypothesisJust-world hypothesisConformitySocial identity theory: you don’t know what is right or wrong growing up so you identify with people around us/ learning and modeling behaviorRealistic group conflict: forced to believe one side or the other when you see conflictRelative deprivation: you don’t know any better so you believe what is given to youStereotype threatyou perpetuate the stereotype because you’re afraid of proving it rightconsequence of prejudice/ when you feel judged you feel nervous so that facilitates arousal and causes a deficit in your performanceindividual differences that influence aggressionpersonality traitssexual differencescultural differencesprisoner’s dilemmaRobbers cave studyStereotypes and prejudice can be fostered when two groups compete against eachotherSocial identity theory: identifying with people around you causes prejudice to growThere were dramatic hostility between the groupSuperordinate goalsDecreased hostilityPersonalityPeople’s typical way of thinking, feeling, and behavingTwin studies showed many traits are heritable, but there is a key role of nonshared environmentDevil is the id, ego is more conscious and very aware of


View Full Document
Download Final Study Guide
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Final Study Guide and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Final Study Guide 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?