PSY 331 1st EditionExam 1 Study Guide Study Guide - Exam 1- PSY 331What is social psychology? The study of how thoughts, feelings and behaviors of individuals are influenced by the actual,imagined, or implied presence of others. Classic Definition- doesn’t capture everythingAlternate Definition- study of human experience- Very broadSocial psych in the world-“opposites attract”-“birds of a feather flock together”Dilemma?- Both seem reasonable- Rely on what research says, not what makes sensePsychology = science-ideas are empirically testedEmpiricism the practice of relying on observation-“lets take a look”Scientific Method- Rules and procedures used to gather, analyze, and interpret infoPopulation vs SamplePopulation entire group of all relevant individualsSample a smaller group selected from populationLogic:- Population usually impractical- Samples much easier- Test sample- Generalize to populationSampling Issues- Most studied group: psych 101 students-Who does this generalize to?- Not necessarily everyone!- But: not necessarily no one else- Should have reason to expect group differencesExample: WNY vs Southern CA Study of romantic relationships dynamics Study of surfing experienceCan be empirically tested?Observational Research- Observing and describing- No attempt to manipulate (change) behavior -Naturalistic observation -e.g. playground, bar-Participant observation -e.g. Leon Festinger-Archival research -e.g. TV commercialsAdvantages- Observe behavior in natural setting- Sometimes it’s the only way-e.g. imprisonmentDisadvantages- People may act differently when watched- Observer bias: when observer has a preconceived notion of what they are looking for-evidence: rat studyCorrelational Research- Measures relationship between variables-variables not manipulated-e.g. age and price of car- Correlation coefficient: r- -1 and 1- Direction (- or +)- Magnitude (strength) Which is stronger? r = .2 or r = -4 r = -4 is stronger- The closer it is to 1 or -1 the stronger the relationship is- If its closer to 0 its weakerAdvantages:- Predicts behaviorEx: employee personality traitsDisadvantages:- Cannot determine causality-reverse causationEx: health and income- Third variable problemExperimental Research- Research designed to test cause and effect relationships- Manipulate the independent variable (IV)-the “cause”- Measure the dependent variable (DV)-the “effect”- Random assignment Advantage:- Conclusions about casual relationshipsDisadvantage:- Some things cannot be manipulatedWhat is the “self”?- Some aspects of me (off the top of my head):-conscious experience-things I know-physical characteristics-likes/dislikes-career-family- From individual to groupThe Self: “I” and the “me”The “I”: the actor/knower The “Me”: what is knownComputer analogy-The “me”3 Components- Material “me”: body, property-example: car- Social “me”: social roles and relationships-Multiple selves-Different ones for different contextsExample: friends vs parents?- Spiritual “me”: thoughts, feelings, memories, personality-“Everything that can be called mine”Behavior is determined by interaction between a person and situation Self-concept - Sum total of a person’s thoughts and feelings about the self- Who you think you are- Changes over time- Changes moment to moment- Its big! Different parts vs notWorking/Spontaneous self-concept- Different relationships, situations-multiple selves ideaExample: in class vs at a partySelf-concept over development- Becomes more abstract (vs concrete)- Mid-adolescence: opposing attributes detected but not reconciled- Late adolescence: can reconcile/integrateEx: happy and depressed = moodyThe “I”- The knower of the “me”- The active part- The “I” knows other things as well- The “me” is just one possible focus of attention- An evaluator Ex: I am a good friend -evaluations are important- Also an agent, actor, or executor-doing things, taking actionEx: speaking in front of us right nowSelf-Complexity- Tendency to define the self in terms of multiple, distinct domains- Both number of self-defining domains and overlapConsequences for negative events- High self-complexity-negativity is contained- Low complexity-negativity “spills over” putting all your “self eggs” in one basket can be riskySelf-consciousness- Tendency to engage in self-awareness- privateEx: personal attitudes, beliefs, moodPublicEx: physical appearance, behavior in public settings- chronic or statePrivate- behave in line with internal standards- react more strongly to moods- high self-complexity Public- more likely to conform- more likely to judge themselves and other by their looks- greater negative alcohol-related consequences Self-esteem  evaluation of the selfJames: success divided by pretensionsEx: “second playlist”-idea: more important domains affect us, unimportant ones do notNon-conscious evaluation process- we only know the end result- emotional “gut feeling”Measurement - cant directly assess Rosenberg self-esteem scale- 4-9 point scale, from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”- Instructions: please answer each item according to how you feel in general, not specifically at this momentSelf-esteem scale- General, overall questions-trait self-esteem- Score-relatively high vs low- Most People-above the scale midpoint-“low” is only relativeWhy do we have self-esteem?- Sociometer theory- Theory about function of self-esteem Leary (1995)Fundamental need/motive: social inclusionSociometer Theory- Evolutionary argument-Affiliation is adaptive -Facilitates spreading genes -How?-protection, child-rearing food gathering-Need to know if we meet fundamental need!Warning mechanism:1. Monitor: non-conscious process2. Inform: bring to conscious awareness 3. Motivate: actions to changeMotivation?- Affect/emotion-feel bad- We want to avoid bad feelings-similar to hungerSelf-esteem is this warning mechanism!- Functions like a gas gauge-sensitive to inclusion/exclusion-exclusion in particular -self-esteem itself not an end-underlying processes are key- Different people calibrated differentlyLeary Study (1995)- Participants in groups of 5- Rate selves, write short essays- Trade responses- Rate work-with preferences- Only 3 of 5 picked for group- Manipulations-included/excluded-based on preferences/random- Rate self-feelings (good/bad; competent/incompetent)Results- Lower self-ratings (lower