PSY 2013 1st Edition Lecture 12Outline of Last Lecture II. Areas of DevelopmentD. Social DevelopmentE. Moral DevelopmentSocial Psychology I. Person PerceptionOutline of Current Lecture II. AttitudesA. Changing AttitudesIII. Behavior in GroupsIV. Attribution ProcessV. Conformity and ObedienceVI. Relationship TheoryA. Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of LoveCurrent LectureII. Attitudes- Object of thought – social issue- Components of attitudeso Cognitive – thought out, based on factso Affective – purely emotional, uses more passionate speech in debates, less thought out and less rationalo Behavioral – what was done in the past- Cognitive dissonance theory – “I hate this but I’m still doing it” ex.Tuition rising. We hate it, but we still pay it.A. Changing Attitudes- It depends on the situation as to which component is most effective to win anargument.- Also, different people are swayed by different components differently- Jury members – usually more swayed by affective (as a whole)These notes represent a detailed interpretation of the professor’s lecture. GradeBuddy is best used as a supplement to your own notes, not as a substitute.- If you don’t know which to work at, change their behaviors, because the behavioral component is hardest to fight.- Foot-in-the-door v. Door-in-the-face approacho Foot/door – asking for something small, then something a little biggero Door/face – asking for something outrageous, then your request sounds more reasonable This is more effective in our culture than others because of reciprocity norms. (This is the idea of “You scratch my back, I scratch yours.”)Example:The goal is to get a stranger to agree to drive someone around this weekend for 8 hours who supposedly cannot do it themselves. Originally, without using either approach, 25% of those asked agreed. Foot/door – “Would you be willing to drive someone somewhere this weekend? It will only take 15 minutes.” 90% said yes. “Okay great. Hey, since you’re doing that, would you mind just doing it for the day?Only like 8 hours or so.” 75% said yes.Door/face – “Would you be willing to drive someone around every day for 8 hours for the next 3 years?” 1% said yes. “Okay, well how about just this weekend?” 75% said yes.Reciprocity norms – they lowered their request, so you raise your offer.III. Behavior in Groups- Bystander Effect – not taking action because “someone else will”o Kitty Genovese – went on a bad date, man chased her down an alley, she screamed for help, no one called 9-1-1 because “someone else will”. She diedExample:A man faked a heart attack on a New York subway. On the packed trains, people were less likely to help. On a train with only one other person, they almost all helped the man. If they thought someone else could’ve helped, they felt less guilty about not helping.- Social facilitation – when working in groups, people work better with people around if the task is simple or they feel they are an expert on the subject- Social loafing – when working in groups, people work less efficiently with people around if the work is difficult or tedious; the work is pushed onto other people- Group decision-making o Group Polarization – opposite sides of an argument are not cross-communicating. Instead, they are only talking to each other and moving further and further apart.  This happens with our political parties.o Groupthink – people go along with the group to not cause conflict or change the cohesiveness This is NOT the same as conforming.IV. Attribution Process- Attributions – why people act a certain wayo Internal v. External  Internal – something about the individual External – something about their environment or someone else- Fundamental Attribution Error – when someone does something wrong, we assume it’s an internal attribution causing them to act this way.Example:If you’re standing in a long line at the grocery store and a man runs up and cuts in front of everything to check out only one item and leave, we automatically assume it is because he doesn’t want to wait. We don’t immediately consider that it might have been something for an emergency, like an inhaler for his child having an asthma attack.- Defensive Attribution – when something negative happens to you, it is someone else’s fault or the environment- Self-serving bias – we take credit for good, push off negative- Self-effacing bias – push away positive, anything bad is their own faulto Individualism v. Collectivism Individualism deals more with western cultures and the self-serving bias Collectivism is more found in eastern cultures and deals with the self-effacing biasV. Conformity and Obedience- Conformity – no real pressure, just social pressureo Solomon Ashe- Obedience – authority figureo Stanley Milgram- Power of Situation (social roles) – how does a role change behavioro Philip Zimbardo’s prison studyVI. Relationship Theory- Matching Hypothesiso The two most attractive people in the world will pair off, then the next two, etc. - Similarity – opposites don’t successfully attract. The initial attraction is due to the difference, but long-term it won’t work. Also, what many people consider “opposite”is not opposite. Things that matter are values, not behaviors.- Evolutionary perspective – most important characteristic for male and female is physical attractivenesso Facial symmetry = attractiveo Waist:hip ratio – more ideal = more fertile- Mate poaching – when someone goes after someone already in a long-term relationshipA. Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of Love – anything that does not involve all three points will not work