DOC PREVIEW
ECU PSYC 3221 - Final Exam Study Guide
Type Study Guide
Pages 3

This preview shows page 1 out of 3 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 3 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 3 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

Chapter 12Chapter 13Chapter 15Chapter 16PSYC 3221 1st EditionFinal Exam Study Guide Chapters: 12-13, 15-16Chapter 12- Prosocial behavioro Helping behavior that is to benefit someone else, might have a return- Altruismo Self-less helping behavior, with expecting nothing in return; not even self gratification- Kin selection/evolution explanationo Survival of species- Norm of reciprocityo Reciprocation the norm of retuning the favor- Social exchange theory of helping o “Helping as disguised self-interest”o Doing someone a favor, knowing down the road they’ll have to repay you- Empathy-altruism hypothesiso Feeling bad for someone/having empathy towards them, you might engage in altruistic behavioro You’ve been in that situation before, so you decide to help them out without expecting a favor in return- Gender differenceso Women: if it requires long term attention & nurturingo Men: If it lets them look like a hero- Religiosity differenceso Religious help tend to be more helpful than non-religious people- Mood effects on helpingo Good mood: “Feel-good-do-good effect” – if you’re feeling good you’re more likely to helpo Bad moods: Likely to help if we feel it will take us out of our bad moods, “negative-state relief hypothesis”o Children & depressed people are the least likely to helpo If we feel guilty we’re more likely to help, to maybe retrieve our guilt- Isen and Levin (1972)-dime study- Factors that effect who we helpo Gender Women: more likely to offer help Men: Less likely to offer helpo Similarity If people are similar to us we tend to help them more Exception would be the “white guilt”- Urban overload hypothesisThese 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.o Idea that people who live in urban areas are over loaded with stimuli that they don’t since that they’re missing the people who need help- Darley and Batson (1973)-Good Samaritano Story from the bible about helping- Bystander effecto The more eyewitnesses there are, the less likely people will help- Diffusion of responsibilityo Large groups, having to do with the bystander effect, people think others will help, so they end up not helping- Pluralistic ignoranceo Larger the group, the less likely to help- Latane and Darley (1970) NIAKDo 5 Step Decision process that comes in order before we go ahead and help Noticing…that something is going on Interpreting…that it’s an emergency situation Assuming…responsibility Knowing…how to help Deciding….to helpChapter 13- Prisoner's Dilemma- Tragedy of the Commonso Greedy getting the best of people; “what’s one more cow?”- Non-zero sum gameso Everyone wins or everyone loses- Resolving social dilemmas:o Lawso Decreased group sizeo Communication, etc.- Sherif's Robbers Cave Study- Contact hypothesis- Superordinate goals- Perceived injusticeo Not actual injustice- Misperception between groups (self-serving bias, fundamental attribution error, group polarization, in-group bias, out-group homogeneity)o Conflict that arises as a result of misperception- Mirror image perceptionso In conflict you think you’re always the good guy & the other person is the bad guy- Shifting perceptionso Conflict escalates and perceptions shift- Simplicity of thinking and speech in times of conflict- Bargainingo Face to face with problem to find a solution- Mediationo Bringing an unbiased third party & up to conflicting parties to make a decision- Arbitrationo Last resort, where the third party makes a decision- GRITo Graduatedo Reciprocatedo Initiativeso Attention reduction- Tit-for-tat strategyo You hit me, I hit you backChapter 15- Accuracy of eyewitness testimony vs. impact on jurors- Effect of discrediting an eyewitness- False memories/misinformation effect- Effects of prejudice- Own race bias- Lie detector test/polygraph- Characteristics of the defendant: attractiveness, similarity to jurors, and race- Death-penalty bias- Judge's instructions/reactance- Minority influence- 6 member juries vs. 12 member juriesChapter 16- Population concerns- Consumption concerns- Materialism: Money and/or happiness- Adaptation-level phenomenon- Social


View Full Document
Download Final Exam 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 Exam 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 Exam 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?