Terms : Hide Images
| 800483327 | Social Psychology | how humans behave | 0 | |
| 800483328 | Social psychologists | Study ways people influence and are influenced by each other, incorporating the study of attitudes and perceptions, persuasion, compliance and obedience. | 1 | |
| 800483329 | Social perception and cognition | Mental processes that allow a person to collect and remember information about others and to make inferences and judgments based on that information. | 2 | |
| 800483331 | Primacy effect | first information learned about someone will be a more powerful influence on our views about that person (perceptions) than any later information | 3 | |
| 800483334 | Empirical support for the importance of "first impressions" | positive/negative word list | 4 | |
| 800483335 | Attribution | set of thought processes we use to assign causes to our own and others' behavior. | 5 | |
| 800483336 | What are the two types of attributions? | Internal and External | 6 | |
| 800483337 | Internal attributions | Explanations based on an individual's perceived stable characteristics, such as attitudes, personality traits, or abilities. | 7 | |
| 800483338 | Dispositional attribution | (internal attributions) Internal characteristics of the individual. | 8 | |
| 800483403 | External attributions | Explanations based on the current situation and events surrounding the individual. | 9 | |
| 800483404 | Situational attribution | (external attribution) External environmental factors behind the behavior observed. | 10 | |
| 800483405 | Fundamental Attribution Error | When we make Internal (Dispositional) attributions for a person's behavior despite the presence of possible external influences. | 11 | |
| 800483406 | The actor observer effect | Related to the fundamental attribution error, we also tend to make situational attributions for our own behaviors and dispositional ones for the behavior of others. | 12 | |
| 800483410 | Attribution associated with actor observer effect | Actor (our view of ourselves) = external attribution; Observer (our view of others) = internal attribution | 13 | |
| 800483411 | Why are our views skewed in the actor observer effect? | More aware of how our own behavior varies from situation to situation. Less aware of situation to situation change in behavior of others. | 14 | |
| 800483412 | Stereotype | A generalized belief about group of people. | 15 | |
| 800483413 | Prejudice | an irrationally unfavorable (or favorable) attitude toward a group of people. | 16 | |
| 800483416 | Aversive racism | Expressing the belief that all people are equal while holding negative views toward another race and unintentionally discriminating against some groups. | 17 | |
| 800483417 | Ambivalent sexism | Parallel to aversive racism but with regard to sex (gender) roles. | 18 | |
| 800483418 | The Implicit Association Test | Used for personality assessment can also be used to detect subtle prejudice. | 19 | |
| 800483419 | Cognitive Dissonance Theory | suggests that an individual's behavior can change his or her own attitudes. | 20 | |
| 800483420 | Cognitive dissonance | A state of tension that exists when an individual realizes that he or she holds contradictory attitudes on an issue, or has exhibited behavior that is inconsistent with an expressed attitude. | 21 | |
| 800483421 | Explain the study done by Festinger and Carlsmith in 1959 | Made people do an easy task then lie about it. | 22 | |
| 800483423 | $1 vs. $20 experiment | People who were paid $1 though the task was more positive and the people paid $20 thought the task was still boring | 23 | |
| 800483424 | Foot in-the-door technique | A modest request is followed by a larger one | 24 | |
| 800483425 | Door in-the-face technique | An outrageous initial request is followed by a more reasonable one | 25 | |
| 800483426 | Bait and-switch technique | A very favorable deal is followed by additional demands after a commitment has been made | 26 | |
| 800483618 | That's not-all technique | The offer is improved before any reply is given | 27 | |
| 800483619 | Interpersonal Influence | how presence of others change our behavior and convince us | 28 | |
| 800483620 | What are the two major ways other people influence us? | give us information and set norms by which we conduct ourselves in situations. | 29 | |
| 800483621 | Norms | the rules that establish expected behavior | 30 | |
| 800483622 | Explain Asch's conformity studies | subjects were asked to match one line with one of three other lines on another card. They were surrounded by people who gave obviously wrong answers. | 31 | |
| 800483623 | Conformity | the maintenance or alteration of one's behavior to match the behavior and expectations of others. | 32 | |
| 800483964 | What did Asch's classic experiment demonstrate? | that conformity was also likely even when one could be fairly sure that his or her judgment was correct. | 33 | |
| 800484044 | The need to conform is likely to overwhelm what? | our need to be correct or feel right in our judgments. | 34 | |
| 800484045 | Does the size of group have an impact of conformity? | No, it was as hard for a subject to disagree in a group of 3 as in a group of 13. | 35 | |
| 800484047 | In Asch's experiments how did the unanimity of a decision effect conformity? | it is less difficult to be in a minority of two | 36 | |
| 800484312 | Kitty Genovese Case | got murdered and no one called the police | 37 | |
| 800484315 | Why do people fail to intervene sometimes during a crime or accident? | The presence of many people during a crime may create a sense of diffusion of responsibility. We may convince ourselves that if there are many other people present, someone else will help, so we need do nothing. | 38 | |
| 800484323 | Pluralistic ignorance | a situation in which a majority of group members privately reject a norm, but incorrectly assume that most others accept it, and therefore go along with it | 39 | |
| 800484324 | What do people will sometimes assume in the absence of information? | That others have a different and better-informed opinion. They will decide therefore to say or do nothing. | 40 | |
| 800484327 | Obedience | Social situation where there's an authority figure that gets you to conform and even conduct destructive behavior | 41 | |
| 800484328 | Stanley Milgram | set up an experiment to find out how far individuals would go in obeying an authority figure. | 42 | |
| 800484334 | What is the "Teacher - Learner" paradigm? | almost three-quarters of experimental subjects would follow orders to hurt someone if the authority figure and the situation demanded it. | 43 | |
| 800484339 | Variations of the Stanley Milgram's experiment | Were done, and although compliance could be lowered in some instances, some of participants still "followed orders." | 44 | |
| 800484340 | How did Milgram vary his procedure and what did he find? | Division of responsibility increased obedience; an implication of personal responsibility decreased obedience. | 45 | |
| 800484350 | Why did Milgram vary his procedure? | To find out what elements promoted or inhibited obedience. | 46 | |
| 800486505 | What did most experts think about the outcome of Milgram's experiment? | It was thought that only a very few, very abnormal people would agree to give the higher levels of shock. Some scientists and others refused to believe these results. Milgram's career suffered because what he told us about ourselves was not very comforting. | 47 | |
| 800486513 | Explain the findings of the study done by Philip Zimbardo and his colleagues | Provided evidence that people are inclined to change their behavior in response to assigned roles and to follow outrageous and immoral orders when in those roles. | 48 | |
| 800486544 | Explain the study done by Zimbardo at Stanford in the 1970's | The study involved the establishment of a simulated prison for two weeks. | 49 | |
| 800486545 | How did behavior change in the Zimbardo experiment? | The behavior of the students involved became so real and so brutal, the study had to be called off after 6 days. | 50 | |
| 800486546 | The Power of the Social Situation | We can teach people to cooperate and help each other in some instances but it is possible that in order to discourage destructive behavior in people, sometimes we would be well advised to consider changing the situation instead. | 51 |
