Psych-social cognition

02/15/2010

I. Social Cognition: The study of Schemas

 Schema: Organized knowledge structures that influence perception,
memory, and behavior
 Neural Networks- information has an organized structure
o Especially language
o Our brains are set up for language
 Schema Generation
o Experience: Someone who hasn’t seen a movie will have a very
limited schema about it…they have read about it but not seen it.
o Operant Conditioning: People reinforce your learning about
something
 Ex. You buy a sweater. You like the sweater, but your
friends say eh…don’t like it…Your schema might be changed
because of other peoples opinion.
o Social Comparison: When we don’t know how to evaluate
ourselves or a situation to develop our schemas, we will look to
other people and observe how they are behaving/responding. This
will shape what we do and what we think our schemas are.
 Grades in a classroom: Peoples grade were manipulated.
Subject gets an 84 on the test. When comparing grades,
some people told the subject they got a 94, some got a 74.
 When you talked to the person who got a 74, you felt
better about your 84. However when you talk to the person
who got a 94, you feel worse about your 84.
 Schemas about your school-its new to you, social
comparison influences you.
o Genetic Predisposition: some genetic predisposition towards
making up schemas
 Studies on identical twins reared apart: have more similar
schemas than fraternal twins reared apart.
 Schema Measurement:
o Attitude Surveys-
 o Cluster Analyses (Q-sort): People take thousands of words and
have you sort them into piles…things that go together, things that
don’t go together
o Implicit Association Test (IAT): self reported schema organization
could be influenced by bias (sometimes we don’t want to admit
things that are closely related in our brains but are socially
undesirable. Ex. Racist but doenst want to admit it
 Puts together schemas in a study without you realizing you
are associating things together
 Memory- memorizing pairs of words. Finger on Y for yes
and N for no…a pair of words will come up on the screen…you
must say if that is a pair of words you had to memorize…They
will put up words that might be closely associated in your
mind. Look at response time.
 The faster you respond, the more closely the two
words are associated in your head.
 Ex. Lithuanians are lazy- if you had that stereotype
you would respond more quickly. That stereotype will
come up very quickly in your mind, and you will
remember faster. If they are not closely associated you
must find the words separately and it takes longer.
 Structure Characteristics Evaluation Characteristics
o 1. Dynamic 5.Seek Meaning
o 2. Yet Stable 6. Categorize Quickly
o 3. Central Nodes <-Halo Effect -> 7. Seek Consistency
o 4. Fuzzy Boundaries
 1. Dynamic-when we are young, our schemas are dynamic
 2. When we get older, our schemas are more established
and are much harder to change.
 3. Knowing some information, activating some part of a
schema may be more important to you than having the whole
thing activated..
 Halo effect-physically attractive people seem to be
more intelligent, nicer, more successful, talented and
overall better
 4.
  5. We tend to quickly seek meaning in a situation/from a
person. We want to be able to have them fit a schema, so we
try to fit them
 6. We take little bits of information, and then categorize…
we don’t like to change them…When we meet an accountant,
we assum other accountant qualities and don’t look for
qualities that are non-accountant
 7. We look for things that support our schema and accept
them as proof, and downplay evidence that doesn’t support
our schemas.
 Types of Schemas:
o Person-
o Concept-
o Self-
o Group-
o Event (script)


 02/15/2010
Influence of Schemas
Perception
 Expectations, motives, moods, activation
 Memory and Recall
 Behavior
o Overtly-
o Covertly-
 Decision Making

Social Cognition Biases
 More likely under automatic processing, low ened for cognition
 Cognitive Miser
Early psych stuff 02/15/2010
Introduction to Psychology
Psychology as a Science
attempts to predict
A theory, in psychology, is a representation of why something occurs

2. Steps in Research
First, one must formulate a theory
Theory vs. Phenomenon: good research is theoretically driven; based
on a theory of why
Phenomenon simply demonstrates that a behavior occurs without the
why
Theory Development
Inductive: specific (an example behavior) to general (broadened to a
theory on behavior as a whole)
ex. Attachment: When born, we're at the mercy of a caregiver; the
bond if powerful
Deductive: general (seeing a general behavior with similar threads)
to specific (develop a theory to explain them all)
ex. Ego Depletion: energy is finite; one needs rest between mental
activities
Theory Evaluation
Testable/ Falsifiable (Most Important!)
ex. Freud's theory of the unconscious (sex & violence) couldn't be
tested
Fits Data; data must support the theory
Parsimony; simple explanation
Generates Research; often used to gauge the actual value of
research
CHECK TO SEE IF YOU HAVE FORGOTTEN ANY
 3. Experimental Research vs. Correlational Research
Experimental Research; an independent variable is manipulated and
a dependent variable is measured
Random Assignment is key; attempt to eliminate any influence on
the dependent variable; more subjects, more likely to wipe out random
variable that may affect the outcome
Control is key; one must have complete control over the
environment; everything about the two groups involved must be identical
except for the variable being tested-- lack of control can affect outcomes
(temperature of the room, paint colors, noise levels)
Standardization; everything that happens to each person in the
independent variable must be identical (instructions, etc.)
With experimental research, one can discuss causation based on the
results of an experiment
Correlational Research; essentially, measuring variables in an effort
to monitor the relationship between variables; systematic relationship
between the units
eg, If one variable goes up, does the other?
Scale of -1 0 +1
positive correlation; one variable goes up, so does the other
negative correlation; as one variable goes up, the other goes down
(perfect: -1 corr.)
correlation can also be 0; 2 things are not systematically related at all;
unrelated
With correlational research, one cannot talk about causation; the
research provides no proof, one can only speculate and say with certainty
whether two things are systematically related
Experimental research has become less “hardcore” as correlational
research's effectiveness and specificity have grown

4. Background Issues For Research Methods

1. Design: Experimental vs. Correlational
2. Validity: Internal vs. External
Internal Validity: the degree to which you are sure of the cause of
the results in your study
 may be more powerful in experimental research but can also be used
in correlational research
External Validity: the degree to which the behavior of the subject is
naturally occurring
are testees aware of the fact that they're being tested? It is possible to
have external validity in an experimental design
oftentimes, people act abnormally when they think they're being
tested
3.Measurement Issues
I. Operationalization- the manner in which you choose to manipulate
independent variables; also, the manner in which you choose to measure a
variable (sometimes the wrong variable is mistakenly manipulated)
some measured variables are easier to operationalize than others
II. Manipulation Checks- be sure you manipulate the correct
variable!
Ie ask participants what emotions they felt were affected
III. Reliability- if there is a variable that should be consistent across
time, one must be sure that it is-- used to test quality of scale
5. Research Methods: Pros & Cons
Laboratory: nice because you can control every aspect of the
experiment (internal validity) but people know they're in an experiment
(threatens external validity)
Con: Artificial in nature
Observational: try to observe behavior in a natural environment--
always correlational
Pro: High external validity (people are unaware)
Con: Difficult (observers must have same coding method for behaviors
they're observing), coders are unreliable, harder to talk about causation
Field Experiment: manipulation of an independent variable and
measuring a dependent variable in a real-world setting (maintains some
external validity)
ex. Weapons experiment
Pro: Can talk to some degree about causation, hight external validity
(people are unaware they're being tested)
Con: Ethics issues (how far can you go, informed consent, realm of
everyday occurrence)
 Surveys: often used in connection with other methods
Pro: Lots of data in a short period of time, easy, can be validated as
measuring what one is trying to measure, can be longitudinal (measure over
time)
Con: People lie (consciously and unconsciously), surveys are optional
so responses can be skewed, not actually measuring behavior (passive
observation)
Experience Sampling: tries to capture real-life behavior as it is
ongoing in a personal life
ie self-report behavior right after it happens
Pro: attempts to constantly and actively monitor experience without
intrusion or ethics issues
Con: People may lie, may not answer
Clinical Trials: Often used to test effectiveness of drug or therapy;
half get drug, half, placebo
Con: Mind games with placebo (affects symptoms), moral obligation to
share effective medicines
Archival Research: Data was collected for another purpose and
accessed and coded for other purposes
Quasi- Experimental: The independent variable is naturally occurring
(cannot be manipulated or is unethical to manipulate)
ie gender
Con: Cannot directly control experiment or randomly distribute (cannot
talk about causation as certainly)
Multi-Trait, Multi-Method: if correlation can be found in different
settings, a theory is more likely to be proven true

6. Potential Biases-- threats to internal and external validity

Design Problems: way of manipulating method that can lead to bias
Demand Characteristics- when people know they're in an experiment,
they act differently; find out hypothesis, may or may not act to support the
hypothesis
may have to do pilot testing to see if subjects can spot the hypothesis
3rd variable (control)- think you're manipulating one thing but another
variable is affected as well (ie accidentally angering someone)
 Experimenter Bias: the way the person running the study behaves
different to subjects in the control and experimental groups
ie Intelligence based on photo experiment-- questioners acted in a
subtle manner and inadvertently affected the outcome
to eliminate, try using a blind; anyone interacting with subject is blind
to their condition
or standardize instructions (use a script, recording)
Participant Bias: evaluation apprehension
When someone knows they're in a study it can chance the way they
behave
Ways to avoid: don't use subjects' names, only identifiers

7.Issues of Ethics
Pre-Milgram Study: kid was made terrified of white animals (white
rat used) with a loud sound used to induce phobia-- raised issue of morality
in experimentation
Milgram Study (1950's): soon after Nuremberg trials of Nazis who
said they were only doing what they were told
Milgram was inspired to create an obedience theory study; teachers
were paired with learners (experimenters) and learners had to memorize
word pairs. If they fucked up, they were shocked by the teachers
His hypothesis was that people would keep doing the experiment and
follow orders
65% of people continued through the danger zone
contacted folks 6 months later and those that went all the way through
with the study had serious emotional repercussions
experiment had a ripple effect in the psychological community over
ethics
Post-Milgram Study: anyone doing research must submit it to an:
Internal Review Board (IRB)
Must obtain Informed Consent (voluntary participation) unless
observing a circumstantial situation
Risk vs. Benefits: must discuss risks to subjects and possible
benefits to the knowledge of the community
What will we learn? Would it be worth temporary emotional
unsettlements?
 Debriefing: subject of emotional upheaval is given plenty of time to
question and achieve the same emotional state they came in. Also to fully
understand the study.
 02/15/2010
I thnk we need to have a conversation here, like old times. =]
I totally forgot abput that haa that was like three thousand years ago
Lolol whats new with you?
Not that much. Wearing a bathing suit. The usual.
Hows mark?
Wonderful. we had a library date party last night
What are you guys?
Not sure….\
Haven’t talked about it yet? I know the feeling….
Oh weve talked I just agve him the I don’t want a boyfriend speech
I thought you did want him as yoru bf?
Eh, not sure. I’m still getting to know him and I don’t want
commitments that Ill regret.
Fair enough. How long has it been now?
Since intersession basically but I’m not with him like 24/7
Yea hats true. I spend a lot of time with diego, Ive slept in my own
bed twice in the last 2 weeks.
That cute does he have a big bed tho bc if I spent all of my time in
commons I would be slightly unhappy
Its bigger than a twin, but its not like big. He has his own like room
and shower etc. he lives in a house so theres a kitchen and its fun. The only
reason I slept here ove rhte weekend was because he was in new york.
Aw that’s really cute so what are you guys now?
Im pretty sure were exclusive but we haven’t talked about it. Its tricky
because hes not like normal guys and like everything I have learned from
my guy experience like doesn’t apply….but I really would like to be
exclusive/be able to call him my boyfriend. Its also frustrating because its
still a secret from half the octopodes so we have to be normal in public and
its not as fun anymore.
Why would it be a big deal if the octopodes knew? If you guys are
planning on being serious I think you should just bring it up and make it
official and stop hiding it
I know that’s what I want but I don’t know if that’s what he wants…
hes great though I don’t want to mess things up. Hes different. ALSO Did
Annemarie tell you thethings I have experienced now? Im so proud of me…
 ?
ok well have gone down on him, which was a big deal for me. Id never
done that before. Also I like having sex on a regular basis. Sex is fun. =]
nice I’m glad you’re experiencing these lovely things. Has he
reciprocated?
Uhhh yea…hes way better at it that I am….hes a beatboxer. A very
very good one. =p
Omg…. That sounds lovely.
Hahah im so glad you react that way. I cant joke about these things
with Katie and alli…they go eww…I need sex and the city friends to talk
about this stuff with….
Oh dear. Well I can offer you that outlet if you would like.
Lol yea theres you an Annemarie. You can tell me that kind of stuff
too. I wont go ew. But lets just say im in a really good mood today because
last night was rather enjoyable. I just really needed to say that…
How much sleep did u actually end up getting?
Well he has an 830 am class, so we went to sleep actually. We only
had sex once last night but it was realllly relally good.
Ha that’s relly funny has he had gfs before?
Yea I high school a lot I know and hes had sex more than I have but I
wouldn’t say hes extremely experienced.
Fair enough he is a junior tho right?
Yea. how often do you and mark…you don’t have to answer if you
ddont want… were just talking about me…what about you
Pretty much whenever im in commons. Nice. Is it funnnnn….
Yep pretty standard experience for the said activinty. Fun
Win. we are doing very well for ourselves aren’t we?
For sure. Cp high five *
 02/15/2010
Jan 25 (M) Introduction to course and discipline: What
-----------
exactly is social psychology and why are we
studying it?

Jan 27 (W) Theoretical Approaches to Social Psychology

Chapter 1

Jan 29 (F) Social Psychology Research Chapter 9

Feb 1 (M)
Feb 3 (W)
Feb 5 (F)

Feb 8 (M) SNOW WEEK

Feb 10 (W)
Feb 12 (F)

Feb 15 (M) Social Cognition Chapter 4

Feb 17 (W)

Feb 19 (F) Social Cognition Errors

Feb 22 (M) Attribution

Feb 24 (W)

Feb 26 (F) The Self

 02/15/2010
Heiders levels of Responsibility
Association- who did it
Causation- did they cause the event
Forseeability- could they forsee the consequences
Intentionality- did they do it intentionally knowing the consequences
Justifiability- is there some other circumstanc

Kelleys Cube
Consensus
Consistency
Distinctiveness
 02/15/2010
Compliance
 Mindless conformity- the use of heuristics
 Langer study: a placebo reason incrases compliance over no reason and
almost as much as a real reason. (Can I use the copier now because I
have to make copies VS Because im in a rush Vs no reason)
 Those who are cognitively active live longer


Associations with Positive Mood

 Flattery works= puts you in a better mood, makes you more likely to do
something that you might not objectively do.
 Wine and Dine (restrictions on lobbyist)- the more someone encourages
the good mood….giving them alcohol, food, atmosphere…more likely to
do something they wouldn’t normally do

Norm of Reciprocity: one of the most powerful norms in human
behavior….if I do a favor for you, you will feel obligated to do a favor for me
back. If you ask a larger favor in most recent time…the first time they have
a favor available for return..a b igger one, it is most likely to say yes beause
it is their first opportunity
 As its own strategy. “soda study” Hare Krishna’s
o Arrive as a subject. 30 minute personality survey, then break
then another one. Experimenter there and confederate….you do
your experiment…experimenter leaves. The confederate will
leave, and bring back a soda…and one for you. Then later he asks
you to buy a raffle ticket for charity….if you took the soda, you
are much more likely to spend 5$ on the raffle ticket.
o Hare Krishna’s give you flower…people who took the flower were
much more likely to listen, take pamphlets or give the money.
 Door in the face: “zoo study”, Watergate
o You ask for something larger than what you actually want. Person
says no….you then come down in your request. You look like you
have done them a favor by decreasing your demands.
o Zoo study: 1st- look for chaperone. “would you be willing to….for
three hours blah blah blah…” person says no. Then ask them to
chaperone for one trip to the zoo
 That’s not all:
o Cookie and cupcake.
 Commitment
o Foot in the door- get someone committed in a small way, then
you can get them to do something larger.
o “drive safe” study- will you sign this petition…then later, will you
put this sign on your lawn? People who signed the petition were
more likely to say yes.
o Low balling- “7am study”, Car sales, heating oil study: get
someone to commit to something…then once they are committed,
you change the parameters of what they have agreed to.
o Car salesmen lowballing (illegal in most states)
o Agree to get someone to come to a psych study, then after they
have agreed tell them it is Saturday at 7am. If you told them the
time of the study up front they are much more likely to say no.
 Law of Scarcity
o One time deal- some sort of limit set so that you might be out of
it.
o Disney DVD
 02/15/2010
Obedience to Authority