DOCSLIB.ORG

The Effect of Stereotype Threat on the Solving of Quantitative GRE Problems: a Mere Effort Interpretation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Effect of Stereotype Threat on the Solving of Quantitative GRE Problems: a Mere Effort Interpretation Pers Soc Psychol Bull OnlineFirst, published on May 6, 2009 as doi:10.1177/0146167209335165 The Effect of Stereotype Threat on the Solving of Quantitative GRE Problems: A Mere Effort Interpretation Jeremy P. Jamieson Stephen G. Harkins Northeastern University The mere effort account argues that stereotype threat ways—cognitively, affectively, and motivationally” (p. 397). motivates participants to want to perform well, which Consistent with this view, Schmader, Johns, and Forbes potentiates prepotent responses. If the prepotent response (2008) have identified working memory “as a core cog- is correct, performance is facilitated. If incorrect and nitive faculty that is implicated in cognitive and social participants do not know, or lack the knowledge or time stereotype threat effects” (p. 337). Research has also required for correction, performance is debilitated. The demonstrated the role of affective processes (e.g., anxi- Graduate Record Examinations (GRE) quantitative test ety; Bosson, Haymovitz, & Pinel 2004). In the current is made up of two problem types: (a) solve problems, work, we focus on the contribution of motivation to which require the solution of an equation, and (b) com- threat effects, specifically on Jamieson and Harkins’s parison problems, which require the use of logic and esti- (2007) mere effort account. mation. Previous research shows that the prepotent The mere effort account was suggested by Harkins’s tendency is to attempt to solve the equations. Consistent (2006) analysis of the effect of evaluation on performance. with mere effort predictions, Experiment 1 demonstrates This account argues that evaluation motivates partici- that threatened participants perform better than con- pants to want to perform well, which potentiates whatever trols on solve problems (prepotent response correct) but response is prepotent, or most likely to be produced in a worse than controls on comparison problems (prepotent given situation. If the prepotent response is correct, the response incorrect). Experiment 2 shows that a simple potential for evaluation facilitates performance. If the pre- instruction as to the correct solution approach elimi- potent response is incorrect and participants do not know, nates the performance deficit on comparison problems. or lack the knowledge or time required for correction, performance is debilitated. However, if participants are Keywords: stereotype threat; motivation; mere effort; math; able to recognize that their prepotent tendencies are incor- GRE rect and are given the opportunity to correct, performance will be facilitated. Harkins and his colleagues have found support for the mere effort account of the effect of evalua- tereotype threat refers to the concern that is experi- tion on performance on the Remote Associates Task Senced when one feels “at risk of confirming, as self- (Harkins, 2006), anagrams (McFall, Jamieson, & Harkins, characteristic, a negative stereotype about one’s group” 2009, Experiment 1), the Stroop task (McFall et al., 2009, (Steele & Aronson, 1995, p. 797). A wide range of stere- Experiments 2 and 3), and the antisaccade task (McFall otypes have been tested (e.g., women’s lack of ability in et al., 2009, Experiment 4). math and science: O’Brien & Crandall, 2003; African Americans’ underperformance on standardized tests: Steele Authors’ Note: Correspondence concerning this article should be & Aronson, 1995; White males’ athletic inferiority: Stone, addressed to Jeremy P. Jamieson, Department of Psychology, 125 2002). In each case, concern about confirming the rele- Nightingale Hall, Northeastern University, 360 Huntington Avenue, vant negative stereotype has been shown to negatively Boston, MA 02115-5000; e-mail: [email protected]. affect the performance of the stigmatized individuals. PSPB, Vol. XX No. X, Month XXXX xx-xx Steele, Spencer, and Aronson (2002) have argued DOI: 10.1177/0146167209335165 that these effects “are likely to be mediated in multiple © 2009 by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc. 1 2 PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY BULLETIN Jamieson and Harkins (2007) argued that stereotype task, the antisaccade task (Hallett, 1978). This task threat, like the potential for evaluation, can motivate requires participants to respond to a target presented participants, which may bring into play the same proc- randomly on one or the other side of the display. Before ess that Harkins and his colleagues (Harkins, 2006; the target appears, a cue is presented on the opposite side McFall et al., 2009) implicate in the evaluation–per- of the display. Participants are explicitly instructed to formance relationship. Of course, other stereotype not look at this cue but rather to look to the opposite threat research has also argued that the participants side of the display where the target will appear. However, subject to threat are motivated to perform well. For a reflexive-like prepotent tendency to look at the cue must instance, Steele and Aronson (1995) suggest that the be inhibited or corrected to optimize performance. performance of threat participants may suffer because The mere effort account predicts that because the they alternate their attention between trying to answer motivation potentiates the prepotent response, partici- the items and trying to assess the self-significance of pants under stereotype threat will look the wrong direc- their frustration. That is, according to this account, they tion, toward the cue, more often than controls. However, are indeed motivated to solve the problems. However, it because this response is obviously incorrect and partici- is not this motivation in and of itself that affects their pants have the time required for correction, those sub- performance but rather the time spent assessing their ject to threat would also be motivated to launch correct frustration. In contrast, the mere effort account argues saccades (saccades launched toward the target following that motivation plays a direct role in producing the successful inhibition of the reflexive saccade) and cor- effects of threat on performance. rective saccades (saccades launched toward the target Mere effort shares the notion that stereotype threat following reflexive saccades) faster than controls. Once energizes prepotent or dominant responses with the the participants’ eyes arrive at the target area, they must arousal/drive explanations proposed by O’Brien and then determine the target’s orientation and press the Crandall (2003) and Ben-Zeev, Fein, and Inzlicht (2005). appropriate response key. The motivation to perform For example, O’Brien and Crandall argue that the arousal well would make stereotype threat participants try to produced by stereotype threat “is non-specific and serves respond as quickly as possible. Thus, when the partici- to energize behavior in a nondirective way. For this rea- pants see the target, participants subject to threat should son, arousal enhances the emission of dominant responses” respond more quickly than controls. Jamieson and Harkins (p. 783). However, as is also the case for the arousal/ (2007, Experiment 3) found support for each of these drive explanations for social facilitation (e.g., Cottrell, predictions, which taken together, produced faster over- 1972), these accounts do not incorporate the correction all reaction times for participants subject to stereotype process proposed by Harkins and his colleagues (Harkins, threat than for no threat participants with no difference 2006; McFall et al., 2009). in accuracy.1 In addition, it should be noted that the mere effort Jamieson and Harkins’s (2007) research supports the account does not argue that stigmatized individuals are mere effort account of performance on the antisac- motivated to seek out situations to demonstrate their cade task, an inhibition task framed as a measure of proficiency in stereotyped domains. In fact, research has visuospatial capacity. However, most stereotype threat shown that participants subject to threat take advantage research that has focused on the female math-ability of explanations that allow them to deflect responsibility stereotype has used problems taken from standardized for their performance (e.g., Ben-Zeev et al., 2005; Johns, tests, such as the quantitative section of the Graduate Schmader, & Martens, 2005; Keller, 2002; Steele & Record Examinations (GRE) general test (e.g., Ben-Zeev Aronson, 1995; Stone, 2002). Consistent with this view, et al., 2005; Inzlicht & Ben-Zeev, 2003; Schmader & Harkins and his colleagues have demonstrated that Johns, 2003; Spencer, Steele, & Quinn, 1999). On this although participants are more motivated to perform task, like the Remote Associates Test (RAT) and ana- well when subject to experimenter evaluation than when grams but unlike inhibition tasks, such as the Stroop they are not (e.g., Harkins & Szymanski, 1988; McFall and the antisaccade tasks, the correct answer is not appar- et al., 2009; White, Kjelgaard, & Harkins, 1995), when ent. The present research tests the contribution of mere given a choice, participants avoid subjecting themselves effort to performance on this task. to the scrutiny of the experimenter (Szymanski & Harkins, The GRE quantitative test is primarily made up of 1993). So, the mere effort account applies to situations two types of problems: solve problems and comparison that do not provide stigmatized individuals with the problems, which differ in the solution approach that opportunity to avoid judgment in the context of the tends to be
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Social Facilitation: Salience and Mediated, Anticipatory, And
    SOCIAL FACILITATION: SALIENCE AND MEDIATED, ANTICIPATORY, AND RESIDUAL PRESENCE By JASON MATTHEW GLUSHAKOW A dissertation submitted to the Graduate School- New Brunswick Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Program in Psychology written under the direction of John R. Aiello, Ph.D. and approved by ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ New Brunswick, New Jersey October, 2011 Abstract of the Dissertation Social Facilitation: Salience and Mediated, Anticipatory, and Residual Presence by Jason M. Glushakow Dissertation director: Dr. John R. Aiello Social facilitation is the oldest experimental concept in social psychology. Throughout decades of social facilitation research, social presence has typically been viewed as a dichotomous variable which affects individuals while performing a task. However, this dissertation attempts to investigate whether social presence may be viewed as continuous variable, differing on the salience of presence. In addition, it seeks to determine whether changes in performance can be elicited by prior social presence (residual presence) and the expectation of future social presence (anticipatory presence). Study 1 compared the effects of 6 different levels of presence (absence, artificial presence, passive presence, implied presence, embodied presence, and active presence) on simple and complex task performance. It provides evidence that the various levels of social presence did have a differential impact on participants. From the questionnaire responses, social presence was able to be classified into three distinct categories: low (absence, artificial and passive presence), intermediate (implied presence), and high salience (embodied and active presence). Study 1 also provides some support for the expectation that presence results in simple task facilitation.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Loafing: a Review of the Literature
    Social Loafing: A Review of the Literature Ashley Simms Texas Wesleyan University Tommy Nichols Texas Wesleyan University Social loafing is a phenomenon that has been discussed and researched since 1913. Though it has been long examined, recent technological developments offer ample opportunity for further study. This paper summarizes its long history of research and offers several propositions for future research. INTRODUCTION In 1913 a phenomenon was found that, at the time, did not receive sufficient attention. Maximilien Ringelmann, a French agricultural engineer, observed that when a group of people collectively pulled on a rope, the output was less than when group members individually pulled on the rope (Kravitz and Martin, 1986; Ringelmann, 1913). The results of this finding were not considered further until 1974 when Ingham, Levinger, Graves, and Peckham recreated the experiment. The term “social loafing” was coined for the discovery that participants working in groups exert less effort than participants working individually. It was described as having a detrimental effect on individuals and the institutions associated with them (Latane, Williams, & Harkins, 1979). From there, the research evolved into five distinct categories: 1) establishing the existence of social loafing in both physical and cognitive group projects, 2) causes and deterrents of social loafing, 3) partner adaptation to group member social loafing (such as the “Sucker Effect”), 4) social loafing as a positive mechanism, and finally 5) social loafing in modern technology. ESTABLISHING SOCIAL LOAFING EXISTS The origins of social loafing begin with “The Ringelmann Effect,” which describes the tendency for individuals to lower their productivity when in a group (Ringlemann, 1913); Ingham, Levinger, Graves and Peckham relabeled this effect “social loafing” when they were successful in demonstrating individual effort declines in a curvilinear fashion when people work as a group or only believe they are working in a group (Ingham, Levinger, Graves, & Peckham, 1974).
    [Show full text]
  • DESIGNING PERSUASIVE SYSTEMS for USER ENGAGEMENT in COLLABORATIVE INTERACTION Agnis Stibe University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland, [email protected]
    Association for Information Systems AIS Electronic Library (AISeL) ECIS 2014 Proceedings DESIGNING PERSUASIVE SYSTEMS FOR USER ENGAGEMENT IN COLLABORATIVE INTERACTION Agnis Stibe University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland, [email protected] Harri Oinas-Kukkonen University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2014 Agnis Stibe and Harri Oinas-Kukkonen, 2014, "DESIGNING PERSUASIVE SYSTEMS FOR USER ENGAGEMENT IN COLLABORATIVE INTERACTION", Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS) 2014, Tel Aviv, Israel, June 9-11, 2014, ISBN 978-0-9915567-0-0 http://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2014/proceedings/track07/3 This material is brought to you by the European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS) at AIS Electronic Library (AISeL). It has been accepted for inclusion in ECIS 2014 Proceedings by an authorized administrator of AIS Electronic Library (AISeL). For more information, please contact [email protected]. DESIGNING PERSUASIVE SYSTEMS FOR USER ENGAGEMENT IN COLLABORATIVE INTERACTION Stibe, Agnis, Oulu Advanced Research on Software and Information Systems, Department of Information Processing Science, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland, [email protected] Oinas-Kukkonen, Harri, Oulu Advanced Research on Software and Information Systems, Department of Information Processing Science, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland, [email protected] Abstract Social influence concepts have great potential to positively affect the behaviors and attitudes of individuals. Drawing on socio-psychological theories, this study explores how social influence design principles alter user engagement in collaborative interaction during public events. Based on a theory- driven research model, a persuasive information system comprising social influence design principles of cooperation, social learning, and social facilitation was implemented and examined with a sample of 101 participants.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Psychology Is Its Study of Attitudes, Beliefs, Decisions, and Actions and the Way They Are Molded by Social Influence
    10/7/2013 Social Influence The greatest contribution of social psychology is its study of attitudes, beliefs, decisions, and actions and the way they are molded by social influence. Module 36: Social Thinking and Social Influence © 2013 Worth Publishers Social Influence Cultural Influences Conformity . Culture, the behaviors and beliefs of a group, is shared What form of social influence is and passed on to others including the next generation the subject of this cartoon? of that group. Conformity refers to adjusting our behavior or thinking to fit in with a group standard. This sharing of traditions, values, and ideas is a form of social influence that helps maintain the culture. Norms are the rules, often unspoken but commonly understood, that guide behavior in a culture. Cultures change over time; norms for marriage and divorce have changed in Western culture. Social Influence Mimicry Automatic Mimicry It is not only Some of our mimicry of other people is not by choice, but true that automatic: birds of a . Chameleon Effect: unintentionally mirroring the body feather flock together: it is position and mood of others around us, leading to also true that contagious yawning, contagious arm folding, hand if we flock wringing, face rubbing… together, we might choose . Unconsciously mimicking others helps us to feel what to wear the they’re feeling. Automatic mimicry is part of empathy. same . Those who are eager to fit in are more prone to feathers. automatic mimicry. http://youtu.be/zVaknBrb-fQ 1 10/7/2013 Conformity Social Influence: Conformity Responding to Social Norms What makes you more likely to When we are with other people and perceive a social norm (a “correct” conform? or “normal” way to behave or think in this group), our behavior may follow the norm rather than following our own judgment.
    [Show full text]
  • 11 Social Influence
    9781405124003_4_011.qxd 10/31/07 3:09 PM Page 216 Social Influence 11 Miles Hewstone and Robin Martin KEY CONCEPTS autokinetic effect compliance consistency conversion deindividuation door-in-the-face technique evaluation apprehension foot-in-the-door technique group polarization groupthink informational influence lowballing technique majority influence (conformity) minority influence (innovation) norms normative influence obedience to authority referent informational influence self-categorization theory social comparison social facilitation social influence whistleblowing 9781405124003_4_011.qxd 10/31/07 3:09 PM Page 217 CHAPTER OUTLINE This chapter considers two main types of social influence, both of which can be understood in terms of fundamental motives. First, we discuss ‘incidental’ social influence, where people are influenced by the presence or implied presence of others, although there has been no explicit attempt to influence them. We consider the impact of the mere presence of other people on task performance, and the impact of social norms. In the second part of the chapter, we ask why people succumb to social influence, highlighting types of social influence and motives underlying influence on the part of the target of influence. In the third part of the chapter, we turn to ‘deliberate’ social influence. We introduce theory and research on compliance, the influence of numerical majorities and minorities, group decision-making and obedience. Throughout we will see that social influence is an ambivalent concept. On the one hand, it is the glue of society: it makes things work, and society would be utterly chaotic without it. But on the other hand it can be a dark force, underlying some of the most extreme, even immoral, forms of human social behaviour.
    [Show full text]
  • Women's Stereotype Threat‐Based Performance Motivation And
    This is a repository copy of Women's stereotype threat‐ based performance motivation and prepotent inhibitory ability. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/138164/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Hutter, RRC orcid.org/0000-0001-7622-2273, Davies, LC, Sedikides, C et al. (1 more author) (2019) Women's stereotype threat‐ based performance motivation and prepotent inhibitory ability. British Journal of Social Psychology, 58 (3). pp. 691-713. ISSN 0144-6665 https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12298 © 2018 The British Psychological Society. This is the pre-peer reviewed version of the following article: Hutter, RRC , Davies, LC, Sedikides, C et al. (1 more author) (2019) Women's stereotype threat‐ based performance motivation and prepotent inhibitory ability. British Journal of Social Psychology, 58 (3). pp. 691-713, which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12298. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Use of Self-Archived Versions. Reuse Items deposited in White Rose Research Online are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved unless indicated otherwise. They may be downloaded and/or printed for private study, or other acts as permitted by national copyright laws. The publisher or other rights holders may allow further reproduction and re-use of the full text version. This is indicated by the licence information on the White Rose Research Online record for the item. Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request.
    [Show full text]
  • Religiosity, Prosocial Values, and Adjustment Among Students in Mennonite High Schools in Winnipeg
    Religiosity, Prosocial Values, and Adjustment among Students in Mennonite High Schools in Winnipeg Eduard Schludermanm, Shirin SchPudermann, and Cam-loi Huynh, University of Manitoba The Consequences of Religious Commitment Religious groups, such as the Mennonites, have established religious schools in order to promote religious commitment1 on the premise that the Christian religion is not only true, but also beneficial to the individual and to society (e.g., Friesen, 1983; Kraybill, 1978). Even though this premise may seem almost self evident to Mennonite religious and educational leaders, such a premise has been rejected by many educators, social scientists and psychologists who have argued that religious commitment has bad effects and therefore harms both students and society. For instance: Dittes (1969:637-641) argued that compared to nonreligious persons, religious persons are characterized by more personal inadequacy (e.g., low intelligence, high suggestibility, wealc egos, fewer friends). Wulff (1991:309) argued that religious commitment tends to be associated with poor mental health and poor personal adjustment. Others have argued that compared to nonreligious 192 Journal ofMennonite Studies persons, religious persons endorse harmful social values, such as lack of social compassion (Rokeach, 1969) or right-wing authoritarianism (Altemeyer, 1988:230). These views have been widely accepted and quoted in surveys of the psychology of religion (e.g., Batson, Schoenrade and Ventis, 1993:234;Wulff, 1991:309,225-226).Needless to say, such persons see little value in schools which promote religious commitment in their students (see Thiessen, 1993). There is thus a wide spectrum of opinion as to whether religious commitment promotes or hinders good social and personal adjustment.
    [Show full text]
  • Stereotype Threat • Explore Related Articles • Search Keywords Steven J
    PS67CH17-Spencer ARI 14 November 2015 8:18 ANNUAL REVIEWS Further Click here to view this article's online features: • Download figures as PPT slides • Navigate linked references • Download citations Stereotype Threat • Explore related articles • Search keywords Steven J. Spencer,1 Christine Logel,2 and Paul G. Davies3 1Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, N2L 3G1; email: [email protected] 2Renison University College, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, N2L 3G1; email: [email protected] 3Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada, V1V 1V7; email: [email protected] Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2016. 67:415–37 Keywords First published online as a Review in Advance on stereotype threat, social identity, identity safety, stereotypes, prejudice, September 10, 2015 discrimination The Annual Review of Psychology is online at psych.annualreviews.org Abstract This article’s doi: When members of a stigmatized group find themselves in a situation where 10.1146/annurev-psych-073115-103235 Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2016.67:415-437. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org negative stereotypes provide a possible framework for interpreting their be- Access provided by Ohio State University Library on 02/14/17. For personal use only. Copyright c 2016 by Annual Reviews. havior, the risk of being judged in light of those stereotypes can elicit a dis- All rights reserved ruptive state that undermines performance and aspirations in that domain. This situational predicament, termed stereotype threat, continues to be an intensely debated and researched topic in educational, social, and organiza- tional psychology. In this review, we explore the various sources of stereotype threat, the mechanisms underlying stereotype-threat effects (both mediators and moderators), and the consequences of this situational predicament, as well as the means through which society and stigmatized individuals can overcome the insidious effects of stereotype threat.
    [Show full text]
  • Intelligent Social Learning Rosaria Conte National Research Council, Institute of Psychology, V.LE Marx 15, 00137 Roma
    Intelligent Social Learning Rosaria Conte National Research Council, Institute of Psychology, V.LE Marx 15, 00137 Roma. Division "AI, Cognitive and Interaction Modelling" & University of Siena - Communication Sciences - "Social Psychology" PSS (Project on Social Simulation) - voice:+39+06+86090210;fax:+39+06+824737 email: [email protected] - http://ip.rm.cnr.it Abstract One of the cognitive processes responsible for social propagation is social learning, broadly meant as the process by means of which agents' acquisition of new information is caused or favoured by their being exposed to one another in a common environment. Social learning results from one or other of a number of social phenomena, the most important of which are social facilitation and imitation. In this paper, a general notion of social learning will be defined and the main processes which are responsible for it, namely social facilitation and imitation, will be analysed in terms of the social mental processes they require. A brief analysis of classical definitions of social learning is carried on, showing that a systematic and consistent treatment of this notion is still missing. A general notion of social learning is then introduced and the two main processes which may lead to it, social facilitation and imitation, will be defined as different steps on a continuum of cognitive complexity. Finally, the utility of the present approach is discussed. The analysis presented in this paper draws upon a cognitive model of social action (cf. Conte & Castelfranchi, 1995; Conte, 1999). The agent model which will be referred to throughout the paper is a cognitive model, endowed with mental properties for pursuing goals and intentions, and for knowledge-based action.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Loafing in Multicultural Teams
    Author Verona Bardhoku Submission Institute of Innovation Management Thesis Supervisor Univ.-Prof. Dr. Robert. J. Breitenecker Co-Supervisor Mag. Andreas Krawinkler SOCIAL LOAFING IN November 2020 MULTICULTURAL TEAMS: A qualitative perspective on social loafing tendencies in multicultural teams of international business students. Master’s Thesis to confer the academic degree of Master of Science Global Business in the Joint Master’s Program Global Business – Canada/Taiwan JOHANNES KEPLER UNIVERSITY LINZ Altenberger Straße 69 4040 Linz, Austria jku.at SWORN DECLARATION I hereby declare under oath that the submitted Master’s Thesis has been written solely by me without any third-party assistance, information other than provided sources or aids have not been used and those used have been fully documented. Sources for literal, paraphrased and cited quotes have been accurately credited. The submitted document here present is identical to the electronically submitted text document. Linz, November 2020 Verona Bardhoku November, 2020 Verona Bardhoku 2 /102 Acknowledgements First of all, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my thesis supervisor Univ.-Prof. Dr. Robert Breitenecker and my co-supervisor Mag. Andreas Krawinkler. Thank you for your guidance and advice during the time I was writing this thesis. Thank you for the fast collaboration and answering all my questions. Further, I would like to express my appreciation for all the interviewees, especially the ones who did not know me and still accepted to share their experiences and thoughts with me. Everyone gave me impactful insights and helped me make this thesis possible. As of last, I would like to thank my family for their financial and emotional support during my whole studies, and especially during the time I was writing this thesis.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Psychology (12-2 Thru 12-6; 12-14, 12-15)
    12/7/2017 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiWZxOdXiUs go to 1:27 http://www.learner.org/discoveringpsychology/19/e19expand.html?pop=yes&pid=1516# Social Psychology • Areas of Social Psychology (12-2 thru 12-6; 12-14, 12-15) • Social thinking/social cognition (how we think about others & how others influence our thoughts) • Study of how our thoughts, • Person perception feelings, perceptions, and • Interpersonal attraction behavior are influenced by • Attitudes & how they’re influenced • Stereotypes/Prejudice the presence of or • Propaganda interactions with others. • Social influence (how our behavior is influenced by • Relatively recent addition to others) psychology • Social relationships • Research influenced by current social problems • Others or social situations have powerful effects on us! One Social Thinking Effect: Others Focus on Social Influences on Our Behavior • Fundamental attribution error • How our behavior is influenced, directly or • The tendency, when analyzing others’ behaviors, to: indirectly, by the presence and/or the behavior of • overestimate the influence of personal traits AND others, the social situation • underestimate the effects of the situation • Behavior of groups • When analyzing our own behaviors we are more likely to take • Conformity; Obedience the situation into account • Social roles, norms & impact of situation • Behavior in crowds; Aggression • Example: see someone trip – think they are a klutz • But if you trip, blame it on the uneven sidewalk • Recommended leisure reading: Influence by Robert Cialdini • Social psych research on influence has provided critical data for all sorts of careers that involve influencing Social Influence: Conformity others: • Marketing & Sales In some ways we are built to conform (remember • Politics observational learning, mirror neurons) : • Fund-raising • Litigation • Management Automatic Mimicry • Behavior is contagious; what we see we often do.
    [Show full text]
  • The Audience Effect in Adolescence Depends on Who's Looking Over Your Shoulder
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Birkbeck Institutional Research Online Journal of Adolescence 43 (2015) 5e14 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Adolescence journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jado The audience effect in adolescence depends on who's looking over your shoulder * Laura K. Wolf a, , Narges Bazargani b, Emma J. Kilford a, Iroise Dumontheil a, c, Sarah-Jayne Blakemore a a UCL Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17 Queen Square, London WC1N 3AR, UK b UCL Department of Neuroscience, Physiology and Pharmacology, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT, UK c Department of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck, University of London, Malet Street, London WC1E 7HX, UK article info abstract Article history: Adolescents have been shown to be particularly sensitive to peer influence. However, the Available online data supporting these findings have been mostly limited to the impact of peers on risk- taking behaviours. Here, we investigated the influence of peers on performance of a Keywords: high-level cognitive task (relational reasoning) during adolescence. We further Adolescence assessed whether this effect on performance was dependent on the identity of the fl Peer in uence audience, either a friend (peer) or the experimenter (non-peer). We tested 24 younger Audience effect adolescent (10.6e14.2 years), 20 older adolescent (14.9e17.8 years) and 20 adult (21.8 Reasoning e Development 34.9 years) female participants. The presence of an audience affected adolescent, but not adult, relational reasoning performance. This audience effect on adolescent performance was influenced by the participants' age, task difficulty and the identity of the audience.
    [Show full text]