front 1 attribution theory | back 1 a person's behavior can either be indicative of that person's personality or be indicative of a person's situation (consist dispositional attibutionand situational attribution) |
front 2 Dispositional attribution | back 2 when a person blames or credits another person's internal characteristics for the behavior |
front 3 situational attribution | back 3 when a person blames or credits that situation for causing the behavior |
front 4 fundamental attribution error | back 4 when looking at someone's behavior, we normally blame who they are rather than looking at their situation. (observer underestimates the significance of a situation and overestimates the impact of personal disposition) ex: during lunch, A teacher views Jade as an extrovert as she always talking and laughing with her peers during class, B teacher views Jade as an introvert since she doesn't interact much with her peers Conclusion: both teachers are focused on disposition, not the
situation |
front 5 actor-observer bias | back 5 tendency to attribute one's own actions to external causes while attributing other people's behaviors to internal causes -> blame others rather than self |
front 6 self-serving bias | back 6 - when we as individuals look at our actions, and or reflect back on events we were part of -> if negative result, attribute the responsibility to the situation -> if positive result, give credit for achievement to ourselves (dispositional) |
front 7 Just-world hypothesis | back 7 tendency for people to believe that the world is fair and things are the way they are for a reason -> if you good person, good things happen to you -> if you bad person, bad things happen to you because you bad (associated with victim blaming) |
front 8 confirmation bias | back 8 tendency to seek information that aligns with our point of view and dismiss information that challenges our beliefs -> often helps support and reinforce our self-serving bias |
front 9 victim blaming | back 9 - take the blame and put it onto the victim - blaming the victim for their misfortune ex: basketball tryout -> Assume people who didn't make the team are not the best (the world is fair and the best players make the team -> associated with the Just-world hypothesis) * ignore the possibility that there were other factors at play such as the player's health, mood of the coach,... |
front 10 Halo effect | back 10 when a person interprets the actions and information of another person in a favorable way ex: when your friend fail a test, you're more likely to empathize with them and say that the test is not fair |
front 11 false consensus effect | back 11 when a person overestimates how others think and act -> leads a person to think more people think like them than they really do why is it occurring? we as people want to believe that our views and beliefs are normal and accepted in society, so we tend to adopt the view that other people must also think like us --> attitude influences our actions and perceptions -> lead to self-fulfilling prophecy |
front 12 self fulfilling prophecy | back 12 if you believe something will happen, it will happen -> belief that influences the behavior of the individual, ultimately leads to success |
front 13 Leon Feser | back 13 - interested in how we deal with situations where our thoughts, situations, and behavior may not align - proposed the idea of "Cognitive dissonance" |
front 14 Cognitive dissonance | back 14 a phenomenon that happens when an individual changes their attitude to match a situation or behavior - change in attitude or belief to match the behavior ex: you think killing a cow is bad, but you eat cheeseburger -> Thoughts and behavior are inconsistency you may change your eating habit or change your opinion |
front 15 elaboration likelihood model | back 15 - explain how people are persuaded how much a person thinks about the information being presented in an argument proposes two primary routes (central route to persuasion and peripheral route to persuasion) |
front 16 central route to persuasion | back 16 arguments that focus on facts and logic facts, evidence, logical arguments - long lasting impact |
front 17 peripheral route to persuasion | back 17 arguments that focus on emotions and reactions - the goal is to get you to feel something --> get a person to make a quick decision and require loew levels of elaboration - individuals make quick decisions without focusing on details emotional argument, commercial |
front 18 conformity | back 18 doing things because the group does |
front 19 Asch's line study | back 19 nine confederates in the room and the tenth person was a participant -> the majority of them conformed to what they knew was the wrong answer -> the participant choose the wrong answer to keep the association with the group |
front 20 foot in door phenomenon | back 20 when someone starts with a small request and builds up to larger request |
front 21 door in face phenomenon | back 21 when someone starts with the large request that other person would turn down, and then asks a more reasonable request that the person would accept |
front 22 compliance | back 22 - following instructions or requestions -> some aspects are foot-in-door phenomenon and door-in-the-face phenomenon |
front 23 informational social influence | back 23 based on our assumption that group is smarter than individual -> we conform because we want to be accurate and we accept others' versions of reality |
front 24 normative social influence | back 24 just want to fit in, we conform because we want to avoid rejection/ gain approval |
front 25 automatic mimicry (chameleon effect) | back 25 unconsciously imitating others' expressions, postures, voice tons -> help empathize by causing our brains to mirror other's emotion -> you might fond someone if you mirror someone's expression |
front 26 groupthink | back 26 people's desire for harmony in group causes them to suppress or selfcensor dessenting opinions |
front 27 Space Shuttle Challenger (ex of groupthink) | back 27 one day when the shuttle was about to launch, NASA received a warning one of the parts of the rocket might malfunction. however due to pressure from NASA executives to carry out the launch, whole group agreed to take the risk and launch the rocket, which led to tragic disaster --> groupthink can be prevented when leader welcomes many options and viewpoints into a discussion |
front 28 Standford Prison Experiment | back 28 - studying show how big an impact our roles have on us experiment: When randomly assigned to behave like prison guards or prisoners, subjects adopted that role to the point where guards became abusive to prisoners and prisoners planned a rebellion against the guards (even though subjects were allowed to opt out at any time). This emphasizes the power of role play. |
front 29 obedience | back 29 similar to compliance -> requires a person who gives orders or instructions to be in a position of authority obedience -> order, while compliance -> request |
front 30 Milgram Experiment | back 30 demonstration of how people will obey authority figures even when they disagree experiment: Subjects were instructed to sit in a chair and ask a learner, who was actually working with Milgram, to list pairs of words. If the learner got it wrong, a scientist would instruct the subject to deliver an electric shock to the learner. Milgram discovered that over half of the participants would deliver what they believed to be a fatal shock to the learner, showing that humans have very strict obedience to authority. This experiment is very unethical. |
front 31 bystander effect | back 31 a social psychological phenomenon where individuals are less likely to offer help to a victim when other people are present. |
front 32 conflict resolution | back 32 involves the process of resolving a conflict by providing each side's needs so that they are satisfied with the outcome. |
front 33 crowding effect | back 33 refers to decreased performance or discomfort caused by perceived high density or number of people within an environment. |
front 34 Deindividuation | back 34 losing self-awareness and self-restraint in group situation |
front 35 social loafing | back 35 tend to put less effort into tasks when we are in a group compared to when we are working alone |
front 36 social facilitation | back 36 an individual's improved performance on easy or well-learned tasks when they are with others -> other observe, we become aroused perform better on easy tasks but worse on difficult task |
front 37 social inhibition | back 37 perform worse on difficult tasks |
front 38 group polarization | back 38 a group will move farther and farther toward their individual ideas over time, group discusses their belief with like-minded people - bring groups closer together, but also facilitates unrealistic think and hatred -> lead to group biases |
front 39 ingroup bias | back 39 tendency to favor our own group rather than other |