Chat with us, powered by LiveChat Based on the Prejudice lectures, lets assume most people have implicit biases (for example being implicitly biased against someone of a certain race, age, religion, sexu - Wridemy Essaydoers

Based on the Prejudice lectures, lets assume most people have implicit biases (for example being implicitly biased against someone of a certain race, age, religion, sexu

Answer each question in 150 words using only the sources provided 

1. Based on the Prejudice lectures, let’s assume most people have implicit biases (for example being implicitly biased against someone of a certain race, age, religion, sexual orientation, gender, etc.).  Beyond the legal system and the workplace, what are some other areas of our lives in which implicit biases may cause problems?  What might this bias look like in those situations and how could this problem be resolved? 

2. In reference to the PowerPoint, Fiske and Taylor in 1991, found that people think more about people than any other subject. However, it was also mentioned that we do not like to think because it requires energy and effort. To tie into the lessons in the previous weeks is the natural urge to compare ourselves to other driven by how frequently we think of other people? Why would we spend some much time thinking about other people to the point of comparison if we don't even like to think?

Chapter 11

Attraction & Exclusion

Today’s Outline

Attraction

Belongingness

Similarity

Physical attractiveness

Reciprocity

Rejection

Causes of rejection

Effects of rejection

Loneliness

Attraction & Exclusion

As social animals, humans are, at their core, truly concerned with attraction and exclusion

Indeed the point of social psychology may be to understand why some are accepted and loved, while others are rejected

Take a moment to consider times in your life where you might have been afraid of romantic rejection or perhaps were seeking social acceptance with a new group of peers

Attraction & Exclusion

The need to belong is defined as the desire to form and maintain close, lasting relationships with some other individuals

Needing to belong is considered a fundamental drive or basic need of the human psyche

Warren Jones, “In two decades of studying loneliness, I have met many people who said they had no friends. I have never met any one who didn’t want to have any friends.”

Need to belong

From an evolutionary psychology perspective:

Attraction and acceptance are necessary for reproduction

Additionally, humans likely developed a herd mentality to increase our odds of survival

Consider all the ways we know our behavior changes in groups

Monkeys can recognize that any two monkeys may have an alliance, be forming one, or might be likely to fight

One theory is that the human brain developed more to keep track of a highly complex social world

Two components to belongingness

1. Regular, positive social interactions

Regular is key here, many of us have formed friendships but moved on to new situations in our life and lost regular contact with old friends

Positive is also key, hanging out with that person you always argue with doesn’t fill that social need

2. Stable relationship/friendship in which people share mutual concern for each other

Typically research has shown people want about 1-5 close friends

People are less concerned with casual friends/acquaintances

How bad for you is not belonging?

Belonging is called a need, not a want, perhaps for these reasons

Death rates from various diseases increase among people with no social connections (Lynch, 1979)

People who are alone have more mental and physical problems (Uchino, Cacioppo, & Kiecolt-Glaser, 1996)

Loneliness reduces the ability of the immune system to heal the body (Cacioppo & Hawkley, 2005)

Attraction – Similarity, complementarity, & opposites

Which old saying turns out to be true, “Birds of a feather flock together” or “Opposites attract”

The research has pointed to birds of a feather being the clear winner

In any relationship ranging from acquaintance to lover, opposites are unlikely to stay connected in the long run

Typically, but not always, our friends are similar in age, race, education level, political leaning, economic status, etc.

Note this is kind of a bad thing too, as it can lead us to assume everyone shares the opinions of your social group

How often do you see people unfriend others on Facebook over political disagreements?

Attraction – Similarity, complementarity, & opposites

Similarity

We tend to like friends who do the same activities that we do

Some researchers have even suggested that when a romantic couple gets into a relationship, if their levels of physical attractiveness aren’t quite similar, they will be more likely to break up

Have couples who are in different physical leagues stuck out to you as unusual?

Attraction – Similarity, complementarity, & opposites

Indeed, matching

hypothesis has been

supported, couples

are more likely to break

up if there’s a difference

in physical attractiveness

(even serious couples)

Attractiveness & Attraction

Speaking of physical attractiveness, most of us would say ‘we know it when we see it,’ but how do researchers define and measure it?

For starters, which of these 3 faces is the most attractive?

Attractiveness & Attraction

I chose the middle one. According to research findings, most people would choose either the middle or the right photo

The left photo is the original

Attractiveness & Attraction

Facial symmetry

Symmetrical faces are almost always rated as more attractive

The more symmetrical, the better

The implication is that facial symmetry implies genetic fitness. Asymmetry is a sign of genetic imperfections

To demonstrate that genetics are the explanation behind this, researchers (Thornhill & Gangestad, 1999) took the t-shirts that men slept in and asked women to smell and rate their scent

Some of the men had clear genetic asymmetry, length of pinky fingers or ear lobes

Women preferred the smell of men with genetic symmetry

They especially preferred the symmetric men’s scent when

at the point in their period when reproduction was ideal

Attractiveness & Attraction

Facial symmetry continued

More research has used computer software to merge/combine faces

For example, people rate the attractiveness of two faces, and then the faces are combined, and they rate the composite of the previous two faces

People mostly like composite faces better

In fact, the more faces that one combines, the more people liked it

E.g. a 16-face facial composite is preferred over a 4-face composite

Symmetrical, or ‘averaged,’ faces are preferred

Consider how saying someone looks inbred is the opposite

Lack of genetic diversity causes issues and is unappealing

Attractiveness & Attraction

Alright, we’ve covered faces, what about bodies?

Attractiveness & Attraction

Studies by Singh (1993) measured male ratings of silhouettes of woman’s bodies

He manipulated the size of the waist (belly fat) and the size of the hips

He find found that a low waist to hip ration, like .7, was preferred. This matches the standard hourglass shape people talk about

A small effect was found for women preferring men with a .9 waist to hip ratio

Subsequent research found the male shoulder to waist ratio was much more important, e.g. a V-shape

Attractiveness & Attraction

Alright, but how does physical attractiveness stack up to other aspects of attractiveness (having things in common, warmth, career success, etc.)

It can be summed up by one of my favorite quotes from your textbook authors:

“The fancy theories about matchmaking and similarity and reciprocity couldn’t shine through the overwhelming preference for the best-looking partners”

Attractiveness & Attraction

Attractiveness predicts date satisfaction more than any other dimension

Relates back to the Halo Effect, which can also be called ‘what is beautiful is good effect’

People (presumably) have other good traits if they’re attractive

Attractiveness & Attraction

Hortacsu and Ariely (2006) found that women stated a preference for taller men

But that preference could be offset if the man made enough money

E.g. for a 5 foot 8 inch guy, he could get as many dates as a taller guy if he made roughly 150k more

E.g. a 5 foot 2 guy could keep up with taller guys if he made 277k more than them

However, other research has shown that while women state a preference for taller guys, they don’t find them more attractive once having met them (Sheppard & Strathman, 1989)

Similarly, short men don’t report having less dates than tall men

Attractiveness & Attraction

Beyond considering romantic or sexual partners, being good looking confers other benefits. Good looking people are more likely to:

Do better in job interviews

Receive more help from strangers during emergencies

Be more popular among their peers

This even applies to young children

Teachers like attractive kids better as well

Finally, even 3-month-old babies show a preference for staring longer at attractive faces

Attractiveness & Attraction

According to principles of behaviorism:

We like people and romantic partners when they praise or compliment us (feels good, so we have positive associations with them)

We also like people who do us favors. This can take the form of help, gifts, cooking food, etc.

The exception in both of those cases is when the favors or compliments are seen as manipulative

Attractiveness & Attraction

As we discussed in the social influence chapter, reciprocity has compelling effects

As such, when someone likes us, we are inclined to like them by default

One exception is when we don’t like someone back and don’t want to spend time with them

Can cause us to feel guilty and/or turn them away

Attractiveness & Attraction

Nonverbal reciprocity

Lakin & Chartrand (2005) found that participants liked confederates better who mimicked their behavior (giggling, putting one’s hand on one’s face, etc.) than those confederates who didn’t mimic

Try it out in your life! Just don’t make it too obvious ;p

Attractiveness & Attraction

A few final points about attraction

The ‘mere exposure effect’ (Ch. 7) applies to liking people too

Also called the propinquity effect, we like people that we encounter regularly

Makes us feel like our environment is stable and predictable

But like the mere exposure effect, if our initial response is dislike, disliking gets worse

Social allergy effect: a partner’s annoying habits get more annoying over time

Rejection

Rejection is a broad term, referring to being turned down for a date, being dumped, being fired, being kicked off of a team, not invited to an event with your usual friends, etc.

Ostracism is another word for it, being excluded, rejected, or ignored by others

Why does rejection occur?

What causes rejection

Reasons differ by context

Among children, other kids are rejected if they’re:

1. Aggressive

physically or verbally

2. Withdrawn

Often just by him/herself

3. Different/deviant

Just unlike peers in some way

What causes rejection

Among adults

Typically deviance

Just being too different from people around you

Shame on some level, because that stifles uniqueness

Bad apple

Making others of your group look bad

What causes rejection

Romantic Rejection

When turning people down, people often cite external reasons (too busy, not looking for a relationship, etc.)

But the reason is almost always internal (not attracted to person, don’t like them, etc.)

Those external answers are polite, but can lead to confusion

Rejected people can become a stalkers

There has also been a trend lately of men rejected by women to become violent and go on a shooting spree as a result

Psychological effects of rejection

The effects of rejection are uniformly bad

Pain

Illness

Depression

Suicidal thoughts

Life seeming pointless

Risky sexual behavior

People can develop rejection sensitivity

Reluctance to open up to new people for fear of being hurt

Psychological effects of rejection

Similar to shocking physical pain, sometimes the psychological response to an important rejection is numbness

The mental distress, anxiety, and sadness come later

Rejection makes people temporarily stupid, in terms of cognitive performance

Rejection also suppresses people’s ability to self-regulate or control their behavior

More likely to binge eat sweets

Behavioral effects of rejection

Less generous, cooperative, and helpful

More impulsive and destructive

Higher levels of aggression

Before shootings in the U.S. became so frequent, the narrative was that school shooters were often rejected outcasts

There may be some truth to that narrative, but it’s not always the case and it certainly doesn’t excuse shooting people

Loneliness

When we discuss lonely people, we mean chronically lonely, not temporarily because someone moved to a new city

Comparing lonely to non-lonely people defies a lot of the stereotypes about lonely people

There are no appreciable differences in attractiveness, intelligence, or general social skills between lonely and non-lonely people

But, lonely people do seem to do a bad job of detecting the emotional states of people they interact with

This may lead to friction in social relationships

Lonely people interact with others as often as non-lonely (quantity), but the interaction quality is poorer

Loneliness

Recommendations:

Someone who is often lonely should get a pet! They help a lot

Improve at monitoring emotional states

Continuing to attempt to form meaningful bonds with people

Live closer to family

,

Chapter 5

Social Cognition Part 2

Today’s outline

Findings about automated processing

Heuristics

Cognitive biases

Attributions

Fundamental attribution error

Social Cognition continued

Last class we discussed the theme of automated/non-conscious/peripheral processes vs controlled/conscious/central processes.

As you may recall seeing, another way to describe automated cognition is called ‘heuristics’

If you don’t know how that word is pronounced/sounds, click here and click on US https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/pronunciation/english/heuristic

Heuristics

Heuristics are cognitive shortcuts that the automated mind uses to help us make decisions quickly/easily

They can, however, also be prone to certain errors

Indeed, you may recognize the name Daniel Kahneman

He won the Nobel Prize for “having integrated insights from psychology into economic science, especially concerning human judgment and decision-making under uncertainty”

Representativeness Heuristic

‘The tendency to judge the frequency or likelihood of an event by the extent to which is resembles a typical case’

Which series of coin flips is more likely? (h = heads; t = tails)

HHHHH or

HTHTH

Most people say the second one, but in reality, the odds are the same

Representativeness Heuristic continued

What’s more healthy?

Turns out rats that were fed Lucky Charms grew and were fine, but rats fed 100% natural Quaker Oats Granola didn’t grow and died early in their life span

Granola seems healthier, but had tons of saturated fat

OR

Availability Heuristic

Were you more afraid to fly on your first airplane or to drive somewhere?

Most would say airplane

But the chances of dying in a car crash (1 in 5,000) are many many many times more likely than dying in an airplane (1 in 11 million)

Car crashes remain one of the leading causes of death, alongside heart attacks and cancer

Plane crashes, though, stand out because they’re rare and usually covered extensively in the news

Heuristics continued

A lot of the time, heuristics can help us make decisions

But often there’s a major flaw with our brain:

Information from base rates and statistics get overshadowed by biases, like the availability heuristic or representativeness heuristic

Also the gambler’s fallacy, which we’ll discuss shortly

Anchoring & adjustment heuristic

In estimating the likelihood or frequency of an event, if there’s a starting number present, people will anchor on to that and adjust either up or down

E.g. in a negotiation, if the company offered you 60k a year.

Anchoring & adjustment heuristic

Tversky and Kahneman (1974):

Spun a random 1-100 wheel in front of participants (the wheel was rigged to either land on 65 or 10)

Whichever it landed on, researchers would ask: “Is the percentage of African countries in the UN higher or lower than the # on the wheel?” Then, “What was the # of African countries?”

Participants who were anchored by the number 10%, estimated 25%, whereas those anchored by 65% estimated 45%.

This occurs even though participants see the wheel and believe it’s just random

Other cognitive biases

We already discussed confirmation bias in previous chapters, though the effect of that bias cannot be overstated

Conjunction fallacy

Let’s try this out

Linda is 31, single, outspoken, very bright. She majored in philosophy in college. As a student, she was deeply concerned with discrimination and other social issues, and she participated in anti-nuclear demonstrations. Which is more likely?

A. Linda is a bank teller

B. Linda is a bank teller and active in the feminist movement

Conjunction fallacy

Even though b. is tempting, the answer is a.

The odds of one event occurring (she’s a bank teller) is more likely than two separate events occurring together (bank teller and feminist)

People perceive an increase in accuracy as information gets more specific and tied to similar-seeming elements, but in fact, the opposite is true

E.g. not all bank tellers are feminists, and vice versa

Illusory correlation

When two rare things occur together, they stand out as correlated

This explains why some people have a bad view of minorities, because if the news reports on a minority member (rare) committing a crime (rare), that stands out

In one study, participants read about actions taken by people from two groups, Group A and Group B.

Group A has more members than Group B

Illusory correlation continued

Some of the actions taken by people in both groups were desirable (e.g. helped someone) or undesirable (e.g. lied to someone).

But the ratio of desirable to undesirable behaviors was the same for both groups

Nevertheless, after reading all of the stories, participants estimated that members from Group B. committed more undesirable acts than desirable ones

Base Rate Fallacy

As sample size increases, variability decreases

E.g. if you flip a coin 10 times, you might see HHHHTTHHHH, 8 out of 10 heads

But if you flipped 1000 coins, the chances of seeing 800/1000 heads is way lower

Some sports, then, are more likely to have flukes!

Any game with low scores, like

soccer; to reduce flukes, games should

have high scores and multiple matches

(e.g. best of 3)

Gambler’s Fallacy and Hot Hand

Say you flip a coin 9 times, and the result is all heads. Will the next one be:

A. Head

B. Tails

C. Heads or Tails are equally likely

What do you think the answer is?

Gambler’s Fallacy and Hot Hand

Hot hand players would believe good luck would continue and say A. Heads

Gambler’s Fallacy players would say a Tails is due and pick B. Tails

The answer is C.

The 10th flip is a discrete event, the prior events have no impact on the current flip

Researchers demonstrated this

by putting cameras above roulette

tables in Las Vegas Casinos

Gambler’s Fallacy and Hot Hand

If you play any kind of board games that include dice, you’ll catch yourself making either the Hot Hand or Gambler’s Fallacy very often

I know I do!

Gambler’s Fallacy and Hot Hand can be understood in the context of the representativeness heuristic

People expect strings of numbers to look average

These two fallacies could also play into the next bias…

Illusion of Control

People have an immensely strong desire to control everything

We come to believe we can control chance events

E.g. in past times, things like rain dances

More casino research has shown people who want high numbers roll dicer harder, and people who want low numbers roll dice softer

Similarly, with Gambler’s Fallacy and Hot Hand, it’s possible people are trying to reason around random chance by explaining in their mind why the next flip should be heads tails

Referring back to self-esteem, illusions of control are probably a mentally healthy thing to have

Magical thinking

Any assumptions that don’t hold up to scrutiny or fact

E.g. being afraid to wear a sweater that someone who has HIV/AIDS wore

It couldn’t be transmitted as such

Being afraid of eating a chocolate bug

Unrealistic contamination

We all get grossed out if we see a hair in our food or if a bug just landed in it

But in reality, nothing really happens from that ;p

Statistical Regression

Sir Francis Galton came up with it

Aka regression toward the mean

Streaks can happen in anything, sports, gambling, etc., but eventually, everything regresses back to whatever its mean is

This relates back to the base rate fallacy, as sample size increases, variability decreases

Counterfactual thinking

Imaging alternatives to past or present events, despite reality being set in stone

What if a different candidate won

What if you would have been on time for that date

Narrowly missing a subway train is something people find more aggravating than missing it by 5 minutes, even though there’s no real difference

Attributions

Attributions are an explanation of why something happened

Inferences we make to explain events in our life

E.g. Dylan said something mean because he’s a jerk

Earlier in the course we had discussed the ‘self-serving bias’

Where people attribute their success to internal characteristics (I’m smart, hard-working, etc.)

But attribute failures to external things (my boss just didn’t like me)

Let’s investigate another important bias…

Attributions

Fundamental attribution error (FAE)(aka correspondence bias):

tendency to attribute the actions of others to internal causes even if they are actually caused by external forces or circumstances (Jones & Nisbett)

e.g. Bob is late because he's a slacker (internal)

we don't assume it's due to traffic

This bias is one of the most

famous and important findings

in social psychology

Actor and Observer

Actor-observer bias: as observers, we attribute the behavior of others to their wants, motives, and personality traits (this is the fundamental attribution error), but as actors, we tend to find external explanations for our own behavior

Personalizing the Fundamental Attribution Error

Can you think of an example from your recent past where you evaluated someone's actions and made the fundamental attribution error?

in other words, you attributed their behavior to internal causes, even though you don't know for sure

Can you similarly think of an example where someone attributed YOUR behavior to an internal cause, when really the cause was external?

Personal Anecdote on FAE

I have a memory that stands out to me:

Junior year of college I had woken up after my first night back on campus and was going to head to my first class, animal behavior

The instructor was Dr. Yasukawa, who

was kind of intimidating and well-

regarded on campus, but I was excited

to take his class because he was the athletics

director and we had often played some sports

with students/faculty during ‘noon ball’ in

between classes during my pervious year/s

Personal Anecdote on FAE continued

So I woke up, took one look in the mirror, and saw that my eyes were super bloodshot

It looked like I was on drugs

In fact, it was because I had severe allergies from being in the Midwest (hay, pollen, ragweed, etc.)

Afterwards I got on allergy medication which stopped any such problems

I tried a few things to fix the problem, but ended up not being able to, and had to decide to just go to class, and was late at this point

I walked in and everyone was looking at me, classes were small at my college, only 20 people

Personal Anecdote on FAE continued

As I was heading to my seat, he said “Hi Jon, that’s your ‘one bite.’

Referring to animal behavior, as that was the course, and how dogs can kind of get away with one bite, but after that they get branded as trouble

I was so embarrassed!!! I apologized after class, but you can tell when someone doesn’t believe what happened

Personal Anecdote on FAE continued

He (the observer) assumed I was late because: I was just the kind of person who ran late, was disrespectful, or had been smoking, etc.

In reality, this was a perfect example of the FAE

He assumed internal causes for my lateness

I (the actor) knew, of course, that there was a clear, external cause

Monitor your own judgements of people, I’ve caught myself making the FAE many times

Factors Influencing Attributions

Discounting: downgrading internal causes as a way of explaining an individual’s behavior when a person’s actions seem to have strong external causes

e.g. athletes endorsing shaving cream

Consensus: degree to which people respond alike; implies that responses are externally caused

everyone is late….traffic

,

Chapter 5

Social Cognition Part 1

Today’s outline

Social cognition in general

Elaboration likelihood model

A model that explains two possible routes for processing information and making decisions

Controlled vs automatic processing

Knowledge structures

Schemas, scripts, priming, framing

Cognitive coherence

A model that explains how people make decisions in the real world

Development of social cognition

Behaviorism had been focused on observable actions and not internal states

But social psychologists contended that we can still measure/access thoughts, both directly and indirectly, using clever methodology

E.g. Measuring behavior after a discussion with someone of another race, in order to assess racist attitudes

Social cognition

Social Cognition: the study of any kind of thinking by people about people or social relationships

It’s a good thing social psychologists decided to look into social cognition because it turns out we think more about people than any other subject (Fiske & Taylor, 1991)

Social psychology

Do you like to think?

Humans have the largest prefrontal cortex of any animal, but…

Do humans like to think???

Turns out, no!

Conscious, rational thought requires a lot of energy and effort

Social cognition

Social psychologists developed the term ‘cognitive miser’ to describe human thought

Just as a miser doesn’t like to spend money and does so rarely, so do cognitive misers avoid thinking

*Notable exceptions:

When it comes to people’s favorite things (hobbies, sports, interests, etc.) people can and do readily think and devour knowledge

Some people do like to think in general, how do we know?

Need for cognition

Caccioppo & Petty (1982) developed a scale called Need for Cognition (NFC)

It measures the “tendency for an individual to engage in and enjoy effortful thinking”

Going back to persuasion from last lecture, someone’s NFC level is an audience (to whom) characteristic

Those high in NFC are more easily persuaded by strong arguments, but do not find weak arguments compelling

Example of strong argument: college students should have to take comprehensive exams at the end of senior year because that boosts starting salaries

Example of a weak argument: college students should have to take comprehensive exams because graduate students complained that because they have to, undergrads should too

Brief Note:

Before we continue, we are going to use a lot of terms in this chapter to mostly express the same things concerning the two different modes of thinking and the duplex mind:

Conscious vs. non-conscious

Central vs. peripheral

Systematic vs. heuristic

Controlled vs. automated

At different points we will use different terms, only because those were the terms the researchers used for their specific studies

But it’s important to recognize the themes and similarities

Elaboration Likelihood Model<

Our website has a team of professional writers who can help you write any of your homework. They will write your papers from scratch. We also have a team of editors just to make sure all papers are of HIGH QUALITY & PLAGIARISM FREE. To make an Order you only need to click Ask A Question and we will direct you to our Order Page at WriteDemy. Then fill Our Order Form with all your assignment instructions. Select your deadline and pay for your paper. You will get it few hours before your set deadline.

Fill in all the assignment paper details that are required in the order form with the standard information being the page count, deadline, academic level and type of paper. It is advisable to have this information at hand so that you can quickly fill in the necessary information needed in the form for the essay writer to be immediately assigned to your writing project. Make payment for the custom essay order to enable us to assign a suitable writer to your order. Payments are made through Paypal on a secured billing page. Finally, sit back and relax.

Do you need an answer to this or any other questions?