Lecture4
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View Lecture4 as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 2,456
- Pages: 88
Social Perception • The process through which we seek to know and understand others • Nonverbal communication • Attribution • Impression formation
Nonverbal Communication: Eye Contact • Important nonverbal cue • High level gazing: liking or friendliness • Staring (maintain gaze regardless): anger or hostility
Nonverbal Communication: Touching • Perception influence by who touches, nature of touch, and context • Can convey: affection, sexual interest, dominance, caring, or aggression • Produces positive reactions when appropriate • Handshake • Firmness and duration predict favorable impressions
Nonverbal Communication: Recognizing Deception • • • • •
Most people lie every day Not very good detectors of lying Generally perceive others as truthful Generalize individuals truthfulness However, nonverbal cues can be helpful
Nonverbal Communication: Recognizing Deception • Microexpressions: immediate, brief facial expressions • Interchannel discrepencies: differences among types of nonverbal cues • Eye contact: blink more, dilated pupils, unusually high or low level • Exaggerated facial expressions: unusually strong nonverbal cues • Move arms, hands, and fingers less • Linguistic style: delay, high pitch, restart sentences, speech errors, backtracking
True Liars • Police interrogations tapes of solved crimes • Analyzed for gaze aversion, blinking, hand/arm movements, and speech errors • Liars blinked less and paused longer • No other differences • Confound: truth tellers were also very nervous
Good Deception Detectors • Regular population: 55% • Police interrogators: 65%-70% (none exceeded 80% overall) • Paul Eckman: 80%
Good Deception Detectors • Have nurses describe a pleasant film while watching a terribly gruesome one • 500 secret service agents, federal polygraphers, and judges watch films • All at chance • Except secret service: 80% • Only .1% (16 out of 10,000) true wizards: detect lying at >80% across situations
What just happened?
What just happened? • Strong tendency to make attributions about the causes of events
Attributions: Understand the Causes of Others’ Behavior • Attribution: the process though which we seek to identify the causes of others’ behavior and so gain knowledge of their stable traits and dispositions • Cause and effect, how versus why • Internal (disposition) or external (situation)
Attribution Theories • Correspondence Inference Theory of Attributions • Kelley’s Theory of Causal Attributions
Theory of Correspondent Inference • Describes how we use others’ behavior to infer information about their stable dispositions • Behavior depends on stable traits AND the situation/context • We make trait inferences from behaviors that: (1) are freely chosen, (2) produce noncommon effects (effects that can only be produced by one cause), and (3) are low in social desirability
• A woman gave a man all of her jewelry.
• John brought a healthy snack to share with the office. He passed them out at a staff meeting where all supervisors were present. “Anything to help the team,” he pronounced loudly when thanked for the snack.
• John brought a healthy snack to share with the office. He left them in the conference room and smiled discretely from his desk when he saw others enjoying them.
• John brought a healthy snack to share with the office. He left them in the conference room and smiled discretely from his desk when he saw others enjoying them. • Noncommon effects: allow us to zero in on the causes of others’ behavior
• Bob just got engaged. His future spouse is attractive, has a great personality, is wildly in love with Bob, and is very rich.
• Bob just got engaged. His future spouse is very attractive, treats him with indifference, is extremely boring, and is known to be heavily in debt.
• Your social psychology teacher was on time to class.
• Your social psychology teacher was late to class.
Kelly’s Theory of Causal Attributions • When determining the cause or the “why” of others behaviors we focus on three types of information: consensus, consistency, and distinctiveness • Main cause or “why” attribution we make is whether behavior comes from internal or external causes
Kelly’s Theory of Causal Attributions • Consensus: extent to which other persons react to similar to the person we are considering • Consistency: extent to which person has responded similarly to same situation on different occasions • Distinctiveness: extent to which person has responded similarly in different situations
Kelly’s Theory of Causal Attributions • Internal attributions: low consensus and distinctiveness, high consistency • External: high consensus, consistency, and distinctiveness
• Joe is golfing in the San Francisco Invitational. After he hit a terrible drive on hole 17, he broke his golf club over his knee and threw it down the fairway. • Internal attribution? • External attribution?
• Joe is golfing in the San Francisco Invitational. After he hit a terrible drive on hole 17, he broke his golf club over his knee and threw it down the fairway. • Low consensus
• Joe is golfing in the San Francisco Invitational. After he hit a terrible drive on hole 17, he broke his golf club over his knee and threw it down the fairway. • Low consensus: nobody on the tour had ever done this before
• Joe is golfing in the San Francisco Invitational. After he hit a terrible drive on hole 17, he broke his golf club over his knee and threw it down the fairway. • Low consensus: nobody on the tour had ever done this before • High consistency:
• Joe is golfing in the San Francisco Invitational. After he hit a terrible drive on hole 17, he broke his golf club over his knee and threw it down the fairway. • Low consensus: nobody on the tour had ever done this before • High consistency: he did the same thing after terrible drives on holes 8, 11, and 13
• Joe is golfing in the San Francisco Invitational. After he hit a terrible drive on hole 17, he broke his golf club over his knee and threw it down the fairway. • Low consensus: nobody on the tour had ever done this before • High consistency: he did the same thing after terrible drives on holes 8, 11, and 13 • Low distinctiveness:
• Joe is golfing in the San Francisco Invitational. After he hit a terrible drive on hole 17, he broke his golf club over his knee and threw it down the fairway. • Low consensus: nobody on the tour had ever done this before • High consistency: he did the same thing after terrible drives on holes 8, 11, and 13 • Low distinctiveness: he also broke and threw clubs when he missed puts and when his caddy gave him the wrong club
Internal or External? • Joe is golfing in the San Francisco Invitational. After he hit a terrible drive on hole 17, he broke his golf club over his knee and threw it down the fairway. • Low consensus: nobody on the tour had ever done this before • High consistency: he did the same thing after terrible drives on holes 8, 11, and 13 • Low distinctiveness: he also broke and threw clubs when he missed puts and when his caddy gave him the wrong club
Internal or External? • Joe is golfing in the San Francisco Invitational. After he hit a terrible drive on hole 17, he broke his golf club over his knee and threw it down the fairway. • Low consensus: nobody on the tour had ever done this before • High consistency: he did the same thing after terrible drives on holes 8, 11, and 13 • Low distinctiveness: he also broke and threw clubs when he missed puts and when his caddy gave him the wrong club
Internal or External? • Joe is golfing in the San Francisco Invitational. After he hit a terrible drive on hole 17, he broke his golf club over his knee and threw it down the fairway. • High consensus: many players in the tournament have done the same thing • High consistency: Joe did the same thing after terrible drives on holes 8, 11, and 13 • High distinctiveness: he has not broken or thrown a club in any other circumstances
Internal or External? • Joe is golfing in the San Francisco Invitational. After he hit a terrible drive on hole 17, he broke his golf club over his knee and threw it down the fairway. • High consensus: many players in the tournament have done the same thing • High consistency: Joe did the same thing after terrible drives on holes 8, 11, and 13 • High distinctiveness: he has not broken or thrown a club in any other circumstances
Other attributions • • • •
Internal or external Stable or unstable Specific or global Controllable or uncontrollable
Experiment • Think of a question for which I might not know the answer. • You must not know the answer.
Experiment • How many do you think I will get correct?
Experiment • Ask questions, keep track of your own responses.
Experiment • Ask questions, keep track of your own responses. • How many did you get correct?
Experiment • Students tend to overestimate how many questions an instructor will get correct. • Attribute knowing information on class topic to internal trait of being knowledgeable • Versus external factors such as notes, class pressure, specific training, etc • Is Alex Trebek intelligent?
Attribution Errors • The Correspondence Bias / Fundamental Attribution Error • The tendency to explain others’ actions as stemming from dispositions, even in the presence of clear situational causes • He did because he’s “that kind of person” • Anchoring and adjustment: first assign and internal cause and then correct based on context • Underestimate the influence of the correspondence bias
Attribution Errors • The Correspondence Bias / Fundamental Attribution Error • Anchoring and adjustment: first assign and internal cause and then correct based on context
Degree of Support for Castro
70 60 50 40
Pro Essay
30
Con Essay
20 10 0 Free Choice
No Choice How Written
Cultural Factors • More common in individualistic cultures: people should accept responsibility for their actions • Less common in collectivist cultures • American versus Chinese newspapers • Japanese versus American students: essay/speech attributions
Groups • Correspondence bias exists for groups to • Jewish versus German ratings of Holocaust atrocities
Attribution Errors • The actor-observer effect • The tendency to attribute our own behavior mainly to situational causes but the behavior of others to internal causes • He failed because he’s unprepared. I failed because the test was unfair.
Number of Attributions
5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0
Self Other
Dispositional
Situational
Kind of Attrinutions
Attribution Errors • Self Serving Bias • Tendency to attribute positive outcomes to internal causes but negative outcomes to external causes • I got a ‘A’ because I’m smart. I got an ‘F’ because the teacher is unfair. • Preserves self esteem
Attribution and Depression • Self-defeating attributions common feature of depression • Attribute negative events to internal causes and positive events to external causes • Learned helplessness: perceived lack of influence on improvement • Cognitive therapy
Impression Formation • Another form of social perception • The process through which we form impressions of others • Relatively automatic • Large influence on behavior
Impression Formation • Physical attractiveness • One of the most powerful influences on our impression of others • “What is beautiful is good” stereotype
Impression Formation • • • • •
Physical attractiveness Rates the ability of VPs Attractiveness x Gender (2x2) More attractive man = higher ability Less attractive woman = higher ability
Impression Formation • Physical attractiveness – physically attractive defendants charged with misdemeanor offenses get lower bail settings than do less attractive defendants – professional men 6’2” and over get starting salaries 10% higher than shorter men
Primacy Effect • First impression have strong effect
Impression Formation • Can form unified impression from a very small amount of information • Impressions are not a conglomeration of perceived traits • Impressions are an integrated whole
Asch’s Study Person A Intelligent – skillful – industrious – warm – determined – practical – cautious Person B Intelligent – skillful – industrious – cold – determined – practical – cautious
Asch’s Study • Indicate impression of person by putting check marks next to traits • If additive: impression won’t differ much • However, large differences were observed • Warm more likely to be rated as generous, happy, good-natured, sociable, popular, altruistic
Asch’s Study • 91% of Subjects Told Person is Warm Infer Person is Generous • Only 9% Told Person is Cold Infer Generous • Warm more likely to be rated as generous, happy, good-natured, sociable, popular, altruistic
Asch’s Study • Central traits: ones that strongly shape overall impressions • Peripheral traits: exert less influence on impressions • Substitute polite and blunt for warm and cold
Asch’s Study • Intelligent • Skillful • Industrious • Blunt • Determined • Practical • Cautious
Asch’s Study Intelligent Skillful • Industrious • Polite • Determined • Practical • Cautious • •
Asch’s Study • 87% of Subjects Told Person Is Polite Infer Person is Good-natured • But 56% Of Those Told Person Is Blunt Infer Good-Natured
Implicit Personality Theories • Beliefs about what traits or characteristics tend to go together – once we make assumptions based on one trait (e.g., friendly), we use our IPT to draw conclusions about other traits (e.g., honest)
• Helpful, kind sincere • Practical, intelligent ambitious • Schemas: jock, first born
Identify one individual of each of the following body types: • Endomorph – plump: • Mesomorph – muscular: • Ectomorph – frail: Place on set of initials next to each body type
Identify one individual of each of the following body types: • • • •
Endomorph: Mesomorph: Ectomorph: Match each of the letters to the characteristics of the individuals you have identified: R = relaxed, easy going, sociable, good natured B = bold, assertive, active, adventurous I = inhibited, restrained, apprehensive, cautious, private
R= relaxed Endomorph (plump) Mesomorph (muscular) Ectomorph (frail)
B= bold
I= inhibited
R= relaxed
B= bold
I= inhibited
Endomorph (plump)
27
18
13
Mesomorph (muscular)
20
27
14
Ectomorph (frail)
12
15
23
Impression Formation: Adding or averaging • When forming impression do we add together discrete pieces of information or average it • Truthful and reasonable • Truthful, reasonable, painstaking, and persuasive • #1 rated more favorably
Impression Management • Efforts by individuals to produce favorable first impressions • Self-enhancement: effort to increase one’s appeal to others • Physical appearance, describe strengths, describe overcoming obstacles • Other-enhancement: effort to make a target person feel good to increase one’s appeal • Flattery, expressing agreement, showing interest, small favors • Slime effect: strong negative impression of those who “lick upward but kick downward”
Nonverbal Communication: Eye Contact • Important nonverbal cue • High level gazing: liking or friendliness • Staring (maintain gaze regardless): anger or hostility
Nonverbal Communication: Touching • Perception influence by who touches, nature of touch, and context • Can convey: affection, sexual interest, dominance, caring, or aggression • Produces positive reactions when appropriate • Handshake • Firmness and duration predict favorable impressions
Nonverbal Communication: Recognizing Deception • • • • •
Most people lie every day Not very good detectors of lying Generally perceive others as truthful Generalize individuals truthfulness However, nonverbal cues can be helpful
Nonverbal Communication: Recognizing Deception • Microexpressions: immediate, brief facial expressions • Interchannel discrepencies: differences among types of nonverbal cues • Eye contact: blink more, dilated pupils, unusually high or low level • Exaggerated facial expressions: unusually strong nonverbal cues • Move arms, hands, and fingers less • Linguistic style: delay, high pitch, restart sentences, speech errors, backtracking
True Liars • Police interrogations tapes of solved crimes • Analyzed for gaze aversion, blinking, hand/arm movements, and speech errors • Liars blinked less and paused longer • No other differences • Confound: truth tellers were also very nervous
Good Deception Detectors • Regular population: 55% • Police interrogators: 65%-70% (none exceeded 80% overall) • Paul Eckman: 80%
Good Deception Detectors • Have nurses describe a pleasant film while watching a terribly gruesome one • 500 secret service agents, federal polygraphers, and judges watch films • All at chance • Except secret service: 80% • Only .1% (16 out of 10,000) true wizards: detect lying at >80% across situations
What just happened?
What just happened? • Strong tendency to make attributions about the causes of events
Attributions: Understand the Causes of Others’ Behavior • Attribution: the process though which we seek to identify the causes of others’ behavior and so gain knowledge of their stable traits and dispositions • Cause and effect, how versus why • Internal (disposition) or external (situation)
Attribution Theories • Correspondence Inference Theory of Attributions • Kelley’s Theory of Causal Attributions
Theory of Correspondent Inference • Describes how we use others’ behavior to infer information about their stable dispositions • Behavior depends on stable traits AND the situation/context • We make trait inferences from behaviors that: (1) are freely chosen, (2) produce noncommon effects (effects that can only be produced by one cause), and (3) are low in social desirability
• A woman gave a man all of her jewelry.
• John brought a healthy snack to share with the office. He passed them out at a staff meeting where all supervisors were present. “Anything to help the team,” he pronounced loudly when thanked for the snack.
• John brought a healthy snack to share with the office. He left them in the conference room and smiled discretely from his desk when he saw others enjoying them.
• John brought a healthy snack to share with the office. He left them in the conference room and smiled discretely from his desk when he saw others enjoying them. • Noncommon effects: allow us to zero in on the causes of others’ behavior
• Bob just got engaged. His future spouse is attractive, has a great personality, is wildly in love with Bob, and is very rich.
• Bob just got engaged. His future spouse is very attractive, treats him with indifference, is extremely boring, and is known to be heavily in debt.
• Your social psychology teacher was on time to class.
• Your social psychology teacher was late to class.
Kelly’s Theory of Causal Attributions • When determining the cause or the “why” of others behaviors we focus on three types of information: consensus, consistency, and distinctiveness • Main cause or “why” attribution we make is whether behavior comes from internal or external causes
Kelly’s Theory of Causal Attributions • Consensus: extent to which other persons react to similar to the person we are considering • Consistency: extent to which person has responded similarly to same situation on different occasions • Distinctiveness: extent to which person has responded similarly in different situations
Kelly’s Theory of Causal Attributions • Internal attributions: low consensus and distinctiveness, high consistency • External: high consensus, consistency, and distinctiveness
• Joe is golfing in the San Francisco Invitational. After he hit a terrible drive on hole 17, he broke his golf club over his knee and threw it down the fairway. • Internal attribution? • External attribution?
• Joe is golfing in the San Francisco Invitational. After he hit a terrible drive on hole 17, he broke his golf club over his knee and threw it down the fairway. • Low consensus
• Joe is golfing in the San Francisco Invitational. After he hit a terrible drive on hole 17, he broke his golf club over his knee and threw it down the fairway. • Low consensus: nobody on the tour had ever done this before
• Joe is golfing in the San Francisco Invitational. After he hit a terrible drive on hole 17, he broke his golf club over his knee and threw it down the fairway. • Low consensus: nobody on the tour had ever done this before • High consistency:
• Joe is golfing in the San Francisco Invitational. After he hit a terrible drive on hole 17, he broke his golf club over his knee and threw it down the fairway. • Low consensus: nobody on the tour had ever done this before • High consistency: he did the same thing after terrible drives on holes 8, 11, and 13
• Joe is golfing in the San Francisco Invitational. After he hit a terrible drive on hole 17, he broke his golf club over his knee and threw it down the fairway. • Low consensus: nobody on the tour had ever done this before • High consistency: he did the same thing after terrible drives on holes 8, 11, and 13 • Low distinctiveness:
• Joe is golfing in the San Francisco Invitational. After he hit a terrible drive on hole 17, he broke his golf club over his knee and threw it down the fairway. • Low consensus: nobody on the tour had ever done this before • High consistency: he did the same thing after terrible drives on holes 8, 11, and 13 • Low distinctiveness: he also broke and threw clubs when he missed puts and when his caddy gave him the wrong club
Internal or External? • Joe is golfing in the San Francisco Invitational. After he hit a terrible drive on hole 17, he broke his golf club over his knee and threw it down the fairway. • Low consensus: nobody on the tour had ever done this before • High consistency: he did the same thing after terrible drives on holes 8, 11, and 13 • Low distinctiveness: he also broke and threw clubs when he missed puts and when his caddy gave him the wrong club
Internal or External? • Joe is golfing in the San Francisco Invitational. After he hit a terrible drive on hole 17, he broke his golf club over his knee and threw it down the fairway. • Low consensus: nobody on the tour had ever done this before • High consistency: he did the same thing after terrible drives on holes 8, 11, and 13 • Low distinctiveness: he also broke and threw clubs when he missed puts and when his caddy gave him the wrong club
Internal or External? • Joe is golfing in the San Francisco Invitational. After he hit a terrible drive on hole 17, he broke his golf club over his knee and threw it down the fairway. • High consensus: many players in the tournament have done the same thing • High consistency: Joe did the same thing after terrible drives on holes 8, 11, and 13 • High distinctiveness: he has not broken or thrown a club in any other circumstances
Internal or External? • Joe is golfing in the San Francisco Invitational. After he hit a terrible drive on hole 17, he broke his golf club over his knee and threw it down the fairway. • High consensus: many players in the tournament have done the same thing • High consistency: Joe did the same thing after terrible drives on holes 8, 11, and 13 • High distinctiveness: he has not broken or thrown a club in any other circumstances
Other attributions • • • •
Internal or external Stable or unstable Specific or global Controllable or uncontrollable
Experiment • Think of a question for which I might not know the answer. • You must not know the answer.
Experiment • How many do you think I will get correct?
Experiment • Ask questions, keep track of your own responses.
Experiment • Ask questions, keep track of your own responses. • How many did you get correct?
Experiment • Students tend to overestimate how many questions an instructor will get correct. • Attribute knowing information on class topic to internal trait of being knowledgeable • Versus external factors such as notes, class pressure, specific training, etc • Is Alex Trebek intelligent?
Attribution Errors • The Correspondence Bias / Fundamental Attribution Error • The tendency to explain others’ actions as stemming from dispositions, even in the presence of clear situational causes • He did because he’s “that kind of person” • Anchoring and adjustment: first assign and internal cause and then correct based on context • Underestimate the influence of the correspondence bias
Attribution Errors • The Correspondence Bias / Fundamental Attribution Error • Anchoring and adjustment: first assign and internal cause and then correct based on context
Degree of Support for Castro
70 60 50 40
Pro Essay
30
Con Essay
20 10 0 Free Choice
No Choice How Written
Cultural Factors • More common in individualistic cultures: people should accept responsibility for their actions • Less common in collectivist cultures • American versus Chinese newspapers • Japanese versus American students: essay/speech attributions
Groups • Correspondence bias exists for groups to • Jewish versus German ratings of Holocaust atrocities
Attribution Errors • The actor-observer effect • The tendency to attribute our own behavior mainly to situational causes but the behavior of others to internal causes • He failed because he’s unprepared. I failed because the test was unfair.
Number of Attributions
5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0
Self Other
Dispositional
Situational
Kind of Attrinutions
Attribution Errors • Self Serving Bias • Tendency to attribute positive outcomes to internal causes but negative outcomes to external causes • I got a ‘A’ because I’m smart. I got an ‘F’ because the teacher is unfair. • Preserves self esteem
Attribution and Depression • Self-defeating attributions common feature of depression • Attribute negative events to internal causes and positive events to external causes • Learned helplessness: perceived lack of influence on improvement • Cognitive therapy
Impression Formation • Another form of social perception • The process through which we form impressions of others • Relatively automatic • Large influence on behavior
Impression Formation • Physical attractiveness • One of the most powerful influences on our impression of others • “What is beautiful is good” stereotype
Impression Formation • • • • •
Physical attractiveness Rates the ability of VPs Attractiveness x Gender (2x2) More attractive man = higher ability Less attractive woman = higher ability
Impression Formation • Physical attractiveness – physically attractive defendants charged with misdemeanor offenses get lower bail settings than do less attractive defendants – professional men 6’2” and over get starting salaries 10% higher than shorter men
Primacy Effect • First impression have strong effect
Impression Formation • Can form unified impression from a very small amount of information • Impressions are not a conglomeration of perceived traits • Impressions are an integrated whole
Asch’s Study Person A Intelligent – skillful – industrious – warm – determined – practical – cautious Person B Intelligent – skillful – industrious – cold – determined – practical – cautious
Asch’s Study • Indicate impression of person by putting check marks next to traits • If additive: impression won’t differ much • However, large differences were observed • Warm more likely to be rated as generous, happy, good-natured, sociable, popular, altruistic
Asch’s Study • 91% of Subjects Told Person is Warm Infer Person is Generous • Only 9% Told Person is Cold Infer Generous • Warm more likely to be rated as generous, happy, good-natured, sociable, popular, altruistic
Asch’s Study • Central traits: ones that strongly shape overall impressions • Peripheral traits: exert less influence on impressions • Substitute polite and blunt for warm and cold
Asch’s Study • Intelligent • Skillful • Industrious • Blunt • Determined • Practical • Cautious
Asch’s Study Intelligent Skillful • Industrious • Polite • Determined • Practical • Cautious • •
Asch’s Study • 87% of Subjects Told Person Is Polite Infer Person is Good-natured • But 56% Of Those Told Person Is Blunt Infer Good-Natured
Implicit Personality Theories • Beliefs about what traits or characteristics tend to go together – once we make assumptions based on one trait (e.g., friendly), we use our IPT to draw conclusions about other traits (e.g., honest)
• Helpful, kind sincere • Practical, intelligent ambitious • Schemas: jock, first born
Identify one individual of each of the following body types: • Endomorph – plump: • Mesomorph – muscular: • Ectomorph – frail: Place on set of initials next to each body type
Identify one individual of each of the following body types: • • • •
Endomorph: Mesomorph: Ectomorph: Match each of the letters to the characteristics of the individuals you have identified: R = relaxed, easy going, sociable, good natured B = bold, assertive, active, adventurous I = inhibited, restrained, apprehensive, cautious, private
R= relaxed Endomorph (plump) Mesomorph (muscular) Ectomorph (frail)
B= bold
I= inhibited
R= relaxed
B= bold
I= inhibited
Endomorph (plump)
27
18
13
Mesomorph (muscular)
20
27
14
Ectomorph (frail)
12
15
23
Impression Formation: Adding or averaging • When forming impression do we add together discrete pieces of information or average it • Truthful and reasonable • Truthful, reasonable, painstaking, and persuasive • #1 rated more favorably
Impression Management • Efforts by individuals to produce favorable first impressions • Self-enhancement: effort to increase one’s appeal to others • Physical appearance, describe strengths, describe overcoming obstacles • Other-enhancement: effort to make a target person feel good to increase one’s appeal • Flattery, expressing agreement, showing interest, small favors • Slime effect: strong negative impression of those who “lick upward but kick downward”
