Psych Midterm 2
Order by
127 terms
Terms | Definitions |
|---|---|
 Traits | Consistent ways that people think, feel, and act across classes of situations |
| Five-factor model | Five personality traits (OCEAN) that psychologists believe are the basic building blocks of personality |
| Heritability | The degree to which traits or physical characteristics are determined by genes and hence inherited from parents (monozygotic/dizygotic twins) |
| Diversification | A principle that maintains that siblings develop itno quite different people so that they can peacefully occupy different niches within the family environment (younger siblings are "born to rebel") Older siblings are more assertive and dominant (more achievement oriented and conscientious) Younger siblings are more agreeable, open to new ideas, and experiences |
| Distinctiveness Hypothesis | Hypothesis that we identify what makes us unique in each particular context, and we highlight that in our self-definition |
| Social Comparison Theory | The hypothesis that we compare ourselves to other people in order to evaluate our opinions, abilities, and internal states Downward social comparison: compare self to other people to boost self-esteem Upward social comparison: Aspire to be substantially better at skill, so we seek people who are better than us |
| Better-than-average effect | Most people rate themselves above average in most ways - popularity, kindness, fairness, leadership, etc. |
| Personal beliefs | Beliefs about our own personality traits, abilities, attributes, preferences, tastes, and talents |
| Social self-beliefs | Beliefs about the roles, duties, and obligations we assume in groups |
| Relational self-beliefs | Beliefs about our identities in specific relationships |
| Collective self-beliefs | Our identity and beliefs as they relate to the social categories to which we belong |
| Self-reference effect | Tendency to elaborate on and recall information that is integrated into our self-knowledge; tendency to remember information better when it is related to ourselves/pre-existing things about ourselves |
| Self-schemas | Knowledge-based summaries of our feelings and actions and how we understand others' views about the self Idea behind this: we have a self-schema (e.g., more extraverted, more curious), and these schemas process information in those domains more quickly, and more strongly resist info that contradicts the self schema |
| Self-image bias | Tendency to judge other people's personalities according to their similarity or dissimilarity to our own personality |
| Possible selves | Hypothetical selves we aspire to be in the future |
| Self-discrepancy theory | Theory that appropriate behavior is motivated by cultural and moral standards regarding the ideal self and the ought self. Violations of those standards produce emotions such as guilt or shame. |
| Actual self | The self we truly believe ourselves to be |
| Ideal self | The self that embodies the wishes and aspirations we and other people maintain about us |
| Promotion focus | Sensitivity to positive outcomes, approach-related behavior, and cheerful emotions that result if we are living up to our ideals and aspirations |
| Ought self | Self that is concerned with the duties, obligations, and external demands we feel we are compelled to honor |
| Prevention focus | Sensitivity to negative outcomes often motivated by a desire to live up to our ought self and to avoid the guilt or anxiety that results when we fail to live up to our sense of what we ought to do |
| Ego depletion | State produced by acts of self-control, where we don't have the energy or resources to engage in further acts of self-control |
| Illusions and Biases about the Self | 1. Unrealistically positive views about the self (positive traits define me better than negative ones) 2. Exaggerated perceptions of control (lottery) 3. Optimism These three things elevate positive mood and reduce negative mood, foster healthier social bonds by making people more altruistic and magnanimous, and promote goal-oriented behavior Tendency might not always be beneficial (narcissists and overambitious college students) |
| Self-esteem | The positive or negative overall evaluation that we have of ourselves |
| Trait self-esteem | Enduring level of confidence and regard that people have for their defining abilities and characteristics across time |
| State self-esteem | The dynamic, changeable self-evaluations that are experienced as momentary feelings about the self (e.g., your mood will affect your state self-esteem) |
| Contingencies of self-worth | An account of self-esteem maintaining that self-esteem is contingent on successes and failures in domains on which a person has based his or her self-worth Meaning, our self-esteem rises and falls with successes and failures in domains in which we base our self-worth |
| Self-complexity | Tendency to define the self in terms of many domains and attributes |
| Sociometer hypothesis | Hypothesis that maintains that self-esteem is an internal, subjective index or marker of the extent to which we are included or looked on favorably by others State self-esteem provides a rapid assessment of how we are doing in our social bonds (we thrive when we are in healthy social relationships) |
| Self-evaluation maintenance model | A model that maintains that we are motivated to view ourselves in a favorable light and that we do so through two processes: reflection and social comparison Reflection: flatter ourselves by association with others' accomplishments (e.g., our college football team wins, we wear school colors to show that "we" won) Social comparison: Noting how our own performance compares favorably with others Therefore, our friends are not our equals in domains that matter to us |
| Self-verification theory | Theory that holds that we strive for stable, accurate beliefs about the self because such beliefs give us a sense of coherence, and make us more predictable to ourselves and others. Accuracy tells us what to pursue (because success is likely) |
| Identity cues | Customary facial expressions, posture, gait, clothes, haircuts, and body decorations which signal to other important facets of our identity and, by implication, how we are to be treated and construed by others Partners who viewed each other congruently (even if they agreed on negative traits) reported more commitment in a relationship |
| Self-presentation | Presenting who we would like others to believe we are |
| Impression management | Attempting to control the beliefs other people have of us |
| Face | Who we want others to think we are (public image) |
| Public self-consciousness | Our awareness of what other people think about us (our public identity) Define self more in terms of social attributes (Popularity, attractiveness) |
| Private self-consciousness | Our awareness of our interior lives - our private thoughts, feelings, and sensations Define self in terms of interior thoughts and feelings |
| Self-monitoring | Tendency for people to monitor their behavior in such a way that it fits the demands of the current situation |
| Self-handicapping | Tendency to engage in self-defeating behaviors in order to prevent others from drawing unwanted attributions about the self as a result of poor performance In nature: peacocks' tails or stag's antlers |
| On-record communication | The statements we make that we intend to be taken literally |
| Off-record communication | Indirect and ambiguous communication that allows us to hint at ideas and meanings that are not explicit in the words we utter E.g., flirting and teasing |
| Self-knowledge | Beliefs, images, memories, and stories we tell about our lives; helps guide construal of social information through memories and self-schemas, typically reinforcing preexisting beliefs about the self |
| CHAPTER 4 | CHAPTER 4 - Understanding Others |
| Attribution theory | An umbrella term used to describe the set of theoretical accounts of how people assign causes to the events around them and the effects that people's causal assessments have The study and analysis of how people understand the causes of events |
| Judgments (Pictures) | We rate people based on power/dominance and trustworthiness |
| Causal attribution | linking an instance of behavior to a cause, whether the behavior is our own or someone else's E.g., "Why was my interview so short? Did the interviewers conclude that I have what it takes or were the not interested?" |
| Explanatory style | A person's habitual way of explaining events, typically assessed along 3 dimensions: internal/external, stable/unstable, and global/specific Cause is... 1. Internal (because of them) or external (because of the situation or other people) 2. Stable (implies things will never change) or unstable (implies things may improve) 3. Global (something that influences other areas of their lives) or specific (just this area) E.g., Pessimistic: stable, global, internal for bad outcomes and external, unstable, local for good outcomes (leads to poor health, performance, and depression) |
| Covariation principle | The idea that we should attribute behavior to potential causes that co-occur with the behavior We try to determine what causes "covary" with the effect we are trying to explain |
| Consensus | Refers to what most people would do in a given situation - that is, do most people would behave the same way or do few/no other people behave that way? |
| Distinctiveness | Refers to what an individual does in different situations - that is, whether a bheavior is unique to a particular situation or occurs in all situations. E.g., does your friend like math, or just stats class? |
| Consistency | Refers to what an individual does in a given situation on different occasions - that is, whether next time under the same circumstances, the person would behave the same or differently |
| External attribution is likely if: | High in consensus, high in distinctiveness, high in consistency |
| Internal attribution is likely if: | Low in consensus, low in distinctiveness, high in consistency |
| Discounting principle | The idea that we should assign reduced weight to a particular cause of behavior if there are other plausible causes that might have produced it E.g., if someone has a sunny disposition during an interview but really wants the job |
| Augmentation principle | The idea that we should assign greater weight to a particular cause of behavior if there are other causes present that normally would produce the opposite outcome We can make sure that a person's actions reflect what they are really like if the circumstances would seem to discourage such actions (e.g., if a person advocates a position despite being threatened with torture) It's hard to know who's "in role" but easy to know who's "out of role" |
| Counterfactual thoughts | Thoughts of what might have, could have, or should have happened "if only" something had been done differently |
| Emotional amplification | A ratcheting up of an emotional reaction to an event that is proportional to how easy it is to imagine the event not happening E.g., Because it's easy to imagine how easily something could have been avoided (such as a death), stronger emotions are conjured up; another example is with Olympic athletes (silver medalist is less happy than bronze) |
| Self-serving bias | Tendency to attribute failure and other bad events to external circumstances, but to attribute success and other good events to oneself |
| FUNDAMENTAL ATTRIBUTION ERROR | Tendency to believe that a behavior is due to a person's disposition, even when there are situation forces present that are sufficient to explain the behavior E.g., questioner-contestant-observer ratings and perceived knowledge of the questioner and contestant |
| Causes of Fundamental Attribution Error | 1. Motivation influence and the belief in a just world 2. How salient something is; people tend to capture our attention more than their environments or situations 3. Cognitive mechanisms: we observe the behavior, identify what it is and what it means, then characterize the person before even thinking about situational cues E.g., nail-biting nervous woman and cognitive business experiment by Gilbert |
| Just world hypothesis | The belief that people get what they deserve in life and deserve what they get |
| Actor-observer difference | A difference in attribution based on who is making the causal assessment: the actor (who is relatively disposed to make situational attributions) or the observer (who is relatively disposed to make dispositional attributions) E.g., US says stationing troops in many nations is in case of immediate and future threats; other countries may see it as US "imperialism" |
| Culture and Fundamental Attribution Error | Japanese v. American (#1 and #2) 1. Asked to describe fish in tank - Americans described salient objects (fish swimming); Japanese described salient objects, but also 60% more about environment and tank 2. Shown a line in a box; asked to draw line in a larger or smaller box. Task A was to draw the line relative to the smaller/larger box, task B was to draw the absolute size of the line as it was in the original box in the smaller/larger box. Americans better at absolute; Japanese better at relative (context) 3. Chinese Hong Kong - can view things independently or interdependently depending on priming |
| CHAPTER 8 SOCIAL INFLUENCE | CHAPTER 8 SOCIAL INFLUENCE |
| Social influence | The myriad ways that people impact one another, including change sin attitudes, beliefs, feelings, and behavior that result from the comments, actions, or even the mere presence of others |
| Conformity | Changing one's behaviors or beliefs in response to explicit or implicit pressure (whether real or imagined) from others |
| Compliance | Responding favorably to an explicit request by another person |
| Obedience | In an unequal power relationship, submitting to the demands of the more powerful person |
| IDEOMOTOR ACTION | The phenomenon whereby merely thinking about a behavior makes its actual performance more likely |
| Mimicry | We mimic others to lay a smooth groundwork for gratifying social interaction |
| Autokinetic illusion and Sherif's experiment | The apparent motion of a stationary point of light in a completely darkened environment Sherif's conformity experiment: How far did the light move? In a group, everyone's individual judgments quickly fused into a group norm This is informational social influence |
| INFORMATIONAL SOCIAL INFLUENCE | The influence of other people that results from taking their comments or actions as a source of information about what is correct, proper, or effective |
| NORMATIVE SOCIAL INFLUENCE | The influence of other people that comes from the desire to avoid their disapproval, harsh judgments, and other social sanctions (e.g., barbs, ostracism) E.g., Solomon Asch's line experiments |
| FACTORS AFFECTING CONFORMITY PRESSURE | 1. Group size - normative influence (better to be disliked or shunned by a few than by many), informational influence (all things equal, a position advanced by many is more likely to be correct than a position advanced by few); only to 4 2. Group unanimity 3. Expertise and status 4. Culture (conformity is greater in interdependent cultures than independent) 5. Gender 6. Ambiguity of task (easy tasks eliminate informational social influence; only normative social influence is at work, and resistance to the group is stronger) 7. Anonymity (being anonymous eliminates normative social influence; to avoid disapproval, we sometimes do/say things in public but believe something else) If people have satisfying explanations for others' judgments, they are less affected by others' responses (in Asch exp., people did not have reasons so they went with the crowd) |
| Internalization (private acceptance) | Private acceptance of a proposition, orientation, or ideology |
| Public compliance | Agreeing with someone or advancing a position in public, even if we continue to believe something else in private |
| Interpretive context and conformity | Ross experiment showed that when people conform less when they have an explanation for why others are responding differently. Had people judge the lengths of tones and could hear the confederates' responses. Had "Asch" condition (10 points for right answer, 0 for wrong) and "big-payoff" condition (which explained why confeds were calling out "2" so much - 100 points for 2, 10 points for 1). |
| Minority influence | Can exert social influence on majority through consistent and clear messages that persuade the majority to systematically examine and reevaluate opinions |
| Norm of reciprocity | Norm dictating that people should provide benefits to those who benefit them |
| Door-in-the-face-technique (reciprocal concessions technique) | Asking someone for a very large favor that he or she will certainly refuse, and then following that request with one for a more modest favor, which tends to be seen as a concession that the target will feel compelled to honor |
| That's-not-all technique | Adding something to an original offer, which is likely to create some pressure to reciprocate |
| Foot-in-the-door technique | Compliance technique in which one makes an initial small request to which nearly everyone complies, followed by a larger request involving the real behavior of interest |
| Low ball technique | Withhold information until consent received E.g., participate in this experiment! It's at 7am. |
| Emotion-based approaches | 1. Positive mood - ask for something when person is in good mood because requests seem less intrusive and less threatening when we are in a good mood; also, mood maintenance (it feels good to be good, we want to prolong feeling good, so we do more good things) 2. Negative mood - people are motivated to do what they can to get rid of a bad mood (like guilt), so they do something that makes them feel better and enhance compliance |
| Negative state relief hypothesis | The idea that people engage in certain actions, such as agreeing to a request, in order to relieve negative feelings and to feel better about themselves E.g., spilling of computer chips - participants are given money for innocuous task or received praise for task which made them feel better... so they didn't offer to call more people about study habits than the control group; people just want to feel better |
| Reactance theory | The idea that people reassert their prerogatives in response to the unpleasant state of arousal they experience when they believe their freedoms are threatened When your freedom is taken away, it becomes more precious, and your desire to maintain it is increased |
| CHAPTER 10 - ATTRACTION | CHAPTER 10 - ATTRACTION |
| Propinquity | Physical proximity |
| Sociometric survey | Survey that attempts to measure the interpersonal relationships in a group of people |
| Functional distance | Architectural layout's tendency to encourage or inhibit certain activities, like contact between people |
| Explanations of proximity effects | 1. Availability and proximity 2. Effect of anticipating interaction 3. Mere exposure effect |
| Counterbalancing | A systematic variation of conditions in an experiment, such as the order of presentation of stimuli, so that different participants encounter them in different orders, prevents confounding of IVs with time-dependent processes such as habituation or fatigue |
| Mere exposure effect | The finding that repeated exposure to a stimulus (e.g., object or person) leads to greater liking of the stimulus E.g., turkish word test and mirror image test (Friends) |
| Fluency | The experience of ease associated with perceiving and thinking People find fluency inherently pleasurable |
| Similarity | Proximity effect is in effect as well, but also high correlation between couples with similar characteristics (social class, religion, health, physical attractiveness) but not personality characteristics (e.g., leadership, sensitivity) 1. Similar others validate our beliefs and orientations 2. Similarity facilitates smooth interactions 3. We expect similar others to like us 4. Similar others have qualities we like |
| Complementary | Tendency for people to seek out others with characteristics that are different from and that complement their own Probably limited to most (but not all) personality traits |
| Halo effect | Common belief - accurate or not - that attractive individuals possess a host of positive qualities beyond their physical appearance Happier, more intelligent, more popular, more desirable personalities, higher incomes, more professional success |
| SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY | Tendency for people to act in ways that bring about the very thing they expect to happen E.g., phone call with attractive person experiment with 3rd party observer |
| Attractiveness impact | Early age: child receives more attention, assumed to be more intelligent and better behaved World focuses more on women's attractiveness than men's 1. Immediacy ("gut reaction") 2. Prestige (partner's looks matter more in public than private) 3. Biology |
| Reproductive fitness | Capacity to get one's genes passed on to subsequent generations |
| Intrasex competition | Direct competition between 2+ males or 2+ females for access to members of the opposite sex |
| Intersex attraction | Interest in and attraction toward a member of the opposite sex |
| Evolutionary theory | Buss (physical attractiveness, age, and income), Eagly & Wood (women seek men as mates more because men are larger, do not suffer form handicaps of pregnancy, and have disproportionate control over resources; in areas of relative gender equality, women care less about economic status of man |
| Reward theory of interpersonal attraction | People like those who provide them with rewards and make us feel good |
| Social exchange theory | Theory based on the fact that there are costs and rewards in all relationships and that how people feel about a relationship depends on their assessments of its cost and rewards and the costs and rewards available to them in other relationships |
| Equity theory | People are motivated to pursue fairness or equity in their relationships, with rewards and costs shared roughly equally among individuals E.g., the cheater detection card game |
| CHAPTER 11 - RELATIONSHIPS | CHAPTER 11 - RELATIONSHIPS |
| Attachment Theory | Our early attachments with our parents shape our relationships for the remainder of or lives |
| Working model of relationships | Conceptual model of relationships with our current partners - including their availability, warmth, and ability to provide security - as derived from our childhood experience with how available and warm our parents were |
| Strange situation | Experimental situation designed to assess an infant's attachment to the caregiver. An infant's reactions are observed after her caregiver has left her alone in an unfamiliar room with a stranger and then when the caregiver returns to the room (reunion) 1. Secure style 2. Avoidant style 3. Anxious style |
| Secure attachment style | Comfortable with intimacy, want to be close to others during times of threat and uncertainty |
| Avoidant attachment style | Insecurity in relationships, compulsive self-reliance, prefer distance from others, are dismissive and detached during times of threat and uncertainty |
| Anxious attachment style | Feelings of insecurity; compulsively seek closeness, express continual worries about relationships, excessively try to get closer to others during times of threat and uncertainty |
| Relational self theory | Theory that examines how prior relationships shape our current beliefs, feelings, and interactions vis-a-vis people who remind us of significant others from our past |
| Relational self | The beliefs, feelings, and expectations that we have about ourselves that derive from our relationships with significant others in our lives |
| Communal relationships | Individuals feel a special responsibility for one another and give/receive according to the principle of need; long-term |
| Exchange relationships | Individuals feel little responsibility toward one another and give/receive by concerns of equity and reciprocity; short-term |
| Power | Ability to control our own outcomes and those of others; the freedom to act |
| Status | outcome of an evaluation of attributes that produces differences in respect and prominence, which in part determines an individual's power within a group |
| Authority | Power that derives from institutionalized roles or arrangements |
| Power comes from... | 1. Authority 2. Expertise 3. Coercion 4. Ability to provide rewards 5. Reference power |
| Approach/inhibition theory | Theory that states that high-power individuals are inclined to go after their goals and make quick judgments, whereas low-power individuals are more likely to constrain their behavior and attend to others carefully E.g., drawing the E so that another person can see it |
| Social dominance orientation | The desire to see one's own group dominate other groups |
| Triangular theory of love | There are three major components of love - passion, intimacy, and commitment - which can be combined in different ways |
| Investment model of interpersonal relationships | Maintains that 3 things make partners more committed to each other: rewards, few alternative partners, and investments in the relationship |
| Interaction dynamics approach | Methodological approach to the study of the behaviors and conversations of couples, with a focus on both negative behaviors (anger, criticism, defensiveness, contempt, sadness, and fear) and positive behaviors (affection, enthusiasm, interest, and humor) |
| Creating stronger romantic bonds | 1. Capitalize on the good 2. Be playful 3. Care and forgive 4. Illusions and idealization in romantic relationships |
First Time Here?
Welcome to Quizlet, a fun, free place to study. Try these flashcards, find others to study, or make your own.