Only $2.99/month

IB psychology SCLOA learning outcomes

Key Concepts:

Terms in this set (15)

Discuss: offer a considered and balanced review that includes a range of arguments, factors or hypotheses. Opinions or conclusions should be presented clearly and supported by appropriate evidence.
Early social psychologists mainly carried out laboratory experiments because that was considered the most scientific way of obtaining data. Also, more control on variables.

1) Asch 1951- Conformity in a non-ambiguous situation
2) Bandura 1965
Naturalistic studies used due to improved ecological validity. Also, since humans are being studied on a sociocultural level, it is important to have them in their sociocultural setting.

Participant observation: researchers may choose to immerse themselves in the social setting being studied for an extended period of time in order to observe the behaviour.
- Overt: seeks to gain trust of the group being observed, so that they can discuss openly. Interviews can be carried out and notes can be taken.

1) O'Reilly (2000): studied British expatriates on the Costa del Sol.
- Originally thought that they were unhappy and wanted to return home, but found the opposite by spending a significant amount of time with them.


- Covert: sometimes used with groups that would be hostile to an outsider observing their behaviour, or who would not be open and honest, perhaps because of the illegal nature of activities - for example, drug users. Though the researcher must gain the trust of the members of the group, this is done through deceit (ethical concerns). Not possible to take notes, relies on memory of researcher. Interviews not possible either due to covert nature of study.

2) Leon Festinger et al.'s When Prophecy Fails (1956)

- Religious cult in Chicago, believed world would end on 21 December and that they would be rescued by flying saucers as long as they followed rituals and read sacred texts. They were to remain ISOLATED FROM ALL NON-BELIEVERS. This made it very difficult for psychologists to study them.

Festinger and his team decided to become cult members in order to carry out a participant observation.

Nothing happened on 21 Dec. Festinger monitored the group members' doubt, debate, and rationalization of what had taken place. The members of the cult, as part of maintaining their self esteem, decided that God has not destroyed the world because of their prayers.
Describe: Give a detailed account
Attribution theory:
Attribution is defined as how people interpret and explain causal relationships in the social world.

People tend to make an attribution about behaviour depending on whether they are performing it themselves or observing somebody else doing it. This is known as ACTOR-OBSERVER EFFECT.
When people discuss their own behaviour, they tend to attribute it to SITUATIONAL FACTORS - that is, something to do with external factors.

1) Milgram (1974) - shock experiment
The usual social psychological explanation for Milgram's findings is that the participants' behaviour was under situational control (e.g. legitimate authority's orders), rather than dispositional control (e.g. the participants' conscience). Milgram did not dispute that dispositional factors may have played a role but they were not identifiable.
Someone else's behaviour is likely to be attributed to DISPOSITIONAL FACTORS - that is, something to do with personal/internal factors.

1) Jones and Harris (1967)
Observers opted for internal attribution regardless of whether they were told that the essayist was assigned the anti or pro standpoint for Castro.


Self-serving bias is seen when people take credit for their successes, attributing them to dispositional factors, and dissociate themselves with failures, attributing them to situational factors.

Lau and Russel (1980)
Found that American football coaches and players tend to credit their wins to internal factors (80%) and their failures to external factors.

Bernstein et al. (1979) found that students tended to attribute their good grades to their intelligence and hard work, whereas bad grades tended to be attributed to bad teaching or bad luck.

Johnson et al (1964)
- Participants teaching children to multiply by 10.
- Participants either failed or succeeded in teaching pupil the two tasks.
Findings: was that in the condition where performance improved participants explained the improvement as a success based on their abilities as teachers. When failed, attributed this to pupil's lack of ability.
Discuss: offer a considered and balanced review that includes a range of arguments, factors or hypotheses. Opinions or conclusions should be presented clearly and supported by appropriate evidence.

FUNDAMENTAL ATTRIBUTION ERROR: Instead of acknowledging the important role played by situational determinants, we assume that other people's behaviour reflects their dispositions. We attribute other's behaviour to stable internal causes rather than external circumstances.

1) Jones and Harris (1967)
asked people to assess a person's pro- or anti-Castro feelings given an essay a person had written. Even when the people were told the person had been directed to write pro- or anti- arguments, the people still assumed the author believed what they were writing.

2) Lee et al. - game show intelligence
AIM: to see if student participants would make the fundamental attribution error even when they knew that all the actors were simply playing a role.
PROCEDURE: Participants randomly assigned to one of three roles: game show host, contestants on game show, or members of audience. Game show hosts were instructed to design their own questions. The audience watched the game show through the series of questions. When game show was over, observers were asked to rank the intelligence of the people who had taken part.
FINDINGS: Consistently ranked the game show host as the most intelligent, even though they knew that this person was randomly assigned to this position, and had written the questions. Attributed the person's performance to dispositional factors—in this case, intelligence.


People see a relationship between two variables even when there is none/The phenomenon whereby observers conclude that two factors are associated despite the lack of any real association between them.

Hamilton and Gifford
AIM: To research the relation between Illusory Correlation and the negative stereotyping of minority groups.
METHOD: Independent Groups Design
Type: Laboratory Experiment

Participants read descriptions about two made-up groups (Group A & Group B). These descriptions were based on a number of positive (+) and negative (-) behaviours.
Group A had 2x as many members than Group B. While Group A members were seen to perform 18 positive and 18 negative behaviours, Group B members performed 9 positive and 4 negative behaviours.

Participants were questioned on the basis of the descriptions.
Findings: When questioned, participants seemed to have perceived an illusory correlation. More of the undesirable behaviours were attributed to the minority Group B, than the majority Group A.
Hamilton and Gifford's explanation of their findings is based on the idea that distinctive information draws attention. Group B members and negative behaviours are both numerically fewer and therefore more distinct than Group A members and negative behaviours. The combination of Group B members performing negative behaviours, therefore, stands out more than the combination of Group A members performing such behaviours. Such causes illusory correlation.


Self-serving bias is seen when people take credit for their successes, attributing them to dispositional factors, and dissociate themselves with failures, attributing them to situational factors.

Lau and Russel (1980)
Found that American football coaches and players tend to credit their wins to internal factors (80%) and their failures to external factors.

Bernstein et al. (1979) found that students tended to attribute their good grades to their intelligence and hard work, whereas bad grades tended to be attributed to bad teaching or bad luck.

Johnson et al (1964)
- Participants teaching children to multiply by 10.
- Participants either failed or succeeded in teaching pupil the two tasks.
Findings: was that in the condition where performance improved participants explained the improvement as a success based on their abilities as teachers. When failed, attributed this to pupil's lack of ability.
Evaluate: make an appraisal by weighing up strengths and limitations.
Social identity theory suggests that the self-concept is based on knowledge of our membership to one or more social groups.

SIT is based on four interrelated concepts:
a) social categorisation
b) social identity
c) social comparison
d) positive distinctiveness

a) Social categorisation
Divides the social environment into:
- ingroups: to which an individual belongs
- outgroups: to which an individual does not belong
- Category accentuation effect: Reduces perceived variability within groups but increases perceived variability between groups.

b) Social identity
- Social identity is related to intergroup behaviours (not interpersonal behaviours). When we relate towards one another as members of separate groups, our social identities determine our behaviours.

c) Social comparison
- Positive social identities may result from the process of SOCIAL COMPARISON. We continuously compare our ingroups with relevant outgroups.

d) Positive distinctiveness
- This social process comparison is fuelled by our need for POSITIVE DISTINCTIVENESS: the motivation to show that our ingroup is preferable to an outgroup.

- Ingroup favouritism
- Intergroup differentiation
- Stereotypical thinking
- Conformity to ingroup norms

1) Cialidini et al (1976): demonstrated this phenomenon among college football supporters. After a successful football match, the supporters were more likely to be seen wearing college insignia and clothing than after defeats. It is assumed that our need for a positive self-concept will result in a bias in these intergroup comparisons, so that you are more positive towards anything that your own group represents.

2) Tajfel et al (1971) - Minimal group paradigm: observed that boys who were assigned randomly to a group, based on their supposed preference for the art of either Kandinsky or Klee, were more likely to identify with the boys in their group, and were willing to give higher awards to members of their own group. Asked for ratings of in-group and out-group on traits such as likeability, psychologists found that the out-group was rated as less likeable, but was never actually disliked.

3) Sherman et al. (2009) - individuals pay more attention to those in-group and out-group members who maximize positive distinctiveness.
Explain: Give a detailed account including reasons or causes.
Formation of stereotypes:
- Tajfel argues that it occurs due to social categorisation, but this does not explain how it actually happens.

- Campbell (1967)
- 2 key sources of stereotypes:
- personal experience with individual groups
- gatekeepers (the media, parents and other members of our culture)
- argues that stereotypes have a basis in some reality. GRAIN OF TRUTH HYPOTHESIS argues that an experience with an individual from a group will then be generalised to the group. The theory has been criticised however since errors in attribution are common.

Hamilton and Gifford (1976)
- Argues that stereotypes are the result of an ILLUSORY CORRELATION - people see a relationship between two variables even when there is none.

- Once illusory correlations are made, people tend to seek out or remember information that supports this relationship. This is an example of CONFIRMATION BIAS.

- Confirmation bias makes stereotypical thinking resistant to change.
- Stereotype threat: Occurs when one is in a situation where there is a threat of being judged or treated stereotypically, or a fear of doing something that would inadvertently confirm that stereotype.
- Spotlight anxiety: Turned on by stereotype threat. Causes emotional distress and pressure that may undermine performance.

1) Steele and Aronson (1995) carried out an experiment to see the effect of stereotype threat on performance. They gave a 30-minute verbal test, made up of very difficult multiple-choice questions. When one group was told it was a genuine test of their verbal abilities, African American participants scored significantly lower than European American participants. In another group which was presented with the same test as a laboratory task that was used to study how certain problems are generally solved, African American students scored higher than the first group, and their performance on the test rose to match that of the European American students.

2) According to Steele (1997), stereotype threat turns on spotlight anxiety, which causes emotional distress and pressure that may undermine performance. Students under the stereotype threat often under-perform and this can naturally limit their educational prospects.

3) Spencer et al. (1977) gave a difficult mathematics test to students who were strong in mathematics. They predicted that women under the stereotype threat would under-perform compared to the men taking the test. The stereotype threat that women experience in mathematics-performance settings originates from a negative stereotype about women's mathematics ability, which is quite common in society. For women who are good it mathematics and see mathematics as an important part of their self-definition, such a stereotype threat may result in an interfering pressure in test situations. Spencer et al. found that this was true: women in the experiment significantly underperformed compared with equally qualified men on the difficult mathematics tests. However, when the researchers tested literature skills, the two groups performed equally well. This was because women are not stereotype threatened in this area.

4) Illusory Correlation (Hamilton and Gifford)

Research on stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination is difficult to carry out.

Social desirability effect is a confounding variable in such research - are people's responses truly indicative of them, or are they just guarding against being viewed as politically incorrect?

Remedy: Researchers are moving away from self-report methods and are looking at other means to study this behavior, e.g. focus groups, Implicit Association Tests (IAT).
Explain: Give a detailed account including reasons or causes.

Bandura's social learning theory assumes that people learn behaviours through OBSERVATIONAL LEARNING (vicarious learning).

Factors affecting SLT:
- Attention: the person must first pat attention to the model.
- Retention: the observer must be able to remember the behaviour that has been observed.
- Motor reproduction: The observer has to be able to replicate the action.
- Motivation: Learners must want to demonstrate what they have learned.

Factors influencing whether the person decides to imitate/learn the behaviour:

- Consistency (of the model)
- Identification with the model
- Rewards/punishment
- Liking the model:
- Yarrow et al. (1970) showed that children learn altruistic behaviour better from people with whom they have already developed a friendly relationship than from people they do not know.

1) Bandura et al. 1961. The aim of this study was to see if children would imitate aggression modelled by an adult, and if children were more likely to imitate same-sex models. This was studied by observing the behaviour of children towards a Bobo doll, after having seen an adult act in a certain manner. The study showed that children who observed an aggressive adult were significantly more aggressive - both physically and verbally. The study also showed that children were more likely to imitate same-sex models. The SLT states that identification with the model affects the extent to which one can learn through observation. Bandura's study supports this because the children were more likely to imitate the models with whom they identified due to gender.

2) Bandura (1965). The aim of the study was to study the level of aggression displayed by children depending on the reward or punishment for aggression. The study included videos that displayed different forms of punishment for the aggressive adult portrayed. The children were split into different conditions; the control condition, model-rewarded condition, and model-punished condition. In each different condition the children were shown a video of either aggression with no shown reward or punishment; aggression with a reward; or aggression with punishment. After the children viewed the video they were individually taken to a room with toys such as a Bobo doll and mallet, and their behaviour was observed for 10 minutes to study any imitation of aggression portrayed in the videos. The study showed that the children, who observed either of the videos in which the adult was not punished, showed an equal level of aggression towards the Bobo doll through approximately 2.5 aggressive acts. On the other hand the children who observed the video, in which the adult was punished, showed fewer acts of aggression (1.5 acts). Later the children were asked to reproduce the behaviour of the model and were rewarded for each act of aggression they displayed. This resulted in the children producing the same number of aggressive acts (3.5 acts), regardless of which condition group they were originally in. This study supports the theory that rewards or punishment affect the motivation to learn through observation. Bandura also argues that when one observes the consequences of another's actions they can learn from it without experiencing it themselves. This is called vicarious reinforcement and is proven in this study by the children producing significantly less violent acts after observing an adult being punished for aggressive behaviour, than children who observed the adults who were not punished.
Discuss: offer a considered and balanced review that includes a range or arguments, factors, or hypotheses. Opinions or conclusions should be presented clearly and supported by appropriate evidence.


DITF is when a request is made that will surely be turned down, only to be followed by a less demanding request.

- DITF increases likelihood of compliance because the subject will feel as though an accommodation has been made.

1) Cialdini et al. (1975)
- Aim of the experiment was to see TWE uni students would be more inclined to agree to chaperone a group of juvenile delinquents if the request was made following a refused request of working as a counsellor for a minimum of two hours per week for two years.
- When the participants were asked whether they would take a group of juvenile delinquents to the zoo, without any prior requests - 83 per cent refused to volunteer. When the students were first asked to volunteer as counsellors - no one agreed. However, when the students' refusal was followed up with the request to take the juvenile delinquents to the zoo, approximately 50 per cent of students agreed to serve as chaperones.



1) Petrova et al. (2007)
Collectivists show lower levels of compliance than individualists when the FITD technique is used.

- 3000+ students at US university. Nearly half were native US students, the rest were Asian students at the same uni.
- All were sent e-mail asking to participate in survey.
- A month later students received a second e-mail asking them whether they would agree to take part in an online survey.

- Proportion agreeing to 1st request was higher among Asian students than US students.
- US students were more likely to comply to 2nd request, proportion that agreed was 2x as high with US students in comparison to Asian students.

Positive effect of FITD effect among US students (individualists).


Lowballing technique is when conditions are only stated after the commitment is secured, in order to increase likelihood of compliance.

1) Cialdini et al. (1974)
- 2 groups of psychology students were asked whether they would like to volunteer to take part in a research study.
- One group was informed that the time of the study would be 7AM at the same time as the request was made, and the other group were not told until they had agreed to take part.
- Only 24% of the group that was told the time prior to securing the commitment agreed to take part. On the other hand, in the second group - 56% of the class agreed to take part.
- They were then told that it would be at 7AM and that they could back out if they wished; even so - no one backed out. On the day of the research, 95% of the students who had agreed to take part showed up.
(The studies support that the social and cultural environment influences individual behaviour, because the way in which individuals behaved depended on the way those around them presented themselves and their requests.)
Evaluate: Make an appraisal by weighing up strengths and limitations.

1) Asch (1951)

- Artificiality and ecological validity
Asch argued that experiments are social situations in which participants feel like an outsider if they dissent.
- Demand characteristics - participants may act in a way that they feel is required by the features of the experiment
- In the original study, culture could also have limited the validity of the study. Since only one culture was studied, and the group was not multicultural, the study is limited in its application. Since culture is dynamic, it is possible that the Asch paradigm is no longer valid today, even if it were to be studied in the same cultural groups as the original study.
- Ethical considerations: participants were deceived and they were made to feel anxiety about their performance.
- Friend et al. (1990) argue that there is a bias in the interpretation of the findings. In fact, Friend claims that it should be striking to us that in the face of unanimity so many people DID NOT conform. Perhaps the question should be which factors allow people to dissent, rather than which factors influence conformity.

2) Sherif (1935)
To see how the answers of others affect those of another participant whether the participants made their judgements alone; were joined by two other participants; or performed the task after the session with the other two participants.

Participants made 100 judgements as to how far the light, placed on the far wall of a darkened room, seemed to have moved.

- To start with, participants made their judgements alone.
- In further sessions of 100 trials on subsequent days, the participants were joined by two other participants. They took turns in a random order to call out their estimates about the light's movement.
- During a third phase of the study, participants performed the task alone again.

- When participants made their judgements alone, their estimates fluctuated for some time before converging towards a standard estimate, a PERSONAL NORM. Such personal norms varied considerably between participants.
- In the group condition, participants' estimates soon reflected the influence of estimates from the others in the group. Eventually, a common group norm emerged, a SOCIAL NORM, which was the average of the individual estimates. Different groups formed different group norms.
Interestingly, the participants denied that their estimates were influenced by the other group members.
- In the third phase of the experiment, the estimates showed a continued adherence to the social norm established during the group session.
Discuss: offer a considered balanced review that includes a range or arguments, factors, or hypotheses. Opinions or conclusions should be presented clearly and supported by appropriate evidence.

Conformity: the tendency to adjust one's thoughts, feelings, or behaviour in ways that are in agreement with those of a particular individual or group, or with accepted standards about how a person should behave in specific situations (social norms).


1) Asch (1951)
- TWE would a person conform to an incorrect answer on a test if the response from the other members of the group was unanimous.

- Participants entered room with 6 men dressed like businessmen and researcher. Men were CONFEDERATES: played an unknown role to participants and helped researcher to deceive participant.
- Participants told that they were going to take part in "a psychological experiment on visual judgement".
- Shown cards with lines of different lengths.
- Match first card line to second card line.
- 18 trials.
- Confederates had been instructed to answer correctly for some and incorrectly for others. Goal to see if participants would conform to wrong answers given by the confederates, even when it was very clear that the response was incorrect.

- About 75% of participants agreed with confederates' incorrect response at least once.
- Mean of 32% found to agree with incorrect answer in half or more of the trials.
- 24% did not conform to any incorrect responses.

During the debriefing after the experiment, Asch asked the participants how they felt about the experiment. All reported experiencing some degree of self-doubt about their answers. Those participants who conformed said that they knew their responses were incorrect, but they went along with the group because they did not want to ruin the experimenter's results, and they did not want to appear to be against the group. Some argue that this could also be explained in terms of "the need to belong" - the need to be part of the group is stronger than the desire to give the correct answer.

This study is referred to as the ASCH PARADIGM and has been replicated many times. Factors influencing likelihood to conform to the group have been found.

Factors influencing conformity:
Dispositional and situational explanations of conformity

- low self-esteem
- high need for social support and approval
- high anxiety
- feelings of low status in the group

- Group size: Asch (1955)
1 confederate - 3% conformity
2 " - 14% "
3 " - 32% "
+ " - no increase, sometimes even decrease

- Unanimity: Conformity most likely when all confederates agreed (Asch, 1956).

- Confidence: When individuals feel that they are more competent to make decisions with regard to a field or expertise, they are less likely to conform. Perrin and Spencer (1988) found that when they replicated Asch's study with engineers and medical students, conformity rates were almost nil.

- Self-esteem: Stang (1973) found that participants with high self-esteem were less likely to conform to incorrect responses.


1) Deutsch and Gerard (1955) argue that conformity is a result of INFORMATIONAL SOCIAL INFLUENCE and NORMATIVE SOCIAL INFLUENCE.

ISI: based on the way people cognitively process information about a situation.
NSI: social need to belong

2) Festinger (1954) said that people evaluate their own opinions and ideas through SOCIAL COMPARISON - that is, by looking at what others do. When one notices that others are not behaving in the same way, or that they think differently, it causes anxiety, Festinger called this COGNITIVE DISSONANCE.


Culture aspects

1) Smith and Bond (1993) and Bond and Smith (1996) found that collectivists show higher levels of conformity than individualists.

2) Berry (1967) used variation of Asch's conformity paradigm and found less conformity in Inuit culture than in Temne people. Inuit - hunter-gatherers, Temne - gather from one community crop, collectivism.


INFORMATIONAL INFLUENCE: when we accept the views and attitudes of others as valid evidence about how things are in a particular situation (Sherif, 1935) - ambiguous.

NORMATIVE INFLUENCE: underlies our conformity to the expectations of others. (Asch, 1951) - unambiguous.

DUAL-PROCESS MODELS: people conform because they want to be right and they want to be liked. Criticized by those who try to explain conformity by SIT but supported by Asch and Sherif.

REFERENT INFORMATIONAL INFLUENCE: forms basis of SIT explanation to conformity.
- People conform due to their membership of groups, not to be right/liked as DPM suggests.
- Do not conform to people but to a norm.
- Supported by Abrams et al. (1990)


RISKY SHIFT: tendency for group discussions to produce riskier decisions than those reached by group members working on their own. Later showed to not necessarily be more risky, thus GROUP POLARIZATION: tendency to make more extreme decisions in groups than by self.
1) Wallach et al. (1962)
- Participants completed the Choice Dilemmas Questionnaire. This involves a series of 12 stories in each of which the main character faces a dilemma with two options, one riskier than the other.
- During the first phase of the experiment participants worked individually. In a second phase they worked as a group and were asked to arrive at a unanimous decision for each of the dilemmas.
- Wallach et al.'s findings indicated that the options chosen in the group condition were riskier than those chosen by the individuals working alone.

GROUPTHINK: A mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members' strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action.
2) Space Shuttle Challenger Accident, Esser and Lindoerfer, (1989)

- Esser and Lindoerfer analysed 88 statements clearly indicative of groupthink processes which they identified in the report of the Presidential Commission on the Space Shuttle Challenger Accident.
- They discovered little evidence for the importance of group cohesion as defined by mutual attraction among group members. They did, however, find evidence for the importance of stress and did detect a number of groupthink symptoms including illusion of invulnerability, illusion of unanimity and pressure on dissenters.
Matsumoto (2004): culture is a complex concept that is used in many different ways (describe food, clothing, rituals etc) and which is often used to describe what is called "surface culture." He described it as dynamic (changes over time) system of rules, explicit and implicit, established by groups in order to ensure their survival, involving attitudes, values, beliefs, norms, and behaviors.

Kuschel (2004): culture cannot be seen but we can see the manifestation of culture however there is a "deep culture" which is related to beliefs, attitudes and values that underpin cultural manifestation and he thinks culture shouldn't be used as an explanation of behaviour. Instead, descriptions of cultural factors can be used to understand people's beliefs, attitudes, and norms.

Lonner (1995): culture can be defined as common rules that regulate interactions and behavior in a group as well as a number of shared values and attitudes in the group.
Hofstede describes culture as "mental software", that is, cultural schemes that have been internalized so that they influence thinking, emotions and behavior. The mental software is shared by members of a sociocultural group.


Study: Berry (1967) used variation of Asch's conformity paradigm and found less conformity in Inuit culture than in Temne people. Inuit - hunter-gatherers, Temne - gather from one community crop, collectivism.


Cultural norms: behaviour patterns that are typical of specific groups. They are often passed down from generation to generation by observational learning by the group's gatekeepers—parents, teachers, religious leaders, and peers.


Adler (1990) found that if you ask a Russian mother to describe what it means for her child to share something, she will describe her children playing together with a toy at the same time; an American mother, however, will describe her children taking turns to play with the same toy.
Different cultures have different understandings of words/behavioural concepts, in this case; sharing.

There are also other ways to talk about the norms that define a culture. Anthropologist Edward T. Hall presents two other norms to consider.

Hall's proxemic theory (1966) is based on a culture's need for "personal space". In his book, The Hidden Dimension, he shows that different cultures have different perceptions of the amount of personal space that is required to be comfortable. People only allow their closest, most intimate friends into this bubble of space. In the US, for instance, people engaged in conversation will assume a social distance of roughly 10-15 cm/ 4-7 inches, but in many parts of Europe the expected social distance is roughly half that, with the result that Americans travelling overseas often experience the urgent need to back away from a conversation partner who seems to be getting too close.

Hall also described the norm of time consciousness. He distinguished between monochromic cultures and polychromic cultures. Monochromic cultures focus on one thing at a time. There is a high degree of scheduling, and punctuality and meeting deadlines are highly valued. In polychromic cultures, many things happen at once. The focus is more on relationships and interactions. Interruptions are expected as part of life, and there is little frustration experienced when things are postponed or late.
Examine: Consider an argument or concept in a way that uncovers the assumptions and interrelationships of the issue.


Confucian work dynamism: instead of focusing on truth, some cultures focus on virtue.

- China and other Asian countries have a long-term orientation.
These cultures value persistence, loyalty, and trustworthiness. Relationships are based on status. They have a need to protect the collective identity and respect tradition—what is often called "SAVING FACE".

- Hoefstede found that Finland, France, Germany, and the US have a short-term orientation. In contrast to Confucian work dynamism, these cultures value personal steadiness and stability. There is a focus on the future instead of the past, and innovation is highly valued.

One does have to be careful, however, with applying the idea of dimensions too casually. Hoefstede warns against the ecological fallacy—that is, when one looks at two different cultures, it should not be assumed that two members from two different cultures must be different from one another, or that a single member of a culture will always demonstrate the dimensions which are the norm of that culture. These concepts simply give psychologists a way to generalize about cultures in order to better discuss the role that culture plays in behaviour and caution should always be used when generalizing to individuals within those cultures.

Chen et al. (2005)
- Used 147 Singaporean bicultural participants who had been exposed to both Singaporean and American cultures.
- Researchers activated one of the two cultures by showing them a collage that consists of people from the culture the researchers wished to activate.
- Patience of groups was tested by online book ordering.
- Book delivered either within four days with lower fee or within one day with additional charge.
- When the American side was primed, the participants showed more impatience than when the Singaporean side was primed.
Explain: give a detailed account including reasons or causes.

EMIC: looks at behaviours that are culturally specific. Emic approaches are not interested in cross-cultural comparisons but rather in culture-specific phenomena. A culture's uniqueness is explored by such studies though the discovery of its distinctive behaviours (or emics). Emic studies do not import theoretical frameworks from another culture. It is assumed that the meaning of behaviour can only be defined from within the culture studied.
1) Manson et al., (1985)
studied the similarities and differences in how American Indians and Western cultures describe and perceive depression. Through interviews with native informants, the authors derived Hopi illness categories relevant to depression. The descriptions of the natives were then compared to how Western cultures perceive depression. Some of the characteristics identified by Manson et al. (e.g. unhappiness) were similar to Western ways of looking at depression. Others were entirely different. This study supported the emic approach because the researcher studied each culture without importing theoretical frameworks.

ETIC: approach to psychology is to attempt to find universal behaviours. Etic approaches are typically taken within cross-cultural psychology where behaviour is compared across specific cultures. Etic study involves drawing on the notion of universal properties of cultures, which share common perceptual, cognitive, and emotional structures.
1) WHO, (1985)
aimed to study the extent to which symptoms of depression are cross-cultural in Switzerland, Canada, Japan, and Iraq. Investigators used a standard diagnostic scheme to investigate symptoms of depressions of 573 patients in Switzerland, Canada, Japan, and Iran. Through the diagnostic scheme, it was found that most patients experienced several symptoms that were the same in all four countries.

Both studies support that the social and cultural environment influences individual behaviour.