SOCIAL COGNITION

1. SOCIAL COGNITION

2. Trying to make sense of others Social cognition is the study of how people understand and make sense of others and themselves. (Feldman, 2001) Social perception is the process of trying to understand other people�s (and sometimes our own) intentions, traits, motives, and behaviours.

3. Social perception is a two way process, with a perceiver formulating impressions of a target, and a target busy managing the perceptual cues he or she displays. Social perception is thus a dynamic and reciprocal process.

4. What is perception? Perception has to do with the taking in and making sense of a vast array of sensory information. The perceptive process converts sensations into mental representation of the experience. SO WHAT ARE WE SAYING? Just as we perceive things about the physical world such as color, sounds and objects, so too do we perceive things about our social world (ie) people and social situations. The perception of people is different from inanimate objects because we can manage the impression that a person makes of us.

5. Three approaches to understanding social perception Person perception approach Schema approach Attribution approach

6. Person perception approaches These approaches consider the ways we assess and combine the traits of persons to form overall impressions. They are based on the view that people are thoughtful and fairly rational perceivers of others, who are able to pull together people�s traits to form their on impression

7. Impression formation and management Impression formation- refers to formulating tentative conceptions about others� emotions, motivations and personalities by gathering and interpreting situational and behavioural cues. Impression management/or self presentation- refers to influencing other people�s social perceptions by selectively revealing personal information to them; it includes both deliberate and unintentional attempts to establish, maintain or refine the impression others have.

8. Six General Principles minimal information salience context categorization enduring cognitive structures needs and goals

9. What Information Do We Use? People often decide very quickly what others are like based on minimal information.

10. What Information Do We Use? Roles People tend to think of others within a role context first and only then according to personality traits

11. What Information Do We Use? Person perception explores the idea that we use people�s outward appearance and behaviour to draw inferences Physical appearance Nonverbal behaviour

12. What Information Do We Use? Physical Cues Appearance and behavior are key determinants of our first impressions although we are taught that appearance can be deceiving, we act as though we have never heard that advice

13. What Information Do We Use? Nonverbal Communication Social perception also involves trying to figure out or �decode� what other people�s nonverbal behaviour represents. We use nonverbal cues especially to asses someone�s emotional state or their personal motivation. Even small amounts of nonverbal behavior can convey substantial information Channels Visible Facial expressions, gestures, posture, appearance Paralinguistic Pitch, amplitude, rate, voice quality of speech

14. Nonverbal Communication The Visible Channel Distance Indicates friendliness Gestures Vary by culture Eye Contact Indicates interest (friendship or threat) Facial Expressions

15. Nonverbal Communication Paralanguage Paralanguage involves variations in speech other than verbal content A simple statement can mean entirely different things depending on emphasis and inflection

16. Nonverbal Communication The more channels of communication people have access to, the more accurate they are in judging others� emotions. However, the verbal channel tends to be the most influential.

17. Nonverbal Communication Are people successful or unsuccessful liars? True emotions tend to �leak� out through nonverbal channels Some nonverbal channels leak more than others because they are less controllable The body is more likely than the face to reveal deception

18. Nonverbal Communication People are more likely to perceive a deceptive message as less truthful, but on the whole, people are not wonderful lie-detectors The Giveaways Liars blink more, hesitate more, make more speech errors, speak in higher-pitched voices, and have more dilated pupils

19. Nonverbal Communication People use nonverbal behaviors to convey intended impressions Display rules are cultural norms regarding how one conveys emotion to others

20. What Information Do We Use? Salience People pay attention to the figure rather than to the ground or setting The most salient cues are used most heavily Brightness, noisiness, motion, and novelty

21. What Information Do We Use? Effects of Salience Draws attention Influences perceptions of causality Produces evaluatively extreme judgments Produce more consistency of judgment

22. What Information Do We Use? We move very quickly from observable information (appearance & behavior) to personality trait inferences Traits are more economical to remember Trait inferences occur automatically We use implicit personality theories to infer traits from other traits

23. What Information Do We Use? Solomon Asch (1964)- stated that we can form immediate perceptions or impressions of persons when we encounter them. We do not spend much cognitive energy or time forming this first impression and we tend to maintain it after we receive additional information. (Do first impressions really last????) Asch�s ideas about impression was that the whole is more than the sum of its parts. In other words we perceive things in combination rather than perceive each individual part in isolation. This theory was referred to as Implicit Personality theory.

24. What Information Do We Use? Which Traits? We tend to evaluate others along two dimensions: Competence Interpersonal qualities

25. Cognitive math- 1+ 1 doesn�t always equal 2 Asch formulated a hypothesis which stated that one particular trait, which he called a central trait, could be responsible for impression formed. Central traits are characteristics that serve to organize an impression of another person and provide a framework for interpreting other information about that person even when other traits are stated.

26. Order effect in person perception: The first shall be the last? Does it matter what you hear first about a person? 1. intelligent, hardworking, impulsive, critical, stubborn, and envious 2.envious, stubborn, critical, impulsive, hardworking, and intelligent

27. Asch (1946) people who hear the list with the more positive attributes first form a more positive impression than those who hear it in the reverse order. In subsequent studies done two concepts were coined. Primacy effect- this occurs when early information has a stronger impact than later information. Recency Effect- in which later information is given more weight than earlier information. This especially occurs if there is a large time gap between presentation of information and whether we are generally attentive to incoming information or not. This effect occasionally occur. N.B. Please read up on Hypotheses put forward to explain the primacy and recency effect.

28. What Information Do We Use? Categorization We automatically perceive stimuli as part of a group or category

29. What Information Do We Use? Consequences of Categorization leads to category-based social judgments (stereotyping) speeds processing time can lead to errors

30. What Information Do We Use? The Continuum Model of Impression Formation Impressions range from stereotypic, category-based impressions to individuated impressions (dual processing)

31. What Information Do We Use? Dual Processing We generally tend to use category-based inference because it is easy and quick We use individuated information when we are motivated to be accurate the person doesn�t fit our categories we have other reasons for wanting to know the person better

32. What Information Do We Use? Context Effects Contrast biases judgments away from the context (sees them as different) Assimilation biases judgments in the same direction as the context (sees them as similar)

33. What Information Do We Use? Context Effects Assimilation occurs more when people are using category-based processing Contrast occurs more when people are using individuated information

34. Integrating Impressions We move quickly from observations of appearance and behavior to inferences about personality

35. Integrating Impressions Negativity Effect Negative traits tend to affect impressions more than positive ones (especially negative moral traits) Positivity Bias Overall we tend to evaluate others positively

36. Integrating Impressions We infer what others are like from what emotions they express

37. Integrating Impressions The Averaging Principle averaging is used to combine separate pieces of information about people, some of which are positive and others of which are negative A weighted averaging model, in which traits are weighted by importance, provides the best predictions

38. Integrating Impressions Our perceptions of others� personal qualities undergoes a shift of meaning depending on context

39. Integrating Impressions People tend to form evaluatively consistent impressions of others (halo effect)

40. Integrating Impressions Resolving Inconsistencies Information that is inconsistent with other impressions may be remembered especially well However, being �cognitively busy� prevents us from thinking about inconsistent information so we forget it We may differentiate incongruent information by context Sometimes we just recognize incongruities without integrating them

41. Integrating Impressions Schemas are organized, structured sets of cognitions including knowledge about the object, relationships among its attributes, and specific examples

42. Integrating Impressions Schemas Person schemas Role schemas Group schemas (stereotypes)

43. Integrating Impressions Schemas Prototypes are the abstract ideal of a schema Exemplars are particular instances of a category

44. Integrating Impressions Schemas When we have little information about another, we use prototypes to make inferences about them When we have a little more information, we use both exemplars and prototypes When we have a great deal of information, we use more well-developed schemas as well as exemplars

45. Motivated Person Perception Our goals and feelings about other people influence the information we gather about them

46. Motivated Person Perception Need for accuracy about another leads to more systematic processing We remember more about another when we expect to interact with him or her

47. Motivated Person Perception Communicating information about another leads to more evaluatively consistent impressions

48. Motivated Person Perception When we are preoccupied we are more likely to make trait inferences

49. Motivated Person Perception Factors influencing our reactions to others Other�s similarity to self Our prior experiences Our prior expectations Our beliefs about traits as stable or malleable Our own emotional state or mood

50. Schema approach

51. The primary way we simplify and organize impressions of others is through schemas. Schemas are organized bodies of information stored in memory. This information assists us in understanding the ways the social world operates, and enables us to categorize and interpret new information related to the schema.

52. Social categorization process This is a classification of people into groups based on common attributes. We tend to form impressions through stereotypes. These are fixed ways of thinking about people that puts them into categories.

53. Value of schemas They influence the ways we understand and interpret information about the social world. They help determine how we remember material to which we have been exposed previously. They influence the inferences we draw regarding incomplete information.

54. ATTRIBUTION APPROACH

55. Attribution refers to the process through which we seek to identify the causes of others� behaviour, as a way to gain knowledge of their stable traits and dispositions. It is also about explaining the causes of our own behaviour .

56. Historical background- Fritz Heider 1944, 1958  His work �The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations� was regarded as the origin of attribution theory in social psychology. According to Heider, social perception is motivated by the need and desire to see the world in an orderly and predictable manner. He believed that behaviour is a joint product of the actor�s enduring traits and external forces. The fundamental distinction was between �dispositional� and � situational� causes.

57. Dispositional vs. Situational DISPOSITIONAL- These are internal traits , motives, moods, aptitude of the actor. Dispositional causes- reasons for behaviour that rests on the personality traits and characteristics of the individual carrying out the behaviour. SITUATIONAL- These are external characteristics of the situation. Situational causes- reasons for behaviour that rest on the demands and constraints of a given social setting.

58. THEORIES OF ATTRIBUTION Correspondent Inference Theory CI Covariation Model

59. Correspondent Inference Theory CI Edward Jones and Keith Davis (1965) correspondents inferences are akin to internal attributions in Heider�s framework. The theory covers the more general case of how we use a person�s behaviour to make inferences about enduring personality traits and motivations. (Feldman, 2001 pg. 51) It examines observers� notions of how closely an overt behaviour or action represents a specific underlying intention,trait or disposition. (pg. 52).

60. According to CI theory, what determines the attributions we make?

61. The degree of choice the actor was perceived to have. If the actor is perceived as having no choice, then the act doesn't reveal his or her disposition.

62. 2. Whether the behaviour is expected or typical in the situation. If the behaviour is atypical or unexpected in the situation, then it is more likely to reveal something about the actor�s disposition.

63. 3. Whether the behaviour is socially desirable Social desirability is the degree to which the society encourages and values the behaviour. If the behaviour is socially desirable it is also less revealing of the actor�s disposition (unless it is unusually desirable).

64. 4. The number of unique consequences or �noncommon effects� associated with the act According to Jones and Davis we learn most from behaviours of others that lead to unique or noncommon effects. The theory assumes that any behaviour leads to a particular set of consequences. However, the behaviour that is most helpful in forming correspondent inferences are those that result in consequences that other, alternative behaviours would not have produced. (Feldman, 2001 pg. 52)

65. Covariation Model Kelly (1967) defines a cause as �that condition which is present when the effect is present and which is absent when the effect is absent.� Kelley, says that people try to see if a particular cause and a particular effect go together across situations. This theory focuses on three sources of information

66. Covariation Model Consistency Is the person�s response consistent over time? Consensus Do other people have similar responses? Distinctiveness Does the person respond similarly to other similar stimuli?

67. Consensus: the extent to which others react to some stimulus or event in the same manner as the person under consideration. Do other people laugh at Oliver the comedian? YES- high consensus NO- low consensus Consensus is high when actions generalize across other actors with situation held constant.

68. Distinctiveness: the extent to which an individual responds in a similar manner to different stimuli or event. Do you laugh at other comedians and not just Oliver? YES- low distinctiveness No- high distinctiveness Distinctiveness is high when action fails to generalize across situations with actor held constant

69. Consistency: the extent to which an individual responds to a given stimulus or situation in the same way on different occasions. Do you laugh at Oliver the comedian on all other occasions? YES- high consistency NO- low consistency

70. Link between the sources and the fundamental distinctions When consensus and distinctiveness are low and consistency is high, we attribute behaviour to internal causes. When consensus and consistency and distinctiveness are all high, we attribute behaviour to external causes When consensus is low, but consistency and distinctiveness are high, we attribute behaviour to both situational and dispositional causes.

71. Covariation Model

72. Biases in Attribution The fundamental attribution error Self- serving bias The actor- observer effect

73. The fundamental attribution error The tendency to attribute behaviour to enduring dispositions, such as attitudes or personality traits� This refers to the fact that whenever people are making attributions about an action, they tend to over-emphasize dispositional factors about the actor, and under-emphasize situational factors. An example is attributing a friend's recent car accident to the fact that the friend is a poor driver rather than to the fact that another car just happened to pull out in front of her. The former would be a dispositional attribution; the latter a situational attribution.

74. Self- serving bias It is sometimes called a "defensive attribution" There is a tendency to attribute our successes to internal or dispositional factors but to attribute our failures to external or situational factors beyond our control. This bias accounts for the consistent human tendency to take credit for success but to deny responsibility for failure Example: doing well on an exam because of innate brilliance or studying hard versus failing an exam because it was unfair or tricky, lecturer didn�t set it fair; winning a game because of athletic prowess versus losing a game because "the referees were blind".

75. The actor- observer effect The tendency to attribute our own behavior mainly to situational causes but the behavior of others mainly to internal (dispositional) causes. Example: If you feel shy in a tutorial, you are more likely to attribute this to situational factors (the class is too big, the room is too open, ect.) than you do for other students (that how she/he is. She was born that way. She�s just stupid and she�s always acting shy)