1. Lecture 7 Explainingbehavior Jiri Cenek

2. Assignment • Willgiveyou feedback + givemark (evaluate/return thework) today/tomorrow • Yourpresentationtomorrowcanmovethemark ↑↓ Schedule 26.4.: • 13:00 – 14:20 presentations • 14:30 „CommunicationwithChinese“

3. Self-perception and socialcognition • How do wesee and explainothers? (S-C) • How do wesee and explainourselves? (S-P)

4. Part I: Socialcognition Definition: The manner in which we receive, interpret, analyze, remember and use information about the social world.

5. Part I: Socialcognition Object vs. Socialperception and cognition • People behave, objects don’t • Interaction between individuals can change behavior • We can most often see clearly what the characteristics of an object are • We infer or attribute characteristics to people

6. Firstimpressions

7. Part I: Socialcognition • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3h-T3KQNxU

8. FirstImpressionsCount • Impressions can be formed in first fifteen seconds • They are influenced by what we have been told and past experience (perceptual set) • Impressions guide how we act towards/feel about people • Impressions can often be wrong – based on stereotypes/prejudice • Give an overview of person – we select information we use

9. Central and Peripheral Traits Asch (1946) Configural Model • We form a global (overall) first impression • Central traits • Fundamental to whole impression • We make inferences based on these • Peripheral traits less important in impression formation

10. Whattraits are Central/peripheralforyou?

11. Halo Effect and Horns Effect Halo Effect (positive) • “A tendency to allow an overall impression of a person or one particular outstanding trait to influence the total rating of that person”. (Reber, 1995) Horns Effect (negative) • Negative impression formed from perception of less favourable traits Why? • Want to perceive constancy in people

12. Part I: Socialcognition • Attributiontheory (F. Heider, 1958) • Analyzeshowweexplainpeoplesbehavior. • Assumptions: • Weseek to make senseofourworld. • Weattributepeoplesactions to internalorexternalcauses. • We do this in fairlylogical, consistentways. • Causes: • Internal (personsdisposition) • External (personssituation) • Example: Failingexam • The student is not cleverenough. • His parents go throughdivorcethisweek.

13. Part I: Socialcognition • Informationintegration: Rules by whichwecombinepiecesofinformationabout a person intoanoverall image. • Importance • Primacy • Negativity • Example: Person wedontknowissupposed to be: • kind, • a sportsman, • ambitious, • intelligent

14. Positivity and negativity • If we don’t hear negative information we form a positive impression • We focus on negative information we hear, theyseem more important in impression formation • Negativefirst impression more resistant to change (Hodges, 1974),even when positive information follow, more so than other way round (Hamilton and Zanna, 1974) • All of these can affect and distort judgement in interpersonal encounters

15. Attributionerrors

16. Attributionerrors • Formingimpressionsismostlylogical and reasonable, BUTpeople make oftenerrors in attribution. • Thefundamentalattributionerror • Example: Helpingold lady

17. Attributionerrors • Thefundamentalattributionerror • Definition: Thetendencyforobservers to underestimatesituationalinfluences and overestimetedispositionalinfluences. • Unconscious • Unintentional • Real lifeexamples: • Medicaldoctorsoftenpresumed to beexperts on allsortsofmedicalquestions. • Studentsoverestimatethebrillianceoftheirteachers.

18. Reasonsofmaking AE • Actor-observereffect • Conservingmentaleffort • Expectation-confirmation

19. Reasonsofmaking AE • Actor-observereffect • Access to innerthoughts • Differentperspective in observing and acting • Weact: Attention to theenviroment (situation) • Othersacting: Attention to the person/people (disposition)

20. 2. Conserving Mental Effort • The social world is fast-paced→ needto make quick effective decisions (notime to use effortful conscious thinking processes) • Do we really analyze behavior in a rational, logical manner? • Do we really have the time, motivation, or cognitive capacity for such elaborate and mindful processes? • The answer? • Sometimes yes…Sometimes no. • Often, what we do instead is develop cognitive strategies which give “good enough” judgments with little mental effort

21. 2. Conserving Mental Effort Cognitive heuristics • Enable us to think in ways that are quick and easy • Problem is that using cognitive heuristics can frequently lead to error

22. 2. Conserving Mental Effort • Cognitiveheuristics = mentalshortcuts • Availability: the ease with which a particular idea can be brought to mind; dramatic (and sometimesinfrequent) eventscanbebrought to mind more easily • Example: people overestimate their likelihood of dying intheactofterrorism/earthquake • Anchoring:whenestimatingnumber; alreadyavailablenumberserves as ananchor, ten wemove up ordown. • Example: Isthe probability ofdying in a terroristattack more orlessthen 1 %? • = 1 in 3.6 million= 0.000000028% (USA)

23. 2. Conserving Mental Effort Two-stage model ofattribution

24. 3. Expectation Confirmation Strategies • We pay attention to behaviors relevant to our expectations • We interpret ambiguous events/behaviors in ways that support our expectations • We remember people and events consistent with our expectations

25. 3. Expectation Confirmation Strategies • Harold Kelley (1950), a psychology professor once arranged for a guest lecturer to teach his class… • Half the students in the class were given a page of notes that described the lecturer as a "rather cold person, industrious, critical, practical, and determined" • The other students got notes describing him as a "rather warm person, industrious, critical, practical, and determined"

26. 3. Expectation Confirmation Strategies • "cold" description: lecturer was • unhappy • irritable • didn’t volunteer in class discussion • "warm" description: lecturer was • happy • good-natured, • took part in discussion • Why didn’t they wait to form there own opinion…our expectations often lead us to errors in judgment

27. Culturally universal trends in attribution

28. Cross-culturaltrends in socialattribution • Groups to whichwebelongwepercieve as more heterogenous. • Scarification - peoplewithscars are percieved: • Lesssociable • Lessattractive • More dishonest

29. Cross-culturaltrends in socialattribution • Babyfaceovergeneralizationeffect • Peoplewith „baby-face“ are percieved: • More: Less: • innocent, manipulative • submissive, competitive • warm, ruthless • cooperative, powerful • compassionate, …. • gullible, • honest, • trusting

30. Cross-culturaltrends in socialattribution • Accent:listenersjudgeotherpeopleaccording to whethertheyspeakwithaccentor not. • Competence • Social status • Socialatractiveness • Personality characteristics • Openess • Honesty • Assertiveness…. • Standard-accentedspeakers (TV-speakers): Higherevaluationof: • Intelligence, wealth, education, success

31. Cross-culturaltrends in socialattribution • Differences: Collectivisticculturestend to make lessoftenthefundamentalattributionerror(focus on thedispositionsratherthansituation • Cause: Independent/interdependent self-construal

33. Part II: Self-perception

34. Part II: Self-perception • Self-concept • Self-perception • Self-presentation • Self-esteem • 2-4 Reading !!!!!

36. Culturaldifferences in self-perception • US: Individualism • Japan: Collectivism Trafimow et al. (1997) • Participants were from Hong Kong that used English as a second language… • Half given the “Who am I” test in English and half given it inChinese • Results: • English: Personal traits • Chinese: Group affiliation • Interpretation of these results???

37. Self- concept and age

38. Self- concept and age

39. As children get older, their views of self become more differentiated.

40. Self- concept and age

41. Part III: Attributionofsuccess and failure

42. Locusofcontrol • Whichone do you more stronglybelieve? • In the long run peoplegettherespecttheydeserve in thisworld. ORUnfortunately, peoplesworthoftenpassesunrecognized no matterhow hard theytry. • Whathappens to meis my owndoing. ORSometimes I feelthat i donthaveenoughcontroloverthedirection my lifeistaking.

43. Locusofcontrol • Internal and external LOC

44. Attributionofsuccess and failure • Applicationof LOC theory (Rotter, 1966): • Howpeopleexplaintheirsuccess and failure? • Whatdidyousay to yourfriendsthe last timeyoufailedanexam? • 3 commonexplanations: • Individualabilities(„I have/do not haveskills.“) • Effort(„I tried hard/I didnttry.“) • Taskdifficulty(„Itwastoodifficult./Itwasntdifficult.“)

45. Attributionofsuccess and failure • Self-serving/-centeredbias: • Tendency to percieveoneselffavorably. • Weattributeourfailures to difficultsituations and oursucceses to ourskills.

46. Locusofcontrol Self-disparagement • Peopletend to disparagetheirbehavior, appearanceabilities…+ praiseothers • Reason: • Reassuring „strokes“: „I wish i werent so fat.“ → „Come on. You are not fat atall.“ • In sport: Coachespubliclypraisetheiropponents. • Win: We made a big achievement. • Loss: Theopponentwas just toogood. • Self-handicappingstrategy

47. Learnedhelplessness • Martin Seligmanexperiment

48. Learnedhelplessness • Effort has no effect = LH • Apathy • Resignation • Paralysisofwill • Reading!

49. ThankYouforYourattention

50. Furtherreading and sources • Myers, Chapter 3 • http://www.all-about-psychology.com/solomon-asch.html