1.      Heider’s naïve scientist model originally differentiated between the                                           and                        causes people use to explain behaviour.  (1 mark)

1.      What is the ultimate attribution error? (2 marks)

     Building on Heider’s ideas, researchers have argued that we should examine two additional causal dimensions.  Name these 2 dimensions.  (2 marks)

stable vs unstable 

controllable vs uncontrollable 

Kraut and Johnson (1979) conducted a field study in a bowling alley to examine how people communicate emotion.  They videotaped individual players’ facial expressions of emotion after knocking down lots of pins.  What was the main finding?  (2 marks)

1.      Jones and Harris’ (1967) experiment showed that people make the fundamental attribution error.  This was demonstrated by the fact that                                            influenced perceptions of the authors’ attitude toward Castro in the                                               condition. (2 marks)

essay topic/ position 

no choice

 One explanation for gender differences in emotion focuses on socialization. Explain how children’s direct learning about emotion may contribute to gender differences in emotion.  (2 marks)

1.      One explanation for gender differences in emotion focuses on socialization. Explain how children’s indirect learning about emotion may contribute to gender differences in emotion.  (2 marks)

indirect learning is based on social roles

expression of emotions are consistent with stereotypical gender roles: womens roles emphasise relationships, mens roles emphasise power and statues 

more traditional beliefs about gender roles --> more stereotypical expressions of emotion

1. langauge and words used 
2. vocal pitch and volume 
3. facial expressions 
4. body language 

1. vulnerability to reinterpretation

meaning of specific cues depend on specific context. crying in a happy context, consistency between cues 

2.  observers perspective

 ability , accessibiit of emotion categories. schaderfreude--> happy about someones misfortune?

others peoples emotions directly inluence our emotions, can catch peoples emotions. can happen in interpersonall contexts and group events

evidence from the study: had a confederate in a group salary negotiation task. the confederate displayed high energy high pleasantness ( cheerful enthusiasm) , high energy low pleasentness ( hostile) low energy high pleasant ( serene warmth) low energy low pleasant ( depressed)

P's rated their mood as more pleasant after the task when they were in the presence of the pleasant confederate. were more cooperative, satisfied and balanced

1.      The social context can influence our experience and expression of emotion through the process of social appraisal. Describe an example of this process, focusing on role-specific norms.  (3 marks)

1.      The social context can influence our experience and expression of emotion through the process of social appraisal. Describe an example of this process, focusing on context-specific norms.  (3 marks)

1.      The social context can influence our experience and expression of emotion through the process of social appraisal. Describe an example of this process, focusing on general values and beliefs.  (3 marks)

1.      The social context can influence our experience and expression of emotion through the process of social reinforment . Describe the 3 types of social reinforement with examples   (3 marks)

1. social approval. i.e if a friend wins an award and you are jealous but express happiness, others will look favourably on your behaviour 
2. social ostrascism. if we do something inappropriate in a situation, will be ostrascised by others 
3. uncomfortable interactions. if you express a certain type of emotion in certain interactsion, will get a negative outcome, will be less likely to do that in the future 

• There is no gender stereotype about the internal experience of emotions

• How often people express these emotions is significant. The stereotype is that

women express emotions more then men

observers more accurate in identifying emotions expressed by women, compared to those expressed by men (Buck et al., 1974; Coats & Feldman, 1996)

–female observers more accurate than male observers when identifying expressed emotion (Niedenthal et al., 2006)

chronic dieters watched a boring documentary with snacks near by. resisted the snacks. 

in a follow up study they had to resist snacks while performing complex algorithms. did not persist as long as those who had to resist radishes 

if they were presented with an icream later they ate it, used up all their control, compared to non- dieters where it had no effect 

1. lashing out at others. participants were told a test they did was a measure of achievement potential or just difficult experimental. did not do well. high self esteem then had to get to know another P, rated them less likable then low self esteem P. lashed out due to ego threat. also more likely to discriminate when our ego is threatened 
2. alcohol myopia. people who were doing nothing and not drinking were more anxious about giving speach about themselves the people who were drinking and doing a task. alchohol makes you focus on current task
3. self affirmation. can be an escape ( debi thomas) as a buffer ( greg lougansis) looked at another side of something good about them that make them feel good 
4. self handicapping. behaviours deisgned to sabotage own performance in order to provide excuse as to why they did bad or claim additional credit when they did good

 ego-defensive: helps us feel good about ourselves

social adjustive: helps us fit in with others

value-expressive: helps us express broader values

object appraisal: helps us know whether to approach/avoid things

utilitarian: helps us maximize positive outcomes

highly accessible. those who reported their attitudes quickly tended to choose the object they liked best. those with less accessible attitudes chose the item closest to them 

attitudes that are highly accessible will guide behaviour 

anythin a positive thing is primed with positive words, will be faster at saying something is positive 

if a disliked object is primed with negative words, will be faster to say it is negative then when it is primed with positive words 

explain how direct exposure leads us to form attitudes 

ajen and fishbein expectancy value model, attitudes are the sum of evaluative beliefs 

mere exposure, the more we are exposed to a stimulus the more likely we are to like it 

a formerly neutral stimulus becomes more or less liked when consistently paired with positive/negative stimuli

–Special case of classical conditioning

positive consequences reinforce behaviours

when we are “rewarded” for our attitudes, they are reinforced

we leanr appropriate attitudes and behaviours by watchign others, and observing their positive and negative outcomes. 

e.g everyone thinks ipads are cool, will reinforce each other that they are cool and will reinforce to you that they are cool--> get ipad 

dont have a strong attitude about something infer these states by observing our behaviour and the situation. we will assume a corresponding disposition if the situation isnt causing the behaviour.

if the situation is causing the behaviour, don't assume a corresponding disposition 

1. attitude towards behaviour--> specific attitude not general attitude 
2. subjective norms support it--> what people close to them think about the behaviour 
3. perceived behavioural control, the ease with which they can do the behaviour 
4. behavioural intention 

1.      According to the Elaboration Likelihood Model, motivation and ability influence how much a person thinks about a persuasive message. Name the two factors that influence motivation. (2 marks)

central route

peripheral route

elaboration is key. it is based on motivation and ability to think

high elaboration ( high motivation and high ability to think)

careful thought about central merits of message 

have to have a strong argument.  quality of message matters 

low elaboration. low motivation or low ability to think 

any observed attitude change will be based on peripheral cues 

quality of message doesnt matter 

people ( consensus) 

stimuli ( distinctiveness)

occasions ( consistency) 

depending on the info they gather people willl atribute a reaction to something stable about the person ( internal) or the stimulus ( external) 

salience of internal or external cues

the effort it takes to consider internal/ external causes 

the emphasis on people and situations in our culture 

1. percieve behaviour--> make internal attribution, automatic everyone can do this 
2. consider the external factros and correct attribution. effortful, if unmotivated or distracted wont do step two 

people tent to make internal attributions for the behaviours of others and external attributions for themselves.

typically have more information about ourselves then others. situation is salient to us 

often distort attributions about our behaviour to present a good public image or boost our self esteem. 

examples: 

• internal attribution for success ( self enhancing)
• external attribution for failure ( self protecting)

will accept more responsibility for a positive outcome, or decreas self serving attribution when we think people wont believe us. if we are doing something just to make us feel good wont show a bias when it could make them look bad. 

1. hostile aggression. stems from feelings of anger and pain. aimed at inflicting pain or injury for its own stake 
2. intrumental aggression. stems from another goal, harm is inflicted as a means t a desired end. do something because it is their job 

frustration will lead to aggression is people are close to reaching their goal or the obstacle is unexpected. frustration is less likely to lead to aggression if it is understandable legitimate and unintentional 

person as more power then them, will think about consequences before lashing out 

described as real vs fictitious

morally justified by the situation 

described as revenge

carried out by someone Ps identify with 

is approved by an adult 

bushman and baumeister 1998 found that higher levels of narcissism lead to greater levels of aggression. when provoked by negative feedback on their essay 

gave longer more intense noise blasts to evaluator 

can backfire, as it models aggressive behaviour 

correlational evidence suggests the more times a child was spanked, more antisocial behaviour 

• Prompt
• immediately follows the aggressive behavior
• If people think they could get away with it will do it
• Certain ,consistently applied, unavoidable
• Seen as fair/legitimate
• Strong enough to deter the aggressor
• Harsh punishments unlikely to lead people to internalize the desired behavior
• Better to have the mildest punishment to internalise behaviour

Having an audience observe one's performance increases                                          , which in turn, facilitates the                                                                         . (2 marks)

arousal 

dominant response 

group attitudes/judgements tend to be more extreme than those initially held by their individual members

groups tend to converge around whatever the majority direction seems to be

could be risky or cautious, positive or negative

Depending on their orginal inlcination.

the study found that peoples attitutes were even more extreme after group discussion, and were not just going along with the group as their attitudes remained the same post evaluation 

persuasive aguments increase attitude extremity 

social comparison, people go beyond the group norm to gain approval 

antecedents: 

• excessive cohesiveness 
• insulation of group from outside 
• lack of impartial leadership 
• ideological homogeneity 
• high stress from external threats

symptoms

• feelings of invulnerability 
• feelings of unanimity 
• belief the group must be right 
• information contrary to the groups position is ignored or discredited 
• dissidents pressured into conforming  

public goods dilemma

everyone contributes to a common goal for the common good. benifits the individual to give as little as possible but hurts the group.

commons dillemma

everyone takes from a common pool

benifits individual to take as much as possible but hurts the group 

make the group identity salient care about the group and make people accountable 

shared beliefs and values that define appropriate attitudes and behaviours 

injunctive norms

perceptions of what behaviours are approved or disapproved by others 

descriptive norms 

perceptions of how people actually behave in group situations 

public compliance, others influence our behaviour but not necessarily what we think 

private acceptance

others influence out thoughts and behaviour 

normative 

others influence us because we want to be liked and accepted 

informational 

others influence us because we think they are correct

associated with private acceptance 

stonger when 

group is important to you 

the group is close to you in space and time--> more influential in person 

group is bigger up to 4 people 

ambiguous situation 

in  crisis situation 

when others are perceived as experts 

they tested P's alone and one year later to see if they still converged on the group norm.

they were still influenced, which suggests a private acceptance and informational social influence 

if their is high motivation and the task is difficult, there will be higher levels of conformity. 

if there is high motivation and easy, wont be mislead less conformity 

no difference when there is low motivation.

agree received littler attention 

slider received attention till they conformed 

deviate gained more negative attention over time 

agreer> slider? deviate in likable ratings 

tendency to denigrate a person or group whose behaviour or physical or intellectual attributes are judged to be superior than average

they threaten our self-esteem (social comparison)

 they raise expectations for performance

 they’re seen to be too good for the group (likely to abandon the group in the future)

Can make the group look good, can go either way if you are comparing yourself to them or if you are comparing your group to another group

positives 

guide when we are unsure

group harmony

social approval 

lead to positve behaviours/ attitudes

negatives 

unwilling to think for selves

group resentment 

lead to negative behaviours/ attitudes 

authoritarian personality 

Authoritarian Personality

•Rigid, dogmatic, sexually repressed, ethnocentric, intolerant of dissent, punitive

•Submissive toward authority

•Aggressive toward subordinates

–Authoritarians administer more shocks & hold the shock lever down longer

Normative social influence

–Ps knew what they were doing was wrong, but they did it because they were afraid of the experimenter’s disapproval.

Informational social influence

–Ps looked to the man in the lab coat for guidance because he was in charge.

decrease informational social influence by 

• removing expertise, experimenter did not specify shock levels, confederate took over
• introduced disagreements between experts

decreased normative social influence 

• allies, three teachers instead of one, the other two confederates will disobey, decrease P's need for social approval

other factors

• run down building 
• experimenter not there lower immediacy 
• victim is closer, had to put hand on shock plate 

When participants pictures were morphed with attractive and unattractive faces they were more likely to choose their photo that was morphed with the attractive face and/or were faster to recognise the attractively morphed photo of themselves. (can describe either one of these effects)

helpful comparison: at least I am married and have found someone who loves me, it would be hard on an unmarried girls self esteem

unhelpful comparison: some other women dont have to get their breast removed, they must be way better off 

physical surroundings 

social environments 

task complexity ( boring repetitive, or stressed if too complex)

intention to quit

stress

individual 

take a big task and break it down 

mentoring, guiding and advice

role negotiation 

organisational strategies 

job redesign and rotation 

company day care 

flexible work schedules and job sharing 

employee assistance programs 

individual 

exercise 

meditation 

social support

counselling 

organisational 

on site exercise 

employee assistance programs

personal days sabbaticals 

coporate survival training 

continuance 

more calculated, staying there due to a number of factors that benefit you even if you don't like the job 

affective 

emotional attachment, identification with the organisation, better then continuance 

actions by organisation members that exceed the formal requirments of thier job 

going to voluntary meetings, reading emails 

need to say one of the following things…they give employees a realistic idea of what to expect on the job…it minimises entry shock because ‘they told me so’… these let employees know what to expect so encourages self-selection or get better match ups, etc.

when use them? need to say one of the following things…lots of turnover due to unrealistic or inflated expectations; jobs with low visibility since people can’t see what job is like; when being highly selective (other answers may be okay too)  

Laws of probability: closer=more likely to bump into them.

Mere exposure: unless you don’t like them to begin with.

Attributional ambiguity: bumping into person in safe situation/non-threatening e.g., men into room with 2 TVs same/diff movie, 1 with female, ambiguous if showing diff movies

men care about youth and looks more as it is a cue to productive potential 

women care about personality and resources more, as there is greater reproductive cost to women, so they are choosier. evidence showed that women rate men more attractive when they interacted with a child rather then ignored it.  when they were presented with men who had more potential for success they rated their current relationship more negatively. 

Women know that any baby that have is there own, but men don’t necessarily know whether the baby raising is their own

•Say that he looks like the father

•Delivery room effect,

why are close relationships important?

Took happily married couples and unhappily married couples. In order tot heal the blister inflicted, needed certain immune functioning. Measuring immune functioning and the size of the blister. Had them discuss issues in the relationship that was causing stress.

•Measured the site of the blister. How did their immune function change when they discussed these stressful topics. Happily married couples addressing a contentious topic had normal immune functions.

•Unhappy couples discussing contentious topics had poor immune functioning.

happy couple attribution: e.g., partner knows I’ve had a tough week so wants to do something special for me (key is that reason provided reflects well on partner)

unhappy couple attribution: e.g., partner did something that I’ll be pissed about, so trying to get me in a good mood before telling me (key is that reason provided doesn’t reflect well on the partner)

when televisions were showing different movies men had an excuse to sit next to the attractive female (they just prefer to see the movie she happens to be watching) but when televisions were showing the same movies there is no attributional ambiguity—sitting next to her could mean you are interested in her

1 point for where men sat; 1 point for explanation of why they sat there (can just say attributional ambiguity to explain why, but may describe reason without using this term)

a diverse group will be better in bringing different insights and diverse opinions to effectivley solve a problem. they may have higher performance and more productivity.

however more diverse groups might not be happier or satisfied then un diverse groups, due to conflict of opiniions. 

input factor, can involve task, group composition that is made up of different types of people with different abilities

mental models

the cognitive processes or knowledge structures held in common by members of a team regarding how they acquire information, analyse it and respond to it

positively influence team processes, positively influence performance 

output factors 

performance: productive output 

innovation.  of new processes product. best predictor of innovation is support for innovation. 

well being.  member mental health, satisfaction 

viability.  willingness of team members to continue working together 

advantages

Pooling of resources

–Specialisation of labour, people can focus on what their epxertese is

–Greater acceptance of decisions

•If they have been part of the process

•Sometimes just want people to be more acceptable of the decision

–Greater understanding of decisions

disadvantages 

Time consuming

–Group polarization

–Group think

•They isolate themselves from an outside point of view, think they are right

–Premature closure

•The group can reach a decision really quickly, not actually getting the benefits of exploring the decision making process

–Social pressures create conformity

•Goes along with the leader, so not really group decision making

–Intimidation by group leader

Would

have a group leader that guides them

through the process. Each idea is

presented, written on a chart, discussed

and clarified. People will privately choose

the best option. Not swayed by dominant

group member. When you have

something in a group decision making,

not working on one discrete problem

social conformity 

lack of communication skills 

status, gender and hierachy effects 

group polarisation 

social loafing, free rider effect, sucker effect 

unwilling to cooperate 

failure to receive support from management 

managers wont relinquish control 

through superordinate goals (don’t have to use this term, but then must describe what Sherif did—e.g. boys worked together on goals that they both agreed were important, like fixing the water pump or fixing the truck)

through the internet, can find like minded people and get an idea that beliefs are more common then they really are. immersed in a world where they do not realise how demented their views are. 

the media uses fascism

when someones face occupies more space they are rated as more powerful. women shown with less faceism 

when a wallet is a gun study 

decision to shoot someone or not, they were holding either a gun or a wallet

they were quicker to shoot someone if they had a gun and was black.

quicker to not shoot if the person is white and does not have a gun.

facial features and who gets the death penalty 

when the victim was white and the defendant had typically black features they were far more likely to get the death penalty 

teddy bear effect

black ceos that are more baby faced were raed as having warmer personalities ( acts as a disarming mechanism )

job search in australia 

people with more asian or middle eastern sounding names had to submit 50% more resumes to be called back then anglos 

full attention: same ass study 1, they were more likely to run over pedestrian 

divided attention, non- threat, still more likely to hit pedestrian 

stereotype threat is taking away cognitive ability to focus on the task at hand 

Women in the stereotype threat condition adopted a more masculine communication style

•But how did others evaluate these women?

•Did not matter it the man was more verbose or direct, thought he was equally competent and kind. Different for women,, rated as less likeable, more verbose want leaders who are more direct to the point, but if you aren't then you are seen as less competent as a leader

Natural setting results

–Female law school students in an environment with a skewed ratio (< 20% female) reported greater performance pressure, social isolation, and role entrapment compared to women in law schools with a higher percentage of other female students (> 33 %)

–Women in a solo condition don’t perform as well

business perspective

• personal awareness education 
• business awarness education 
• senior leader endorsement 
• skills training 
• modifying specific behaviour 
• getting feedback from people who are different from you 
• top management committment and leadership
• supportive culture 
• variety of interventions 
• active employee involvement 
• ongoing 
• evaluation and modification 

wise criticism = performance feedback that invokes high standards AND also communicates belief that one is capable of reaching these high standards (1 point)

HOW? it provides strategy for how majority group member should give performance feedback to minority group member so that advice is not discounted as biased or driven by stereotypes

 Black students with the unbuffered criticism were far less motivated

In the wise condition, both blacks and whites thought there was relatively little bias

Blacks were equally motivated to revise their essay In the wise critics

Along with the belief that they could reach the high standard was enough that they

could reach the high standard

When social category distinctions are highly correlated with roles in the workplace, stereotypes are reinforced (if all Asians are science majors, or all female managers are in human resources).

Salience of ethnic categories that correlates with the type of person that works in the organisation

–Reduce the correlation between the persons gender or race and their position in the organisation

–Embed diversity so that you wouldn’t know what gender or ethnicity based of their role in the organisation 

Other “human bands” can be a threat

• Prejudice in the dark

– Blacks stereotyped to be more violent

– White participants watch slides of black people in a light room

or a dark room

– They will rate them as more violent in a dark room then when

they are in a light room

• Fear of disease and pathogens

– e.g., Person with port wine stain birth mark is non-consciously

avoided more than a person with drug resistant tuberculosis