Social Cognition. Outline. What is Social Cognition? Social cognition. PSY 750 Advanced Social Psychology

Transcription

1 Social Cognition PSY 750 Advanced Social Psychology Outline What is Social Cognition? Bad is Stronger than Good Attribution Theory Dual-Process Model Schemas Priming Framing Thought Suppression Heuristics: Mental Shortcuts Errors and Biases What is Social Cognition? Social cognition A movement in social psychology that focuses on thoughts about people and social relationships Began in the 1970s Cognitive revolution and scientific study of thinking Previous focus on behaviorism and observable processes only Based on the idea that it is impossible to understand people without examining their thoughts and feelings 1

2 Nisbett & Wilson (1977) We can usually produce an explanation for our behaviors but those explanations may not be accurate because we do not have direct introspective access to most mental processes Problem with self-reports: Participants may be telling the experimenter more than they could be expected to know about themselves Basic methodology was to experimentally manipulate the cause of the behavior, ask the participant to explain their behavior, and find that the participant produces an explanation that does not involve the manipulation e.g., participants saying they chose a pair of stockings because of their quality instead of their position Is Bad Stronger Than Good? Are negative things stronger than positive things? Think about a time when someone said something bad about you How memorable or powerful is that compared to good things that people have said? Bad things tend to have greater psychological impact Trauma versus joyful event May be an innate tendency that is linked with survival Since bad things are often stronger than good, we generally need more good experiences than bad ones for us to flourish (about three times as many) Attributions Attributions Causal explanations people give for their own and others behavior Heider (1958) thought most explanations fall into one of two categories: Internal factors Ability, attitudes, personality, mood, effort External factors The task, other people, luck 2

3 Attributions: Explaining Success and Failure Heider Internal vs. External Weiner Added Stable vs. Unstable Two dimensional attribution theory Four main types of attribution Internal and Stable: Ability (similar to entity theorists) Internal and Unstable: Effort (similar to incremental theorists) External and Stable: Difficulty of task (really depends on the task) External and Unstable: Luck (absolutely no control) Internal vs. External Attribution Covariation Principle For something to be the cause of a behavior, it must be present when the behavior occurs and absent when the behavior does not occur Information is derived from three sources: Consensus How do other people react to the same stimulus/event? Consistency How does the person react to the same stimulus/event on different occasions Distinctiveness How does the person respond to other stimuli/events that are similar? Internal vs. External Attribution Bob talks during my class. What kind of attributions do you make about this behavior? Consensus Do other people talk during my class? Consistency Does Bob always talk during my class? Distinctiveness Does Bob talk during his other classes? If all three are high External attribution It must be something about my class If consistency is high but consensus and distinctiveness are low Internal attribution Bob is just talkative 3

4 Attribution Biases Self-serving bias Tendency to take credit for success but deny blame for failure People prefer to attribute success to ability and failure to task difficulty or luck This self-serving bias makes people feel good and is important for self-presentation Actor/Observer Bias Actors tend to make external attributions Observers tend to make internal attributions e.g., You witness a parent spanking a child in the store You (the observer) may be more likely to say What a horrible parent (internal attribution) The parent (actor) probably felt that the situation (misbehaving child, crowded store) was to blame (external attribution) Attribution Errors Fundamental Attribution Error Tendency for observers to attribute other people s behavior to internal or dispositional causes and to downplay situational causes Example: Someone cuts you off in traffic. You assume the person is a jerk and a terrible driver but it is possible that their behavior may have been due to situational factors (e.g., they are lost) Ultimate Attribution Error Tendency for observers to make internal attributions (fundamental attribution error) about whole groups of people Fundamental Attribution Error I need two volunteers to stand up Volunteer 1: I really like President Obama Volunteer 2: I really dislike President Obama What do we know about each person s attitude toward President Obama? Why? 4

5 Fundamental Attribution Error Jones & Harris (1967) asked participants to judge the attitudes of an essay writer toward Castro Half read a positive speech and half read a negative essay Half of the participants were told the essay writer was assigned their particular essay while the other half was told the essay writer was allowed to choose Estimated Pro-Castro Attitudes Free No Choice Choice Pro- Castro Essay Anti- Castro Essay Fundamental Attribution Error Ditto et al. (1997) asked men to meet a female confederate After the meeting, the female confederate was assigned to write either all positive or all negative things about the participant When she wrote negative things, men discounted her criticism when they learned she had to say negative things However, when she wrote positive things, men tended to infer that she really liked them even if she had to say positive things The fundamental attribution error is especially powerful when it is in our selfinterest Fundamental Attribution Error Ross, Amabile, & Steinmetz (1977) randomly assigned participants to 1 of 3 conditions during a simulated game show Questioner Contestant Observer Questioners were invited to make up difficult questions that would demonstrate their wealth of knowledge It is obvious that the questioner has the advantage Contestants and observers (but not questioners) came to the erroneous conclusion that the questioners were more knowledgeable than the contestants This may be why people think Alex Trebek is smart 5

6 Fundamental Attribution Error Four possible explanations Behavior is more noticeable than situational factors Situational factors may be hidden Insignificant weight is assigned to situational factors Even when made aware of factors People are cognitive misers Preference for the quick and easy answers Richer trait-like language to explain behavior We have thousands of terms to describe dispositional qualities (e.g., mean, nice, crazy) Fewer for situational qualities (e.g., pressure, circumstance, status) How Fundamental is the Fundamental Attribution Error? It is fundamental because it influences our judgments in important ways If you believe that poor people are lazy, then you are likely to support policies that are unsympathetic toward them However, it doesn t always lead to errors It is probably more accurate to call it a bias rather than an error ( it is also known as the correspondence bias) This bias may be adaptive because it is simply more efficient to attribute the behavior of others to their dispositions Why People Think and Why They Don t We have a great capacity for higher order thinking but we also conserve this resource Why? Limited resource Conscious thinking requires more effort than automatic thinking Cognitive Miser People are reluctant to do more thinking than necessary 6

7 Thinking Three common goals of thinking Discover the right answer Confirm the desired answer Reach the answer quickly For example, imagine you are thinking about buying a new car Which car should you buy? You might think about Choosing something you like, that gets great gas mileage, and is not too expensive Finding evidence in the latest Consumer Reports to back up your choice Deciding within one week s time Automatic and Controlled Thinking Dual-Process Model Automatic and Conscious Thinking Example: Stroop Test A standard measure of effortful control over responses Requires participants to identify the color of a word The catch is that the word may spell out the name of a different color Name the color as quickly as possible 7

8 Name the color of each word as quickly as you can, ignoring what the word says Name the color of each word as quickly as you can, ignoring what the word says The Stroop Effect It usually takes longer to complete the Stroop test when the word and ink color do not match Why? You must consciously override the automatic tendency to read the word The Stroop effect People often have difficulty overriding this automatic tendency 8

9 Dual-Process Model These systems work together These systems may come into conflict and the conscious system can override the automatic system Elements of Automatic Thinking No simple test of whether a process is automatic or controlled We can look at four factors to determine its automaticity Intention, control, effort, and efficiency Automatic processes are NOT: Guided by intention Subject to deliberate control Effortful Automatic processes ARE: Highly efficient Rely on organized packets of information stored in memory Schemas Knowledge Structures Substantial information about a concept, its attributes, and its relationships to other concepts e.g., Female singer Schemas aid in navigating a complex world Reduce amount of information to process Unless a schema is violated This leads to conscious thought Analysis of why schema was violated 9

10 Knowledge Structures Scripts are schemas about certain events Knowledge structures that contain important information about how people behave under a variety of circumstances e.g., restaurant script: choose a table, order, wait, eat, pay the bill and leave Include information about motives, intentions, goals and situations Include information about the causal sequence of events Learned from culture Priming Memory is filled with concepts that are linked in memory (e.g., orange & juice; red & light; open & closed) Sometimes the activation of one concept leads to the activation of related concepts e.g., Think about the word school may lead to thoughts of books, teachers, tests, grades, studying, friends, varying emotions, etc. When concepts are activated intentionally, this is called priming Influences subsequent thinking May trigger automatic processes Priming Participants were primed with different words (Higgins, Rholes, & Jones, 1977) Group 1: reckless, conceited, aloof, stubborn Group 2: self-confident, adventurous, independent, persistent All participants read the same description of Donald, a skydiver, powerboat racer, and demolition derby driver Participants impressions of Donald were influenced by the primed words 10

11 Priming Participants completed a scrambled-sentence task (Bargh, Chen, & Burrows, 1996) Rude primes: aggressively, bold, rude, bother, & intrude Polite primes: respect, honor, considerate, & patiently Neutral primes: exercising, flawlessly, occasionally, & gleefully After finishing the scrambled-sentence task, participants were supposed to find the experimenter so they could begin the next task The DV was whether the participant would interrupt 70 the experimenter (who was 60 supposedly talking to another participant) within 10 minutes 30 or not 20 P e rc en t W h o In te rru p ted 10 0 Polite Neutral Rude Priming Primes: neutral or elderly words in scrambled-sentences Elderly primes: Florida, old, lonely, grey, sentimental, wise, stubborn, courteous, bingo, forgetful, retired, wrinkle, rigid, traditional, bitter, obedient, conservative, & knits After being exposed to elderly primes, participants walked more slowly to the elevator (a behavior associated with the elderly) Neutral Prime Elderly Prime Participants were unaware 8.4 of the effect of the primes Effect of primes was not 7.8 due to mood Walking Time (Sec) Exp. 2a Exp. 2b Tversky & Kahneman (1981) Problem Gains Losses Imagine that the U.S. is preparing for the outbreak of an unusual Asian disease, which is expected to kill 600 people. Two alternative programs to combat the disease have been proposed. Assume that the exact scientific estimates of the consequences of the programs are as follows: 72% If program A is adopted, 200 people will be saved. If Program B is adopted, there is a one-third probability that 600 people will be saved and a twothirds probability that no people will be saved. 22% If program A is adopted, 400 people will die. If Program B is adopted, there is a one-third probability that nobody will die and a two-thirds probability that 600 people will die. 28% 78% 11

12 Framing Framing Do messages stress potential gains (positively framed) or potential losses (negatively framed)? People perceive losses and gains differently such that a loss is more devastating than the equivalent gain is gratifying People tend to avoid risk when a positive frame is presented but seek risks if a negative frame is utilized Another important factor contributing to framing is certainty and pseudocertainty effects in which a sure gain is favored to a probabilistic gain but a probabilistic loss is preferred to a definite loss (Clark, 2009) Thought Suppression Two processes are necessary to suppress thought Automatic System Checks for incoming information related to unwanted thought Conscious System Redirects attention away from unwanted thought Relax conscious control and mind is flooded with cues from the automatic system Paradoxical rebound effect e.g., Don t think about a white bear! Heuristics: Mental Shortcuts Heuristic A simple decision rule to make inferences or conclusions Quick, easy, efficient Not always appropriate Information-processing short-cut (or rule of thumb) Not guaranteed to solve the problem correctly but it is considerably faster than focusing on all available information Without heuristics, we would find it very difficult to carry out our daily activities 12

13 Heuristics In an experiment, psychologists interviewed a group of 100 successful professionals (30 engineers and 70 lawyers). The psychologists wrote down a brief description of each of the individuals in the study. The following description is of one randomly selected individual: Jack is a 45 year old man. He is married and has 4 children. He is generally conservative, careful, and ambitious. He shows no interest in political and social issues and spends most of his free time on his many hobbies, which include home carpentry, sailing, and mathematical puzzles. IS JACK AN ENGINEER OR A LAWYER? Heuristics Representativeness Heuristic Tendency to judge the frequency or likelihood of an event by the extent to which it resembles the typical case We use category membership and tend to ignore base rates Jack is more likely to be a Lawyer There are more lawyers than engineers (base rate information) Example of representativeness heuristic taking precedence over base rate information Use of stereotypes (e.g., How could Jack be a lawyer with no political interests?) Heuristics Availability Heuristic A cognitive rule that judges the likelihood of things in terms of their availability in memory. If instances of something come readily to mind, we presume it to be commonplace Example: Airplane crashes get more media attention than car crashes which makes that image more salient even though airplane crashes kill fewer people Events that are common are usually easier to think of than events that are less common Why does this occur? Some events are easier to retrieve from memory Are there more words that begin with the letter k or words that contain the letter k as their third letter? Some events are easier to imagine Which of the following causes more deaths each year: being attacked by a shark or being struck by a falling airplane part? Exposure to a biased sample of events 13

14 Simulation Heuristic Heuristics The tendency to judge the frequency or likelihood of an event by the ease with which you can imagine (or mentally simulate) it e.g., Two men arrive together at the airport One missed his delayed flight by 5 minutes The other missed his flight by ½ hour Who is likely to be more upset? Why? Silver Medalists at the Olympics tend to be less happy with their medal than bronze medalists for the same reason I was so close to winning the gold medal! Heuristics What is 8x7x6x5x4x3x2x1? Average estimate of 2,250 whereas the median estimate for 1x2x3x4x5x6x7x8 is 512 (actual answer is 40,320) Anchoring and Adjustment Heuristic (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974) The tendency to judge the frequency or likelihood of an even by using a starting point (called an anchor) and then making adjustments up or down Example: Estimate what percentage of the United Nations is comprised of African countries Participants given either 10% or 65% as anchors and asked if higher or lower (e.g., more of less than 10% ) Avgerage estimate for the 10% anchor was 25% and the estimate for the 65% anchor was 45% Example: How much would you be willing to pay for a $10,000 used car? Cognitive Errors and Biases Confirmation Bias The tendency to notice and search for information that confirms one s beliefs and to ignore information that disconfirms one s beliefs Astrology and paranormal beliefs like telepathy can be explained by confirmation bias People of different ideological persuasions (e.g., liberal, conservative) often seek media outlets that cater to their views 14

15 Cognitive Errors and Biases Linda is 31 years old, single, outspoken, and very bright. She majored in philosophy. As a student, she was deeply concerned with issues of discrimination and social justice, and also participated in anti-nuclear demonstrations Which is more probable? 1. Linda is a bank teller 2. Linda is a bank teller and is active in the feminist movement 85% of those asked chose option 2 The probability of two events occurring together (in "conjunction") will always be less than or equal to the probability of either one occurring alone Conjunction Fallacy is the tendency to see an event as more likely as it becomes more specific because it is joined with elements that seem similar to events that are likely Cognitive Errors and Biases Illusory Correlation Perception of stronger relationship than actually exists e.g., Believing that professional athletes who are Black are dangerous Particularly likely when two rare events occur together Basis of superstitious behavior (e.g., basketball player believing their new socks are lucky because they played their best game) Gambler s Fallacy is a tendency to believe that a chance event is affected by previous events and will even out Suppose you flip a coin 10 times. You flip nine heads in a row. Is your next flip more likely to be: A. heads B. tails C. heads and tails are equally likely People often say either A or B but C is the correct answer Cognitive Errors and Biases A town has two hospitals. In the larger hospital about 45 babies are born every day; in the smaller hospital about 15 babies are born every day. In one year, each hospital recorded the number of days on which more than 60% of the babies born were boys. Which hospital recorded more such days? A. The large hospital B. The small hospital C. About the same number of days (within 5% of each other) Most people answer C but the right answer is B because people fail to consider that variability decreases as sample size increases Base Rate Fallacy is the tendency to ignore base rate information and be influenced by distinctive features of the case 15

16 Cognitive Errors and Biases False Consensus Effect Tendency to overestimate the number of other people who share one s opinions e.g., believing that most people have the same religious beliefs as you do False Uniqueness Effect Tendency to underestimate the number of other people who share one s prized characteristics or abilities e.g., people who exercise regularly underestimate the number of other people who also exercise regularly Cognitive Errors and Biases Statistical Regression Statistical tendency for extremes to be followed by less extreme performances that are closer to average e.g., Sports Illustrated jinx or the sophomore slump Illusion of Control A false belief that one can control chance situations e.g., Throwing dice softly for low numbers Magical Thinking Assumptions that don t hold up to logical scrutiny e.g., Being afraid to eat chocolate shaped like a bug or to wear a sweater worn by someone with AIDS Counterfactual thinking Imagining alternatives to past or present factual events or circumstances e.g., After getting in a car wreck, thinking what if I had gone home using a different route Are People Really Idiots? We make predictable errors Cognitive misers Heuristics are short cuts How serious are the errors On trivial events we use heuristics and automatic processing On important events we hopefully use conscious processing and make better decisions 16

17 Stanovich & West (2008) Thinking biases are often uncorrelated with cognitive ability Intelligent people display fewer biases when you tell them what the bias is and what they need to do to avoid it but if there is no advance warning that biased processing must be avoided, then more intelligent individuals are not much more likely to perform any better on the task than less intelligent people Reducing Cognitive Errors Reducing bias Debiasing: the use of controlled processing rather than automatic processing Consider multiple alternatives Rely less on memory Use explicit decision rules Search for disconfirmatory information Use meta-cognition 17