{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

PSY 161 exam 2 review

PSY 161 exam 2 review - Social Psychology and Individual...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Social Psychology and Individual Differences Unit 2 -Person/Situation debate set aflame by Walter Mischel’s 1968 book “Personality and Assessment” -4 critiques 1. If traits exist, there should be consistency in behavior across situations – traits should be highly correlated with the behavior that they’re supposed to account for and be able to predict said behavior 2. Research found that traits predict behavior at +.30 (personality coefficient) -not very strong correlation 3. Little consistency - +.30 known about before Mischel but it was assumed to be due to a measuring problem. Mischel showed that it was the reality 4. The consistency that people thought they saw is not really there – due to 2 biases a. Perceptual bias – you interpret a person’s ambiguous behavior in the context of your expectations b. Sampling bias – you forget that you only see people in certain situations so you assume consistencies in behavior that’s not actually there -book questioned trait validity -Rebuttals from the Trait Perspective 1. +.30 is still important – not as small as you think – predictions is medicine are often made with much less -ex: aspirin/experimental drug 2. Aggregation – needed for a high correlation between traits and behavior -ex: diary study/multiple choice exams 3. Genotype/phenotype distinction – outward behavior may be different even if the underlying purpose is the same -ex: taking cookies vs. not taking cookies 4. Snyder and Steve – say some people are consistent and others are not – moderate correlation may be the result of the average of the two *High self monitors – conform/behave according to the situation and social norms (chameleon) – inconsistent *Low self monitors – true to self regardless of situation – consistent -Situationism – situation determines behaviors -Dynamic Interactionism – people are active, proactive agents that select situations to get into and change situations that they are in -3 types: 1. Proactive – people select themselves into situations and create environments for themselves 2. Evocative – people’s presence in a situation evokes certain responses from others and creates a certain situation for themselves 3. Manipulation – same as evocation but intentional – your presence in a situation changes it
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
-Social cognition – applying cognitive psychology to the social world -Assumptions: 1. We are motivated to make sense of the world and to understand what we see 2. The world is loaded with more information than we can process 3. We have limited capacity to attend to information – “cognitive miser” 4. In processing info, we greatly simplify/selectively attend so we can understand - 3 types of simplification strategies 1. Dispositional inference biases: a. Dispositional inference bias – behavior seen as cause by a person’s personality b. Fundamental attribution error – bias toward person based inferences instead of
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 8

PSY 161 exam 2 review - Social Psychology and Individual...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon bookmark
Ask a homework question - tutors are online