Social Psychology

Social Perception and Attribution

Attribution is the process of explaining the causes of behavior -- one's own and others'. Heider distinguished internal (dispositional) attributions (behavior caused by personality, ability, or attitude) from external (situational) attributions (behavior caused by environment, luck, or social pressure). Jones and Davis's correspondent inference theory explains when observers infer that a behavior reflects a stable disposition: behavior is attributed to disposition when it is freely chosen, produces non-common effects (unique consequences not produced by alternative actions), and is low in social desirability. Kelley's covariation model proposes three dimensions for attributing causality: consensus (do others behave similarly?), distinctiveness (does this person behave similarly across situations?), and consistency (does this person behave similarly over time?). Low consensus, low distinctiveness, and high consistency produce internal attribution; high on all three produces external attribution. The fundamental attribution error (FAE) is the tendency to overestimate dispositional causes and underestimate situational causes when explaining others' behavior. The actor-observer bias extends this: we attribute our own behavior to situations but others' behavior to dispositions. The self-serving bias refers to attributing personal successes to internal factors and failures to external factors.

Attitudes and Persuasion

An attitude is a learned tendency to evaluate objects, people, or issues favorably or unfavorably, with cognitive (beliefs), affective (feelings), and behavioral (actions) components. Attitudes do not always predict behavior; the theory of planned behavior (Ajzen) posits that behavioral intention is determined by attitude toward the behavior, subjective norms (perceived social pressure), and perceived behavioral control (self-efficacy about performing the behavior). Persuasion is the process of changing attitudes. The elaboration likelihood model (ELM; Petty and Cacioppo) describes two routes: the central route involves careful, thoughtful consideration of arguments (high elaboration) and produces strong, enduring attitude change; the peripheral route relies on superficial cues (attractiveness, credibility, number of arguments) and produces weaker, temporary change. Key factors in persuasion include source characteristics (credibility, attractiveness, similarity to audience), message characteristics (fear appeals, one-sided vs. two-sided arguments, primacy and recency effects), and audience characteristics (intelligence, self-esteem, prior attitude strength). The foot-in-the-door technique (small request first, then larger) exploits commitment-consistency; the door-in-the-face technique (large request first, then smaller) exploits reciprocity norms.

Cognitive Dissonance

Cognitive dissonance theory (Festinger) states that holding two or more inconsistent cognitions produces psychological discomfort (dissonance), motivating people to reduce the inconsistency. Dissonance is strongest when the behavior is freely chosen, has foreseeable negative consequences, and threatens self-concept. Reduction strategies include changing behavior, changing one of the dissonant cognitions (e.g., altering attitude: 'the task was actually interesting'), or adding new consonant cognitions (e.g., 'I learned valuable skills'). The insufficient justification effect (Festinger and Carlsmith, 1959) demonstrated that participants paid only $1 to lie about a boring task later rated it as more enjoyable than those paid $20 -- the $1 group lacked sufficient external justification, so reduced dissonance by changing their attitude. Post-decisional dissonance occurs after making a difficult choice; people enhance the chosen option and devalue the rejected one (spreading of alternatives). Effort justification refers to valuing outcomes more when they required significant effort to attain, as in severe initiations. Counterattitudinal advocacy occurs when people publicly advocate a position contrary to their private beliefs, which produces dissonance and often leads to attitude change toward the advocated position.

Conformity and Obedience

Conformity is changing one's behavior or beliefs to match those of others, driven by normative social influence (desire to gain approval and avoid rejection) or informational social influence (desire to be correct, using others as information sources). Asch's line judgment studies (1951) showed that about 75% of participants conformed at least once when confederates unanimously gave wrong answers; conformity increased with group size (up to 4-5 confederates) and decreased when even one dissenter broke unanimity. Obedience involves following direct commands, typically from an authority figure. Milgram's obedience experiments (1963) found that 65% of participants administered the maximum 450-volt shock when ordered by an experimenter, despite the learner's apparent distress. Key factors reducing obedience: proximity of the victim (same room), proximity of authority (remote instructions), legitimacy of authority (non-university setting), and presence of disobedient peers. These studies highlight that situational forces can override individual conscience. The bystander effect (Latane and Darley) demonstrates that the presence of others reduces helping behavior due to diffusion of responsibility and pluralistic ignorance (assuming nothing is wrong because others appear calm).

Prejudice, Stereotyping, and Discrimination

Stereotypes are generalized beliefs about a group (cognitive component). Prejudice is a negative attitude toward a group and its members (affective component). Discrimination is negative behavior directed at a group or its members (behavioral component). These can operate together or independently -- a person can hold stereotypes without prejudiced affect, or avoid discrimination while still harboring prejudice. Implicit bias refers to unconscious, automatic associations (measured by the Implicit Association Test, IAT) that can influence behavior without awareness. Theories of prejudice include realistic conflict theory (prejudice arises from competition over scarce resources -- Sherif's Robbers Cave experiment showed intergroup hostility reversed only by superordinate goals requiring cooperation), social identity theory (Tajfel: in-group favoritism and out-group derogation arise from the basic cognitive process of social categorization; mere assignment to arbitrary groups produces bias), and the contact hypothesis (Allport: intergroup contact reduces prejudice under conditions of equal status, common goals, intergroup cooperation, and institutional support). Stereotype threat (Steele) is the fear of confirming negative stereotypes about one's group, which impairs performance on stereotype-relevant tasks. Reducing prejudice requires both cognitive interventions (perspective-taking, counter-stereotypic examples) and structural changes (equal-status contact, cooperative interdependence).

Group Behavior

Groups influence individual behavior through several well-documented phenomena. Social facilitation (Zajonc) is the tendency for the presence of others to enhance performance on simple or well-learned tasks but impair performance on complex or novel tasks. The mechanism: arousal from the presence of others strengthens the dominant response -- correct on easy tasks, incorrect on hard tasks. Social loafing is the tendency for individuals to exert less effort when working in a group than when working alone, especially when individual contributions are not identifiable and the task is perceived as unimportant or easy. Deindividuation is the loss of self-awareness and individual accountability in group settings, leading to disinhibited behavior (facilitated by anonymity, group size, and arousal). Group polarization is the tendency for group discussion to strengthen the initially dominant point of view; groups make more extreme decisions than individuals' initial inclinations. Groupthink (Janis) is a mode of thinking in highly cohesive groups where the desire for unanimity overrides realistic appraisal of alternatives; symptoms include illusion of invulnerability, collective rationalization, self-censorship, and pressure on dissenters. Groupthink contributed to historical failures including the Bay of Pigs invasion and the Challenger disaster.

Prosocial Behavior and Aggression

Prosocial behavior is voluntary behavior intended to benefit others. Altruism is helping without expectation of personal benefit. The bystander intervention model (Latane and Darley) proposes five steps: notice the event, interpret it as an emergency, assume responsibility, know how to help, and decide to implement help. The bystander effect demonstrates that the presence of others decreases the likelihood that any one person will help. Empathy-altruism hypothesis (Batson) proposes that empathic concern for a person in need produces truly altruistic motivation to help, while personal distress produces egoistic motivation to reduce one's own discomfort. Evolutionary explanations for altruism include kin selection (helping relatives enhances inclusive fitness) and reciprocal altruism (helping non-relatives with expectation of future reciprocation). Aggression is behavior intended to harm another. Hostile aggression is driven by anger and aims to inflict pain; instrumental aggression is a means to achieve a goal (e.g., robbery). Biological factors include testosterone (correlated with aggression), serotonin (low levels associated with impulsivity and aggression), and amygdala activation. Frustration-aggression hypothesis (Dollard) proposes that frustration always leads to some form of aggression and aggression always results from frustration. Social learning theory (Bandura's Bobo doll experiment) demonstrates that aggression can be learned through observation and modeling.

How it works

Social behavior emerges from the interaction of situational forces, cognitive processes, and motivational drives. Attribution illustrates the cognitive shortcut of favoring dispositional over situational explanations -- the FAE is thought to result from the two-step process of automatic dispositional inference followed by effortful situational correction, which depletes when cognitive resources are low. Conformity and obedience demonstrate the power of situational pressure: normative influence activates regions associated with social pain (anterior cingulate cortex) when one deviates, while informational influence engages mentalizing networks. Cognitive dissonance operates through a negative arousal state (reflected in anterior cingulate activation) that motivates attitude change to restore consistency. Group processes like social facilitation and social loafing arise from the interaction of arousal (mere presence) and accountability (identifiability). Prejudice reduction through intergroup contact works by recategorizing 'us vs. them' into an inclusive 'we,' reducing amygdala threat responses to out-group faces.

How it works

Social behavior emerges from the interaction of situational forces, cognitive processes, and motivational drives. Attribution illustrates the cognitive shortcut of favoring dispositional over situational explanations -- the FAE is thought to result from the two-step process of automatic dispositional inference followed by effortful situational correction, which depletes when cognitive resources are low. Conformity and obedience demonstrate the power of situational pressure: normative influence activates regions associated with social pain (anterior cingulate cortex) when one deviates, while informational influence engages mentalizing networks. Cognitive dissonance operates through a negative arousal state (reflected in anterior cingulate activation) that motivates attitude change to restore consistency. Group processes like social facilitation and social loafing arise from the interaction of arousal (mere presence) and accountability (identifiability). Prejudice reduction through intergroup contact works by recategorizing 'us vs. them' into an inclusive 'we,' reducing amygdala threat responses to out-group faces.

Comparisons

• Biology (Neuroscience): The amygdala activates in response to out-group faces and during fear conditioning, relevant to implicit prejudice. Prefrontal cortex regulates these automatic responses. Anterior cingulate cortex activation signals dissonance and social pain from rejection or deviance.
• Sociology: Group behavior in psychology (social loafing, group polarization) complements sociological concepts of bureaucracy, groupthink at the organizational level, and discrimination as a structural phenomenon. The contact hypothesis intersects with sociological work on desegregation and institutional change.
• CARS (Critical Analysis): Social psychology experiments (Milgram, Asch, Zimbardo, Sherif) are common passage topics. Understanding the independent and dependent variables, confederate roles, and ethical considerations (deception, debriefing) of these classic studies is frequently tested.
• Clinical: Prejudice and stereotyping contribute to health disparities through stereotype threat, implicit bias in clinical decision-making, and differential treatment. Attribution biases can lead physicians to prematurely attribute patient symptoms to dispositional factors (personality, lifestyle) rather than investigating situational or medical causes.

Common confusions

• Conformity = Obedience. Conformity does not involve a direct command -- it is adjusting to match group norms (Asch). Obedience involves following explicit orders from an authority figure (Milgram). A question describing an authority figure issuing commands tests obedience, not conformity.
• Fundamental attribution error is always about negative behaviors. The FAE applies to both positive and negative behaviors -- it is the general tendency to over-attribute ANY behavior to disposition. The self-serving bias is distinct: attributing successes to self and failures to situation is specifically self-protective.
• Cognitive dissonance requires explicit inconsistency awareness. Dissonance can operate without conscious awareness of the inconsistency. The $1/$20 experiment worked precisely because participants were unaware that their attitude change was driven by dissonance reduction -- they believed they genuinely found the task interesting.
• Social loafing = social facilitation. Social loafing is reduced effort in group tasks (when individual effort is unidentifiable). Social facilitation is enhanced performance on simple tasks in the presence of others. They are opposite effects with different mechanisms: loafing from diffusion of responsibility, facilitation from arousal strengthening dominant response.
• Groupthink = group polarization. Groupthink (Janis) is a specific syndrome of defective decision-making in cohesive groups that suppresses dissent. Group polarization is the general tendency for group discussion to intensify pre-existing attitudes. A group making a riskier decision after discussion is polarization; a group failing to consider alternatives due to pressure for consensus is groupthink.
• Prejudice and discrimination are synonyms. Prejudice is an attitude (affective/evaluative), while discrimination is behavior. A person can be prejudiced without discriminating (suppressing biased behavior) or discriminate without personal prejudice (following institutional policies, such as historical redlining enforced by individuals without strong racial animus).

Quick review

• Attribution: internal (dispositional) vs external (situational). Kelley's covariation: consensus, distinctiveness, consistency. FAE = overestimate disposition, underestimate situation for others. Actor-observer bias: self = situational, others = dispositional. Self-serving bias: success = internal, failure = external.
• Attitudes: cognitive, affective, behavioral components. Theory of planned behavior: attitude + subjective norms + perceived behavioral control predict intention. ELM: central route (thoughtful, enduring) vs peripheral route (superficial, temporary). Foot-in-the-door (commitment) and door-in-the-face (reciprocity) persuasion techniques.
• Cognitive dissonance (Festinger): discomfort from inconsistent cognitions -- reduced by changing behavior, cognition, or adding justifications. $1/$20 experiment: insufficient justification produces attitude change. Post-decisional dissonance: enhance chosen, devalue rejected. Effort justification: value what we suffer for.
• Conformity: Asch's line study, 75% conformed at least once. Normative (approval) vs informational (correctness) influence. Obedience: Milgram, 65% to 450V. Key factors: proximity, authority legitimacy, peer behavior. Bystander effect: diffusion of responsibility, pluralistic ignorance.
• Prejudice (attitude), stereotyping (belief), discrimination (behavior). Implicit bias (IAT). Realistic conflict theory (Robbers Cave, superordinate goals). Social identity theory (in-group/out-group). Contact hypothesis (equal status, cooperation, shared goals, institutional support). Stereotype threat impairs performance.
• Group behavior: social facilitation (Zajonc: presence strengthens dominant response -- helps simple, hurts complex). Social loafing (reduced effort in group when unidentifiable). Deindividuation (loss of self-awareness in groups). Group polarization (discussion intensifies dominant view). Groupthink (Janis: unanimity overrides critical thinking).
• Prosocial: bystander intervention (5 steps: notice, interpret, assume responsibility, know how, act). Empathy-altruism hypothesis (Batson). Bystander effect = more people present = less help. Aggression: hostile (anger-driven) vs instrumental (goal-driven). Frustration-aggression hypothesis. Social learning (Bandura's Bobo doll).