Lecture 6: Lecture 6:

Social Perception IISocial Perception IIAttributions & Stereotypes

OutlineOutlineSocial Perception• Attributions

– Attribution Theories– Attributional biases

1. Fundamental Attribution error2. Actor- Observer Bias3. Attractiveness Bias4. Cognitive Heuristics (Availability bias)

• Stereotypes– Studying stereotypes– Stereotypes and attributions

We have discussed how we may be influenced by the presence of others (social influence)

But social psychology is also interested in how we think about others (social perception)

i.e., how we explain people’s behaviour, how we form beliefs and attitudes, and how our thoughts affect our behaviour

Social Perception: Social Perception: AttributionsAttributions

How do we explain people’s behaviour?

• We often find ourselves trying to figure out why people act in a particular way

Person vs. Situation Person vs. Situation AttributionsAttributions

• How do we decide whether behaviour is due to the actor’s personality, or whether anyone would do same thing in that situation?

• Fritz HeiderAttribution Theory• We tend to give a causal explanation

for someone’s behavior, often by crediting either internal dispositions or external situations

Kelley’s (1967) Covariation Theory

• In order for a factor to be the cause of behaviour, it must be present when the behaviour occurs, and absent when the behaviour does not occur.

1. Consensus

The extent to which other people react to the same stimulus or event in the same way as the person that we are considering

Do others regularly behave this way in this situation?

2. ConsistencyThe extent to which the person in question reacts to the stimulus or event in the same way on different occasions (i.e., across time)

Does this person regularly behave this way in this

situation?

3. DistinctivenessThe extent to which the person in question responds in the same manner to different stimuli or events

Does this person behave this way in many other

situations?

1. The Fundamental Attribution Error

The tendency for observers, when analysing another’s behaviour, to underestimate the impact of the situation and to overestimate the impact of personal disposition

e.g., The Standford Prison Study

Attributional BiasesAttributional Biases

Phil Zimbardo & colleagues

• Interested in examining why prisons were so degraded and violent

• Set up a prison in the basement of Stanford University

Experimental Studies of the Experimental Studies of the Fundamental Attribution ErrorFundamental Attribution Error

• Out of 70 applicants, 24 male (screened) participants took part in a 2 week study

• Randomly assigned to be either guards or prisoners

removed the obvious causes of brutality (i.e., sadistic tendencies in guards, hard-bitten criminal mentality)

The Stanford Prison Study The Stanford Prison Study (Haney, Banks, & Zimbardo, 1973)(Haney, Banks, & Zimbardo, 1973)

• Out of 70 applicants, 24 male (screened) participants took part in a 2 week study

• Randomly assigned to be either guards or prisoners

removed the obvious causes of brutality (i.e., sadistic tendencies in guards, hard-bitten criminal mentality)

• Out of 70 applicants, 24 male (screened) participants took part in a 2 week study

• Randomly assigned to be either guards or prisoners

removed the obvious causes of brutality (i.e., sadistic tendencies in guards, hard-bitten criminal mentality)

“The guards withheld food from those who wanted it; they forced food on those who went on a hunger strike. They subjected their prisoners to physical punishment—push-ups and sleep deprivation. They made the prisoners do stupid and degrading tasks—cleaning toilets with their bare hands. They put people in solitary confinement. They forced their prisoners to ask permission to use the bathroom, and they would sometimes deny permission, forcing them to use buckets in their cells. Thus they forced the prisoners to live in the smell of their own excrement…Most importantly, both guards and prisoners knew that but for the flip of a coin their places would have been reversed” Sabini (p.63)

• The prisoners and guards lost track of reality, as did Zimbardo and the other experimenters

• After 6 days, the experiment was called off

– Guards were escalating their abuse at night time

– Maslach questioned the morality of the prison

• The fundamental attribution error– Guards and prisoners had started off

equal, thus it was the power of the situation that led these ordinary people to act in an extraordinary manner

• Also has real-world applications– Iraq

So what did the study So what did the study demonstrate?demonstrate?

http://www.prisonexp.org to find out more about the Stanford Prison Experiment

Check out…

Why do we commit the fundamental attribution error?

• We tend to focus more on people than the situation (i.e., the person is more salient)

• We notice situational cues but give them less weight in our attributions

• We assume that the actions of others reflect their underlying characteristics. Then we correct (usually insufficiently) for situational factors

• Cultural factors also contribute

2. The Actor-Observer Bias

The tendency to attribute our own behaviour mainly to external (situational) causes but the behaviour of others mainly to internal (dispositional) causes.

Nisbett et al. (1973)• Asked male participants to write

about why they were attracted to:(i) their dates, (ii) their academic majors

• Repeated the exercise as if they were their best friend

FOUND: – Made more situational attributions about

why they were attracted to their dates & majors

– Made more dispositional attributions about why their friend was attracted to their date & major

Why do we commit the actor-observer bias?

• We are more aware of how the situation affects our behaviour (i.e., that we act differently according to the situation)

• BUT when we see others perform an action, we concentrate on the actor, not the situation—when we perform an action, we see the environment, not the person

3. The Attractiveness BiasWe are brought up to believe that what is beautiful is good….

A person’s physical appearance will also affect whether or not we attribute their behaviour to internal or external causes

•According to researchers, attractive people are typically judged as more intelligent, competent, sociable, and moral than less attractive people (Dion, 1986; Eagly & others, 1991)

•Clifford & Walster (1973)•Gave teachers report cards and photos of students

•Asked to rate their intelligence and achievement

•FOUND: Attractive kids were rated as brighter and more successful than unattractive kids even if they had the same report cards

•Adults attribute cause of unattractive child’s misbehavior to personality, and attractive child’s to situation (Dion, 1972)

•Being ugly has some nasty side effects…— Judges give longer prison sentences to unattractive people convicted of comparable crimes (Stewart, 1985)

— DOA: Emergency ward staff were more likely to try to resuscitate a person of pleasing appearance (i.e., well-dressed, young person, clean)

4. Cognitive heuristics

• What are heuristics? Mental shortcuts that are used to make judgements

• One type of heuristic is the availability heuristic

The Availability HeuristicA tendency to overestimate the odds that an event will occur by how easily instances of it pop to mind

Tversky & Kahneman (1973) • Asked people: Which is more common,

words that start with the letter r or words that contain r as the 3rd letter?

FOUND: • Although there are more words with r as

the 3rd letter, people guessed words that begin with r (because it is easier to bring to mind words in which r appears first)

RememberRememberOur attributions—whether situational or dispositional—can have real consequences

e.g., Political implications• Conservatives often attribute social

problems internally (“people generally get what they deserve,” “society is not to blame for crime, criminals are”)

• Liberals often attribute social problems to the situation

(“if you or I had to live with the same poor education, lack of opportunity, and discrimination, would we be any better off?”)

StereotypesStereotypes•What is a stereotype?

– A belief that associates a group of people with certain traits

– Not necessarily negative, but may have negative connotations

Studying Stereotypes3 levels of stereotypes in today’s research1. Public

– what we say to others about a group

2. Private – what we consciously think about a group, but

don’t say to others

3. Implicit – unconscious mental associations guiding our

judgments and actions without our conscious awareness

Priming: Participants are unaware that a stereotype is being activated, can’t work to suppress it

e.g., Bargh and his colleagues– Participants read word lists, some

lists include words like “grey,” “Bingo,” and “Florida”

– FOUND: Participants with “old” word lists walked to elevators significantly more slowly

Assessing Implicit Stereotypes