Norman Triplett (1897-1898) conducted the first social psychological experiment, in which he first "discovered" the social facilitation theory. The original theory suggested that people perform better on tasks when other people are around. The problem with this experiment is he lacked the handy use of SPSS, and because of modern statistical methods, researchers have recently found his original study to have non-significant results, thus making his study not so cool (Strube, 2005). The results of Triplett's original study showed that people did not in fact always perform better on tasks when other people were around, and instead they seemed to do better or worse, depending on the task and the individual. These contradictory results confused psychologists at first, up until Robert Zajonc (1965, 1980) conducted his own research showing a three step solution as to how social facilitation really works.
First, the presence of other creates an arousal which facilitates the behavior. Second, the arousal enhances the dominant response (the natural or default response) and last, the performance of the task at hand is dependent on whether or not it is simple or difficult for the performer. Using this new model of social facilitation, we can see that the presence of other does not always equate to someone performing better on a task, as the dominant response could be wrong or flawed. Therefore, if a person is not comfortable playing a sport because they just started to play, then putting 100 spectators is just going to make his/her performance worse. However, if you put a professional athlete in the same situation, then the presence of other is just going to fuel his/her performance.
I have seen the effects of social facilitation on myself. Back in middle school, I wasn't the biggest fan of any sport, but my school team really needed an extra defender for the upcoming soccer match, as the real player was absent for whatever reason. It wasn't a big game or anything, so they asked if I could be a temporary substitute. I had never played soccer at the time so I had no clue what I was doing, and I was just standing there looking really stupid, as all the players around me were moving around trying to get the ball. I'm not saying that I could have played much better without all those other people looking at me, but the presence of others definitely did not help my situation. It's funny when I think about it now, because I became a huge soccer fan later on.
Word Count: 423
References
Strube, M.J. (2005). What did Triplett really find? A contemporary analysis of the first experiment in social
psychology. American Journal of Psychology, 118, 271-286.
Triplett, N. (1897-1898). The dynamogenic factors in pacemaking and competition. American Journal of
Psychology, 9, 507-533.
Zajonc, R.B. (1965). Social facilitation. Science, 149, 269-274.
Zajonc, R.B. (1980). Compresence, In P.B Paulus (Ed.), Handbook of emotions (pp. 209-220). New
York. Guilford.
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
Thursday, April 11, 2013
Tradebook Blog
Mark Leary made, in my opinion, one of the greatest books I ever read. The Curse of the Self begins with Leary imagining himself giving a commencement address to his graduate students in which he explains that they will be the cause of their own unhappiness, as that is the natural design of the human mind (Leary, 2004). He explains the different theories that others have proposed regarding the differences between humans and all other animals, including the use of tools, language, and intelligence. Though we are far more advanced in these fields, he claims that the most striking difference between humans and animals is the ability to think consciously about ourselves, which is his definition of the "self" (Leary, 2004). In the very first part of the book, Leary explains why the self is the main reason why humans are far more advanced than every other animal, and the various positives about the self, including but not limited to our advanced decision making skills. Though the self is a great evolutionary adaptation, the entire rest of the book is focused on how the self is also the reason why humans face so many and various forms of suffering, that other animals could not even dream of comprehending, hence it is called The Curse of the Self. Throughout the book, Leary brings in hordes of research that supports his claims, and also gives great insight as to how these different mechanisms evolved. This is a great addition in my opinion, as he hypothesizes why these mechanisms were useful at the time, and now that times are far different than when these mechanisms first adapted, they are no longer relevant, and actually can cause psychological harm to people.
The reason I chose this book was because I learned about the self in my social psychology class, and the topic is probably my favorite in the field of psychology. I find the self-concept to be fascinating, and now that I have read this book I have a much better understanding of how it works, how it evolved and came to be the self as we know it now. This was a great choice, and though there were many other good books on the list, I really feel that The Curse of the Self wields information that is essential for not just people in academia, but for anyone who wants to gain a better understanding of the human mind. I highly recommend this book to anyone that has a serious interest in psychology, or to anyone that has intentions of gaining a greater understanding of human psychology. Even though Leary does bring in studies and concepts that the common person probably wouldn't get at first, he masterfully explains everything in detail in a very easy to understand language. He uses examples to illustrate each concept to the reader, sometimes even using personal examples so the readers can relate. I definitely recommend this book to everyone in my social psychology class, as even though we have discussed many of these concepts in class, Leary explains how they (plus others) add to this negative aspect in the self, as well as some hypotheses of their origin.
The reason I enjoyed reading The Curse of the Self so much was probably because the material it teaches is so applicable to everyday life. For example, there is an entire chapter of the book that is focused on how the self can make us miserable and depressed. One form of this is as we all know is worry. Worry can only occur in humans, because in order for one to worry about what might happen tomorrow or next week, the self is required (Leary, 2004). The problem with worrying is that it is mostly unnecessary as people tend to worry about events where the act of worrying does not, or can not change the outcome of the situation. I found this to be particularly applicable and important information that Leary shares in the book, because now I understand that worrying about a test, or any other unpredictable future situation isn't going to change the outcome whatsoever, thus making worrying a pointless thought process. One great example that Leary uses in the book connects the self to violent and aggressive behaviors. In the example, he explains that road rage occurs completely due to the self interpreting peoples' actions as directed against itself, therefore resulting in meaningless actions (such as cutting off, or not letting you merge into the lane) as personal attacks (Leary, 2004). He also goes on to explain that a) if someone does something that you think is disrespectful, it probably wasn't directed at you, and b) even if it was directed at you, getting angry is pointless as it doesn't solve the problem (Leary, 2004).
Dr. Mark Leary is a professor of psychology at Duke University, and is part of the APA as well as the Society for Psychology and Social Psychology. He was the former president of the International Society for Self and Identity, and was ranked in the top 25 most productive scholars in psychology by the Institute for Scientific Information (Leary, 2004). As you can probably tell by his credentials, if there was one person that could qualify to write this book, it would be him. By his explanations of each of the various topics discussed in the book, you can understand the depth of his knowledge on the subject. Also, as mentioned previously, the book is written very well, especially in the way Leary approaches the different topics, and sub-topics. Studies are brought in as evidence for every claim he makes, which goes to show that Leary is very scholarly.
Every part of the book was interesting to read in some way or another, but the part I enjoyed the most was when Leary started to explain tie the concepts of the self in with Buddhism and other Eastern religions/philosophy. Leary explained that all Buddhism really is, is a set of techniques (including but not limited to meditation) that are used to help the individual "quite" the self (Leary, 2004). Some of the Buddhist teachings explain that the self is the only thing that separates individuals, and when we lose the self we are all one, and at that point we reach the highest state of mind, also known as "nirvana". Many of the Buddhist teachings stemmed from Hinduism, which preaches very similar teachings, but in a different way. The main strength of the book is that it doesn't leave the reader puzzled as to deal with this curse that the self creates. Instead, Leary talks about the origins of the curse, the evidence to prove that these issues exist, as well as how to deal with many of the problems. He ends the book with 4 solutions that can be used to help prevent many of the negative attributes of the self. In a way, this book is the best self-help book you can get. Personally, I find that the way he explains how to overcome many of the negative emotional aspects that the self can cause was the most important section of the book, however people could benefit from the information concerning insomnia. He explains that insomnia is a "self-inflicted" phenomena, and can be cured by controlling the self-chatter that goes on during these periods (Leary, 2004).
I also learned very interesting information about the practice of Zen, that Leary briefly wrote about. I've always been fascinated with koans, which are short passages or stories that are meant to transcend rational meaning. Most of them are extremely confusing, as that is their nature, and because of this I've literally hurt my head trying to figure them out. Leary writes about the purpose of koans, which he explains is to stop the students of Zen to guide their interpretations using the self, and instead step back and look at it from every angle (Leary, 2004). The students' self is going to inevitably give up trying to find meaning in the koan, and in turn gains a better understanding of the world (Leary, 2004).
Honestly, there were no shortcomings to this book that I can think of. Perhaps some concepts might be too difficult for the layperson to understand, but other than that, there seems to be no flaw in this book at all. Anybody with at least a basic understanding of psychology should be able to read this book with ease. Not even the book itself is long, or the average chapter length. The book consists of 200 pages, and each chapter is only around 20 pages long, which makes it really easy to read in my opinion (I hate long chapters!).
If I could narrow this book down into one "take home" point then I would say that The Curse of the Self is a book that explains the origins, complications, and solutions of the human mind, the part of us that makes us the most unique creatures on the planet.
Word Count: 1502
Reference
Leary, M. (2004). The curse of the self: Self-awareness, egotism, and the quality of human life. New
York: Oxford University Press.
The reason I chose this book was because I learned about the self in my social psychology class, and the topic is probably my favorite in the field of psychology. I find the self-concept to be fascinating, and now that I have read this book I have a much better understanding of how it works, how it evolved and came to be the self as we know it now. This was a great choice, and though there were many other good books on the list, I really feel that The Curse of the Self wields information that is essential for not just people in academia, but for anyone who wants to gain a better understanding of the human mind. I highly recommend this book to anyone that has a serious interest in psychology, or to anyone that has intentions of gaining a greater understanding of human psychology. Even though Leary does bring in studies and concepts that the common person probably wouldn't get at first, he masterfully explains everything in detail in a very easy to understand language. He uses examples to illustrate each concept to the reader, sometimes even using personal examples so the readers can relate. I definitely recommend this book to everyone in my social psychology class, as even though we have discussed many of these concepts in class, Leary explains how they (plus others) add to this negative aspect in the self, as well as some hypotheses of their origin.
The reason I enjoyed reading The Curse of the Self so much was probably because the material it teaches is so applicable to everyday life. For example, there is an entire chapter of the book that is focused on how the self can make us miserable and depressed. One form of this is as we all know is worry. Worry can only occur in humans, because in order for one to worry about what might happen tomorrow or next week, the self is required (Leary, 2004). The problem with worrying is that it is mostly unnecessary as people tend to worry about events where the act of worrying does not, or can not change the outcome of the situation. I found this to be particularly applicable and important information that Leary shares in the book, because now I understand that worrying about a test, or any other unpredictable future situation isn't going to change the outcome whatsoever, thus making worrying a pointless thought process. One great example that Leary uses in the book connects the self to violent and aggressive behaviors. In the example, he explains that road rage occurs completely due to the self interpreting peoples' actions as directed against itself, therefore resulting in meaningless actions (such as cutting off, or not letting you merge into the lane) as personal attacks (Leary, 2004). He also goes on to explain that a) if someone does something that you think is disrespectful, it probably wasn't directed at you, and b) even if it was directed at you, getting angry is pointless as it doesn't solve the problem (Leary, 2004).
Dr. Mark Leary is a professor of psychology at Duke University, and is part of the APA as well as the Society for Psychology and Social Psychology. He was the former president of the International Society for Self and Identity, and was ranked in the top 25 most productive scholars in psychology by the Institute for Scientific Information (Leary, 2004). As you can probably tell by his credentials, if there was one person that could qualify to write this book, it would be him. By his explanations of each of the various topics discussed in the book, you can understand the depth of his knowledge on the subject. Also, as mentioned previously, the book is written very well, especially in the way Leary approaches the different topics, and sub-topics. Studies are brought in as evidence for every claim he makes, which goes to show that Leary is very scholarly.
Every part of the book was interesting to read in some way or another, but the part I enjoyed the most was when Leary started to explain tie the concepts of the self in with Buddhism and other Eastern religions/philosophy. Leary explained that all Buddhism really is, is a set of techniques (including but not limited to meditation) that are used to help the individual "quite" the self (Leary, 2004). Some of the Buddhist teachings explain that the self is the only thing that separates individuals, and when we lose the self we are all one, and at that point we reach the highest state of mind, also known as "nirvana". Many of the Buddhist teachings stemmed from Hinduism, which preaches very similar teachings, but in a different way. The main strength of the book is that it doesn't leave the reader puzzled as to deal with this curse that the self creates. Instead, Leary talks about the origins of the curse, the evidence to prove that these issues exist, as well as how to deal with many of the problems. He ends the book with 4 solutions that can be used to help prevent many of the negative attributes of the self. In a way, this book is the best self-help book you can get. Personally, I find that the way he explains how to overcome many of the negative emotional aspects that the self can cause was the most important section of the book, however people could benefit from the information concerning insomnia. He explains that insomnia is a "self-inflicted" phenomena, and can be cured by controlling the self-chatter that goes on during these periods (Leary, 2004).
I also learned very interesting information about the practice of Zen, that Leary briefly wrote about. I've always been fascinated with koans, which are short passages or stories that are meant to transcend rational meaning. Most of them are extremely confusing, as that is their nature, and because of this I've literally hurt my head trying to figure them out. Leary writes about the purpose of koans, which he explains is to stop the students of Zen to guide their interpretations using the self, and instead step back and look at it from every angle (Leary, 2004). The students' self is going to inevitably give up trying to find meaning in the koan, and in turn gains a better understanding of the world (Leary, 2004).
Honestly, there were no shortcomings to this book that I can think of. Perhaps some concepts might be too difficult for the layperson to understand, but other than that, there seems to be no flaw in this book at all. Anybody with at least a basic understanding of psychology should be able to read this book with ease. Not even the book itself is long, or the average chapter length. The book consists of 200 pages, and each chapter is only around 20 pages long, which makes it really easy to read in my opinion (I hate long chapters!).
If I could narrow this book down into one "take home" point then I would say that The Curse of the Self is a book that explains the origins, complications, and solutions of the human mind, the part of us that makes us the most unique creatures on the planet.
Word Count: 1502
Reference
Leary, M. (2004). The curse of the self: Self-awareness, egotism, and the quality of human life. New
York: Oxford University Press.
Tuesday, April 9, 2013
I Won't Do It!........Alright Fine.
People convince others to do things all the time, even when they don't really want to do it. This is known as compliance, which is the change in our behavior due to other people making requests (Kassin, Fein & Markus, 2011). There are three major techniques that people use to try to get others to comply to their requests. The first technique is known as the foot-in-the-door technique, which is when someone asks you to comply to a small request first, and then afterwards asks you to comply to a bigger request (Freedman & Fraser, 1966). The reasons this technique works is because of self-perception theory, as once the target has complied to the initial request, they change their self-image therefore making more susceptible to complying to the future larger request. The other reason this works is because of their commitment to the original request makes them more likely to commit to the future request.
The second technique is known as the door-to-the-face technique, where the persuader starts off by making a large request (that they have no intention of getting), and then works their way down to a smaller request that they originally intended (Cialdini et al, 1975). Because the second request is much more reasonable, the target is far more likely to comply. The reason this technique works so well is because of the contrast that the target perceives in the initial offer and the final offer. Also, many sports teams use this technique when trying to buy players from other teams, and then they work the offer down by using reciprocal concessions, where both teams are trading offers. Because of these offer trades, the team that inevitably gives up the player doesn't feel cheated in any way as they had as much as a role to play in the persuasion.
The last technique, and by far the most looked down upon, is known as the low-ball technique, where the target agrees to a deal that is very attractive, and then sometime later the persuader changes the terms of the deal (Cialdini et al, 1978). As you can tell, this is probably the sleaziest move that a person can do, and yet car salespeople and various other assholes are masters at it. The reason this technique works is because of the time in between the initial very attractive offer, and the later change in terms. Once the initial offer is committed to, the target is making a bunch of reasons as to why this is the best idea in his/her life. Once the asshole car dealer comes back and delivers the bad news, the target already has a bunch of justifications to maintain going through with the decision, and then has been low-balled (or kicked in the nuts, as I like to call it).
Though I didn't realize at the time that this was a social psychological compliance tactic, I have definitely used the foot-in-the-door technique against my mom. Way back when, my mom really didn't want to have any pets in the house, for whatever reason, but my brother and I did. How did we solve that problem you ask? By getting her to take us to the pet store so that we could "at least pet the dog" as we couldn't get one anyway. So she took us there, and we ended up leaving with a German Shepard puppy. I won...
Word Count: 564
References:
Bem, D. J. (1967). Self-Perception: An Alternative Interpretation of Cognitive Dissonance Phenomena.
Psychological Review, 74, 183-200.
The second technique is known as the door-to-the-face technique, where the persuader starts off by making a large request (that they have no intention of getting), and then works their way down to a smaller request that they originally intended (Cialdini et al, 1975). Because the second request is much more reasonable, the target is far more likely to comply. The reason this technique works so well is because of the contrast that the target perceives in the initial offer and the final offer. Also, many sports teams use this technique when trying to buy players from other teams, and then they work the offer down by using reciprocal concessions, where both teams are trading offers. Because of these offer trades, the team that inevitably gives up the player doesn't feel cheated in any way as they had as much as a role to play in the persuasion.
The last technique, and by far the most looked down upon, is known as the low-ball technique, where the target agrees to a deal that is very attractive, and then sometime later the persuader changes the terms of the deal (Cialdini et al, 1978). As you can tell, this is probably the sleaziest move that a person can do, and yet car salespeople and various other assholes are masters at it. The reason this technique works is because of the time in between the initial very attractive offer, and the later change in terms. Once the initial offer is committed to, the target is making a bunch of reasons as to why this is the best idea in his/her life. Once the asshole car dealer comes back and delivers the bad news, the target already has a bunch of justifications to maintain going through with the decision, and then has been low-balled (or kicked in the nuts, as I like to call it).
Though I didn't realize at the time that this was a social psychological compliance tactic, I have definitely used the foot-in-the-door technique against my mom. Way back when, my mom really didn't want to have any pets in the house, for whatever reason, but my brother and I did. How did we solve that problem you ask? By getting her to take us to the pet store so that we could "at least pet the dog" as we couldn't get one anyway. So she took us there, and we ended up leaving with a German Shepard puppy. I won...
Word Count: 564
References:
Bem, D. J. (1967). Self-Perception: An Alternative Interpretation of Cognitive Dissonance Phenomena.
Psychological Review, 74, 183-200.
Cialdini, R.B.; Cacioppo, J.T.; Bassett, R.; Miller, J.A. (1978). "Low-ball procedure for producing
compliance: Commitment then cost". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 36 (5): 463–
476. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.36.5.463
Cialdini, R.B.; Vincent, J.E., Lewis, S.K., Catalan, J., Wheeler, D., & Darby, B. L. (1975). "Reciprocal
concessions procedure for inducing compliance: the door-in-the-face technique.". Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology 31: 206–215.
Freedman, J.L. & Fraser, S.C. (1966). Compliance without pressure: The foot-in-the-door technique.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 195-202.
Kassin, S., Fein, S., & Markus, H. (2011). Social psychology. (8th ed., p. 268). Belmont: Wadsworth.
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
My Time is Worth More Than a Dollar!
Have you ever done something that totally goes against your attitudes or beliefs? Well, you're not alone, because people tend to perform behaviors that they feel are totally "not them". This happens so frequently in fact, that this phenomena is now one of the most widely studied in the field of social psychology. This is known as cognitive dissonance theory, which occurs when people have thoughts that are inconsistent with their beliefs, and as a result faces psychological and physiological tension that they strive to reduce (Festinger, 1957). One of the main ways people solve this tension is by changing their attitudes.
There are three dissonance paradigms in which cognitive dissonance can occur in people. First is induced compliance which occurs when someone convinces us to perform a behavior that is not in alignment with our attitudes, but this can only happen when the person feels that they have a say in the matter (Festinger, 1957). For example, we won't feel the dissonance if an authority figure is commanding us to perform the behavior, as then we would just convince ourselves that it was due to the situation that were forced in. The interesting part about induced compliance is that a mild reward is more powerful than a larger award (Festinger & Carlsmith, 1959). The exact opposite of this effect is known as insufficient deterrence, where mild punishments have a larger effect on attitude change than severe punishments. The second paradigm is known as effort justification which in general states that people come to love what they have suffered for (Aronson & Mills, 1959). For example, if I invest a lot of money in buying a car or a house, I will convince myself that I love it no matter how shitty it may actually be. The last paradigm is post-decision dissonance which occurs when we choose one of two options that we both want (Brehm, 1956). The way we deal with this dissonance is by over valuing the positives of the option we chose, and undervaluing the positives of the option we didn't choose.
We all know that everyone goes through dissonance at some point, some creating more sever tension than others. One of the times that really sticks out to me occurred when I was a freshman in college. I tried smoking cigarettes, and though I enjoyed the process of socializing with my friends, it created severe tension as I knew the entire long list of negative side effects that will inevitably occur. Because of this, I couldn't think about anything else, and I inevitably stopped smoking, as the attitudes I had were far to strong.
Word Count: 436
References
Aronson, E. & Mills, J. (1959). The effect of severity of initiation on liking for a group. Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59, 177-181
Brehm, J.W. (1956). Post-decision changes in desirability of alternatives. Journal of Abnormal and Social
Psychology, 52, 384-389
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA.
Festinger, L. & Carlsmith, J.M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced compliance. Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58, 203-210.
There are three dissonance paradigms in which cognitive dissonance can occur in people. First is induced compliance which occurs when someone convinces us to perform a behavior that is not in alignment with our attitudes, but this can only happen when the person feels that they have a say in the matter (Festinger, 1957). For example, we won't feel the dissonance if an authority figure is commanding us to perform the behavior, as then we would just convince ourselves that it was due to the situation that were forced in. The interesting part about induced compliance is that a mild reward is more powerful than a larger award (Festinger & Carlsmith, 1959). The exact opposite of this effect is known as insufficient deterrence, where mild punishments have a larger effect on attitude change than severe punishments. The second paradigm is known as effort justification which in general states that people come to love what they have suffered for (Aronson & Mills, 1959). For example, if I invest a lot of money in buying a car or a house, I will convince myself that I love it no matter how shitty it may actually be. The last paradigm is post-decision dissonance which occurs when we choose one of two options that we both want (Brehm, 1956). The way we deal with this dissonance is by over valuing the positives of the option we chose, and undervaluing the positives of the option we didn't choose.
We all know that everyone goes through dissonance at some point, some creating more sever tension than others. One of the times that really sticks out to me occurred when I was a freshman in college. I tried smoking cigarettes, and though I enjoyed the process of socializing with my friends, it created severe tension as I knew the entire long list of negative side effects that will inevitably occur. Because of this, I couldn't think about anything else, and I inevitably stopped smoking, as the attitudes I had were far to strong.
Word Count: 436
References
Aronson, E. & Mills, J. (1959). The effect of severity of initiation on liking for a group. Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59, 177-181
Brehm, J.W. (1956). Post-decision changes in desirability of alternatives. Journal of Abnormal and Social
Psychology, 52, 384-389
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA.
Festinger, L. & Carlsmith, J.M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced compliance. Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58, 203-210.
Tuesday, March 19, 2013
Too Many Words
People may have strong attitudes about certain views, and attitudes about other things that are not nearly as strong. Either way, there are methods of persuasion that can be implemented in order to change a person's attitude, but there are several factors that are involved that have to be considered. The main factor to consider when trying to persuade someone is the way in which they process the information that you are trying send them. People tend to use a process called elaboration (Greenwald, 1968), which can be defined as thinking about and teasing apart an argument, to varying degrees. According to the Elaboration Likelihood Model (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986), there are two major routes that people take when processing information, which are the central route, and the peripheral route respectively. People that take the central route to persuasion usually focus on the actual content of the message, and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses to the argument at hand. However, when people are not concerned and/or are otherwise busy, they tend to take the peripheral route to persuasion, and instead focus on the superficial cues that are presented to them. These cues can range from being body language to the length of the material. No matter what the case, the central route gives us a much better understanding of the argument contained in persuasive communication.
It might be a bold claim, but I would like to think that I take the central route to persuasion over the peripheral route. This may be due to my relatively recent understanding of research methods that I have gained over my college years, but overall I tend to look for statistics and the reporting of evidence when articles make claims, as opposed to looking at a long article and assuming that it has to be right. Especially when it comes to making important decisions, such as which president I'm going to vote for, I believe that taking the central route is crucial, as making decisions off of mindless cues is pointless. Taking the previous example (though I would consider myself to be more liberal than conservative), when making my decision to vote for president, I definitely took some of the time out of my day to really look into the different policies that each candidate promised to adopt. I also looked at the track records of both the candidates, especially that of President Obama, in order to see if their previous statements held any validity.
Word Count: 411
References
Greenwald, A. G. (1968). Cognitive learning, cognitive response to persuasion, and attitude change. In A. G.
Greenwald, T. C. Brock, and T. M. Ostrom (Eds.), Psychological foundations of attitudes (pp. 147-
170). New York: Academic Press
Petty, R.E., & Cacioppo, J.T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes
to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag
It might be a bold claim, but I would like to think that I take the central route to persuasion over the peripheral route. This may be due to my relatively recent understanding of research methods that I have gained over my college years, but overall I tend to look for statistics and the reporting of evidence when articles make claims, as opposed to looking at a long article and assuming that it has to be right. Especially when it comes to making important decisions, such as which president I'm going to vote for, I believe that taking the central route is crucial, as making decisions off of mindless cues is pointless. Taking the previous example (though I would consider myself to be more liberal than conservative), when making my decision to vote for president, I definitely took some of the time out of my day to really look into the different policies that each candidate promised to adopt. I also looked at the track records of both the candidates, especially that of President Obama, in order to see if their previous statements held any validity.
Word Count: 411
References
Greenwald, A. G. (1968). Cognitive learning, cognitive response to persuasion, and attitude change. In A. G.
Greenwald, T. C. Brock, and T. M. Ostrom (Eds.), Psychological foundations of attitudes (pp. 147-
170). New York: Academic Press
Petty, R.E., & Cacioppo, J.T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes
to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag
Thursday, March 7, 2013
Silence
I decided to choose being extremely introverted for a day in order to observe the reactions of the people, especially my friends’ reactions to this change in my behavior. I chose this particular dimension because I consider myself usually to be very outgoing and outspoken. One of the main reasons for this is because I would consider my self-monitor (Snyder, 1987) to be on the higher end of the spectrum, and because of this I have many different groups of friends that I would say I am close to, many of which probably don’t even know of the others’ existence, therefore there were many different reactions that I could record. Changing this particular dimension would mean that I went a day being very quiet, and not talking a lot even to my close friends, which goes against my self-concept as I am definitely schematic for these traits (Markus, 1977). Since for most of the day I was dealing with people that I am close to. I was seeking self-verification (Swann, 1987), which made me able to be introverted for such a long time.
Implementing this change was not easy for me, but after a couple of hours through the day I got the hang of it. At the start of the day I knew what I was supposed to be doing, but I didn’t really know how to go about it doing it. I would have conversations with my roommate or my neighbors, and I would try to convince myself that this is not the type of situation that I could be introverted, when in reality this trait would be evident in every part of daily life. As I began to realize this, I slowly started to become more and more shy, stopped talking so much, and by 11:00 AM I was almost completely silent. For example, by the time one of my classes came around (a class that I usually participate in regularly) I didn’t say a word until the professor started to call me out and ask me questions. Even then I would try to answer her questions in the least amount of words possible, and in what might as well be whispers. She probably thought I was having a bad day.
Other than my professor, almost all my friends noticed my change in behavior. After my initial interactions with my friends, when I was trying to get into character, I immediately started to switch gears. I also started to implement changes to my non-verbal behaviors, such as looking down when I walk, as opposed to looking straight, and taking faster and shorter steps, in order for the introvertedness to be more apparent. At lunch, I was eating at a table with my friends and I did not start or participate in any discussion whatsoever. They were quite confused by this, and in the corner of my eye I could see them trading strange looks as I continued to stare at my food. A couple of time they asked me what was wrong as they assumed that I was extremely stressed and/or had something on my mind.
I usually play FIFA (a soccer game) daily, with another group of friends, and as you might imagine,it usually gets very loud and competitive. This time however, I tried to say as little as possible which resulted in a very interesting gaming session. What is usually a profanity fest was instead a room filled with the sound of awkward silence, as I just sat there playing and not saying a word. I’m not too sure how they interpreted my change in behavior. I mean, they couldn’t have attributed it to stress as I was nonchalantly playing a videogame with them for an hour. Either way, they definitely took notice and didn’t know how to respond.
Before getting into the role, I have to admit I was pretty nervous because I anticipated the task to be much harder than it actually was. Thankfully that day I didn’t have much work to do for my classes, as studies have shown that under cognitive load, it is very hard to change self-presentation strategies (Schlenker, 2003). As mentioned earlier, it took me a few hours to fully be introverted, and even after I got into character I felt it difficult to maintain at first. At the end of the day, however, I got used to being passive and I felt that I could keep going if I had to (thankfully I didn’t). At the end of the day I was able to return back to being my normal self in an instant, because as much as I got used to playing someone else, I really wanted to go back to being me.
I would say that I learned quite a bit about myself and human behavior after this experience, especially about the relationship between the self-monitor and whether or not a person is extroverted or introverted. The way I see it, the higher a person’s self-monitor is the easier it is for them to be extroverted, and vice versa. I personally favor being extroverted as it makes it easier to form plenty of different close relationships which in my opinion leads to a much greater and more diverse social life. Though some people may say that this trait means that I am “fakey” or something along those lines, I just see it as being extremely adaptive to various situations, and is much more beneficial than it is negative.
From this experience I learned that the self-concept can be changed with time and effort. The self concept is always changing with experience (cite) and even though I was changing a trait that I was particularly schematic for, after a while I would start to find myself introverted. Even though I feel this is the case, because the trait that I was manipulating was so important to my self-concept, I was able to change back with ease, which goes to show that important traits are probably much harder to fully change than those that are not. I would also go as far to say that those with low self-monitors will have a much harder time trying to change traits that are important to them.
Word Count: 1042
References
Markus, H. (1997). Self-schemata and processing information about the self. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 35, 63-78.
Schlenker, B.R. (2003). Self-presentation. In M.R. Leary & J.P. Tangney (Eds.), Handbook of self and
identity (pp.492-518). New York: Guilford.
Snyder, M. (1987). Public appearances/private realities: The psychology of self-monitoring. New
York: Freeman.
Swann, W.B., Jr. (1987). Identity negotiation: Where two roads meet. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 53, 1038-1051.
Implementing this change was not easy for me, but after a couple of hours through the day I got the hang of it. At the start of the day I knew what I was supposed to be doing, but I didn’t really know how to go about it doing it. I would have conversations with my roommate or my neighbors, and I would try to convince myself that this is not the type of situation that I could be introverted, when in reality this trait would be evident in every part of daily life. As I began to realize this, I slowly started to become more and more shy, stopped talking so much, and by 11:00 AM I was almost completely silent. For example, by the time one of my classes came around (a class that I usually participate in regularly) I didn’t say a word until the professor started to call me out and ask me questions. Even then I would try to answer her questions in the least amount of words possible, and in what might as well be whispers. She probably thought I was having a bad day.
Other than my professor, almost all my friends noticed my change in behavior. After my initial interactions with my friends, when I was trying to get into character, I immediately started to switch gears. I also started to implement changes to my non-verbal behaviors, such as looking down when I walk, as opposed to looking straight, and taking faster and shorter steps, in order for the introvertedness to be more apparent. At lunch, I was eating at a table with my friends and I did not start or participate in any discussion whatsoever. They were quite confused by this, and in the corner of my eye I could see them trading strange looks as I continued to stare at my food. A couple of time they asked me what was wrong as they assumed that I was extremely stressed and/or had something on my mind.
I usually play FIFA (a soccer game) daily, with another group of friends, and as you might imagine,it usually gets very loud and competitive. This time however, I tried to say as little as possible which resulted in a very interesting gaming session. What is usually a profanity fest was instead a room filled with the sound of awkward silence, as I just sat there playing and not saying a word. I’m not too sure how they interpreted my change in behavior. I mean, they couldn’t have attributed it to stress as I was nonchalantly playing a videogame with them for an hour. Either way, they definitely took notice and didn’t know how to respond.
Before getting into the role, I have to admit I was pretty nervous because I anticipated the task to be much harder than it actually was. Thankfully that day I didn’t have much work to do for my classes, as studies have shown that under cognitive load, it is very hard to change self-presentation strategies (Schlenker, 2003). As mentioned earlier, it took me a few hours to fully be introverted, and even after I got into character I felt it difficult to maintain at first. At the end of the day, however, I got used to being passive and I felt that I could keep going if I had to (thankfully I didn’t). At the end of the day I was able to return back to being my normal self in an instant, because as much as I got used to playing someone else, I really wanted to go back to being me.
I would say that I learned quite a bit about myself and human behavior after this experience, especially about the relationship between the self-monitor and whether or not a person is extroverted or introverted. The way I see it, the higher a person’s self-monitor is the easier it is for them to be extroverted, and vice versa. I personally favor being extroverted as it makes it easier to form plenty of different close relationships which in my opinion leads to a much greater and more diverse social life. Though some people may say that this trait means that I am “fakey” or something along those lines, I just see it as being extremely adaptive to various situations, and is much more beneficial than it is negative.
From this experience I learned that the self-concept can be changed with time and effort. The self concept is always changing with experience (cite) and even though I was changing a trait that I was particularly schematic for, after a while I would start to find myself introverted. Even though I feel this is the case, because the trait that I was manipulating was so important to my self-concept, I was able to change back with ease, which goes to show that important traits are probably much harder to fully change than those that are not. I would also go as far to say that those with low self-monitors will have a much harder time trying to change traits that are important to them.
Word Count: 1042
References
Markus, H. (1997). Self-schemata and processing information about the self. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 35, 63-78.
Schlenker, B.R. (2003). Self-presentation. In M.R. Leary & J.P. Tangney (Eds.), Handbook of self and
identity (pp.492-518). New York: Guilford.
Snyder, M. (1987). Public appearances/private realities: The psychology of self-monitoring. New
York: Freeman.
Swann, W.B., Jr. (1987). Identity negotiation: Where two roads meet. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 53, 1038-1051.
Tuesday, February 26, 2013
All The Pieces Matter
Most people tend to be completely oblivious to the impact that a situation can have on the way a person behaves. For example, a person may seem to be very timid and quite when you first meet him/her, but is only acting that way because they are stressed for an exam coming up, or maybe because they are feeling ill. On any other day this person wouldn't stop talking, and actually could be pretty annoying. The fact is, we tend to make personal attributions about a person's behavior first, and we sometimes fail to even consider the situational attributions that could have occurred. This error of not considering the situational attributions is known as the fundamental attribution error (Ross, 1977). We usually draw inferences on other peoples' personalities immediately (Uleman,1987), and if we are not preoccupied, and cognitively busy in any other way, we take the situation into account (Gilbert et al, 1989). Since noticing the effects of a situation on behavior is the only step that takes cognitive effort, we can easily leave it out. Another interesting and important point about this error, is how pervasive it is in Western cultures, as opposed to non-Western cultures. For example, a cross cultural study shows that Indians tend to attribute behavior to the context in which they occurred, as opposed to Americans that attributed the behavior to the dispositions of the individual (Miller, 1984)
Living in two very culturally different countries has definitely shed light on the fundamental attribution error. I was born in the United States, and lived here for most of my life, so I am subject to committing the fundamental attribution error, but in India (where I moved to when I was 12), as discussed earlier, people tend to take the situation into account. For example, certain teachers would be complete assholes every now and then, and I would assume that they just had a short temper, or maybe even bi-polar disorder. Whenever I would talk about it to my friends, they would attribute it to the situation rather than the teacher themselves, saying that perhaps they were having a bad day, or any number of external factors that could have contributed to their behavior. I didn't realize this at the time, but making the fundamental attribution error could be quite detrimental in the way I see others.
Word Count: 394
References
Gilbert, D. T. (1989). Thinking lightly about others: Automatic components of the social inference process.
S J. Uleman & J. Bargh (Eds.),Unintended Thought: Limits of Awareness, Intention and Control.
New York: Guilford Press.
Miller, J.G. (1984). Culture and the development of everyday social explanation. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 46, 981-978.
Ross, L., Greene, D., & House, P. (1977). The false consensus phenomenon: An attributional bias in self-
perception and social-perception processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 279-
301.
Uleman, J.S (1987). Consciousness and control :The case of spontaneous trait inferences. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 13(3), 337-354. doi: 10.1177/0146728133004
Living in two very culturally different countries has definitely shed light on the fundamental attribution error. I was born in the United States, and lived here for most of my life, so I am subject to committing the fundamental attribution error, but in India (where I moved to when I was 12), as discussed earlier, people tend to take the situation into account. For example, certain teachers would be complete assholes every now and then, and I would assume that they just had a short temper, or maybe even bi-polar disorder. Whenever I would talk about it to my friends, they would attribute it to the situation rather than the teacher themselves, saying that perhaps they were having a bad day, or any number of external factors that could have contributed to their behavior. I didn't realize this at the time, but making the fundamental attribution error could be quite detrimental in the way I see others.
Word Count: 394
References
Gilbert, D. T. (1989). Thinking lightly about others: Automatic components of the social inference process.
S J. Uleman & J. Bargh (Eds.),Unintended Thought: Limits of Awareness, Intention and Control.
New York: Guilford Press.
Miller, J.G. (1984). Culture and the development of everyday social explanation. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 46, 981-978.
Ross, L., Greene, D., & House, P. (1977). The false consensus phenomenon: An attributional bias in self-
perception and social-perception processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 279-
301.
Uleman, J.S (1987). Consciousness and control :The case of spontaneous trait inferences. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 13(3), 337-354. doi: 10.1177/0146728133004
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)