|
This is a Quizlet of all the studies in this option. https://quizlet.com/_7qq3ob?x=1jqt&i=1nhhis I recommend setting your own nicknames to these studies so you can easily remember it. I found it really useful when I am on the subway or just waiting around to bring it up and refresh myself on the details.
This is an excel of the studies. The way I use excel is that I will turn the text colour of some of the information to white eg. leave only the name of the study. Next, I will try and actively recall the missing informations. I will ask myself what goes in this box eg. Aim of Newcomer(usually out loud because it helps me think) and then check in the top 'formula bar' in the expanded form(press the right arrow). Then I will change the memorized level to high(h), medium(m) or low(l) so I know what I know and what I can work on. I recommend downloading a copy of this excel, change the nicknames to your own, use the memorized level column and this overall method. |
| ||
*Note that the IB does not require the year of the studies. The year mentioned are just for references just in case you wanted to do some more research on them and find the original paper or other sources.
**These are super summarized forms of these studies
***This is not an extensive list of all the possible studies, these are the studies which I remembered.
****No studies on Social Responsibility. Sorry
**These are super summarized forms of these studies
***This is not an extensive list of all the possible studies, these are the studies which I remembered.
****No studies on Social Responsibility. Sorry
STUDIES OF human relationship option
Formation of personal relationship: BIO
Fisher et al (2005)
Nickname: Fishing for photos
Aim: To investigate if there are specific neural mechanisms associated with romantic love
Procedure: Conducted a semi-structured interview to establish the duration and intensity of participants' feeling. Completed Likert scale questionnaire that measured traits related to love. fMRI: looked at photo for 30s then neutral photo 6 times.
Results: Specific pattern of activation in the brain in response to photo of loved ones.
Activation was prominent in dopamine-rich brain areas. More passionate = more active the reward system
Conclusion: Dopaminergic activity plays a role in feelings of romantic love.
Other topic: Neurotransmitter
Zhou et al(2014)
Nickname: Urine affects gender identity?
Aim: To see if androstadienone(M) and estratetraenol(F) influenced sexual behaviour
Procedure: Asked to watch stick figures walk and determine their gender while being exposed to cloves with androstadienone(M), estratetraenol(F)or none.
Results: Androstadienone, straight females and gay males viewed the stick as more masculine and vice versa.
Conclusion: The corresponding pheromone has an effect of sexual behaviour
Other topic: Neurotransmitter
Ditzen et al (2009)
Nickname: Arguing couples
Aim: To investigate the possible role of oxytocin in how couples discuss a contentious(likely to cause argument) issue
Procedure: Each couple received either oxytocin or placebo nasally. Videotaped as they engaged in a discussion which will lead to an argument. Level of cortisol in saliva was measured.
Results: Oxytocin improved communication and lowered cortisol.
Conclusion: Oxytocin improved communication and lowered cortisol.
Other topic: Hormones
Wedekind (1995)
Nickname: T-shirt
Aim: To figure out if males’ Major Histocompatibility Complex (MHC, immune gene) affect mate choice in female
Procedure: Participants was typed for their MHC. Males were asked to wear a T-shirt for 2 night. No perfume soap, smoking, drinking, sex, females were asked to prepare their noses with a nasal spray and to sensitize their smell. Asked females to rank the smell of 7 shirts kept in a cardboard box in a room for intensity and pleasantness alone. 3/7 boxes with MHC similar. 1 shirt was control; not worn.
Results: More pleasant with dissimilar own genes. Odours of dissimilar reminded the women more often of their actual or former mates.
Conclusion: MHC or linked genes influence human mate choice.
Other topic: Genetics, Pheromones
Ronay and von Hippel (2010)
Nickname: Skateboarder
Aim: To determine if men would take greater risks in the presence of an attractive female. If testosterone played a role in this behaviour.
Procedure: Participants were asked to do one easy trick and one difficult trick which they did 10 times each. Did it again but in front of the same male researcher or an attractive female (attractiveness based on 20 males rating photo). Coded for success, crash landing or aborted attempt. Also, saliva samples were tested for testosterone + HR before and throughout
Results: Greater risk on difficult tricks in presence of the female researcher. Aborted fewer times. Testosterone levels were higher for female. No diff in HR.
Conclusion: Testosterone may have played a role in facilitating the risk-taking behaviour of the men.
Other topic: Hormones
Buss(1989)
Nickname: Pre- programmed love
Aim: To investigate cross-cultural similarities and diff in mate preferences in males and females.
Procedure: 37 samples, over 10,000 participants. Survey from 33 countries. Asked preferred age to get married, desired age diff, number of children. Rate 19 characteristics eg. Character, intelligence, in how desirable in mate. Survey were translated into language and back using 3 translators peer checking.
Results: Females wanted 'good financial prospect' . Supports evolutionary explanation of attraction because females try to maximize the survival of their children. Males valued 'physical attractiveness'. Support evolution that men want good fertility. Males wanted younger females; means more fertile. Females wanted older males, more maturity or experience.
Conclusion: Preference were consistent across cultures and fit well into the evolutionary explanation of attraction. Females seek resources. Male look for fertile.
Other topics: Evolution
Formation of personal relationships: COG
Walster/Hatfield et al(1966)
Nickname: Matching hypothesis
Aim: To investigate whether people are more likely to date someone of similar physical attractiveness
Procedure: Uni students were asked to put info into profile and questionnaire for matched dates. Four confederates secretly rated their physical attractiveness for few secs. Randomly assigned to date. Attitude toward their dates was assessed during intermission also after asked if dating for real
Results: Attractive were harsher and wanted less to date non-attractive. However, non-attractive wanted to date attractive.
Conclusion: Matching hypothesis was not supported. Would go after more attractive even if not.
Markey and Markey(2007)
Nickname: Similarity attraction model
Aim: To investigate how similarity affects how people choosing a partner
Procedure: Questionnaire describe their psychological characteristics, values and attitudes of their ideal romantic partner, then themselves.
Results: Couples described themselves similar to what their partner looked like. Couples who have the loving relationship are similar on some characteristics but not all
Conclusion: It is advantageous to have a partner who is similar to you but also a bit different.
Role of communication in personal relationships
Gottman(1989)
Nickname: Gottman's Four Horses of the Apocalypse
Aim: Tries to predict how relationship will unfold.
Procedure: Longitudinal research using observation, questionnaires and interviews. Biometric data also collected at the same time.
Results: Evaluation: Large rich data - Physiological + self-reported data. Good variety sample - straight and gay couples. Sample was made of couples who were close to ending their relationship, so these attributes would be really bad and cannot be generalized to starting off relationships. Ethics: last resort, but not providing counseling
Conclusion:
Sheldon (2009)
Nickname: Social Penetration theory on Facebook
Aim: To investigate self-disclosure, social attraction, predictability and trust as predictors of Facebook relationship
Procedure: Questionnaire. When answering about interactions with other individual online to think about the person they talk to the most on Facebook.
Results: Perception of attraction drives self- disclosure eg. Number of topics. Increased disclosure associated with higher predictability hence more trust. Supports uncertainty reduction theory. More talk = less uncertainty = more like
Conclusion: People on Facebook initially disclose to the people they like. This leads to more predictability which increases trust, therefore more self-disclosure and then more liking.
Other topic: Digital technology
Stratton (2003)
Nickname: Attribution theory
Aim: to observe attributional styles in troubled families that went for help.
Procedure: Analyzed films of family therapy sessions from 8 families( w. stepparents and adoptive parents + whole nuclear) Interactions were coded for attribution behaviour.
Results: Parents often used attribution = children cause bad outcome. All parents made more dispositional attributions for their children than themselves. -ve behaviour of children were described as controllable more often then - ve behaviour of parents.
Conclusion: Troubled family had attribution style was 'blamed children'. Distress with associated with -ve(blaming) attributions.
Explanation for why relationships change or end
Flora and Seguin (2003)
Nickname: Satisfaction
Aim: To examine how perception of relational history predicted relational well-being in couples
Procedure: Relationship well-being (satisfaction and stability) measured 2 times, 6 months in between. semi-structured interview. Coding scheme was used. Questionnaire completed alone about relationship development breadth( completing specific behaviour to advance relationship eg. sex, thinking about them etc.)
Results: Break-up and lower satisfaction at time 2 were related to little breadth and -ve oral history appraising.
Conclusion: Variety of experiences are necessary for long-lasting relationship.
Gottman(1989)
Nickname: Gottman's Four Horses of the Apocalypse
Aim: Tries to predict how relationship will unfold.
Procedure: Longitudinal research using observation, questionnaires and interviews. Biometric data also collected at the same time.
Results: Evaluation: Large rich data - Physiological + self-reported data. Good variety sample - straight and gay couples. Sample was made of couples who were close to ending their relationship, so these attributes would be really bad and cannot be generalized to starting off relationships. Ethics: last resort, but not providing counseling
Conclusion:
Cooperation and Competition
Sherif ( 1961)
Nickname: Robbers Cave
Aim: To test realistic conflict theory, group conflict, -ve prejudices, stereotypes
Procedure: 3 stages. 1. In-group formation: Got 22 11 years old boys(middle class, same educational level, protestant, did not know each other) went to summer camp. They didn't know the existence of the other group. Produced in-groups by doing bonding activities. 2. Friction: Figured out the existence of the other group. Production of conflict by competitive activities eg. baseball, tug of war. Prizes were given to the winning team, no prizes to the losers. They refused to eat in the same dining hall, name calling started and singing offending songs, had riots. 3. Integration: attempt to bring about cooperation between the two groups by solve problems such as water shortage together and pay and decide a movie.
Results: When new people meet together, they will still be able to form hierarchy. Friction phase: conflicts produced stereotypes for out-group. When conflicting group are brought together with a common goal, they tend to work together to reach superordinate goal.
Conclusion: Tyerman and Spencer(1983) - UK sample couldn’t create the group friction. May be cultural.
Other topics: Prejudice and Conflict resolution
De Dreu et al(2012)
Nickname: Oxytocin is not a friend
Aim: To investigate how oxytocin affects cooperation
Procedure: Modified version of the prisoner's dilemma game.
Results: After taking oxytocin, participants were more likely to pre-emptively compete with other groups out of fear that other would start first. Oxytocin engaged defense mood
Conclusion: Oxytocin increases cooperation with in-group and increases competition with out-group
Other topics: Hormones
Gabrenya et al(1985)
Nickname: US vs Taiwan
Aim: To test how individualistic vs collectivistic culture cooperate
Procedure: Schoolchildren from US(individualistic) and Taiwan(collectivistic) were asked to do an auditory task that required counting tone patterns either alone or in pairs
Results: US children showed lack of cooperation when in pairs, but when alone, put in lots of effort. Taiwan children worked better in pairs.
Conclusion: Culture plays a role in cooperation
Other topics: Culture
Prejudice and discrimination
Sherif ( 1961)
Nickname: Robbers Cave
Aim: To test realistic conflict theory, group conflict, -ve prejudices, stereotypes
Procedure: 3 stages. 1. In-group formation: Got 22 11 years old boys(middle class, same educational level, protestant, did not know each other) went to summer camp. They didn't know the existence of the other group. Produced in-groups by doing bonding activities. 2. Friction: Figured out the existence of the other group. Production of conflict by competitive activities eg. baseball, tug of war. Prizes were given to the winning team, no prizes to the losers. They refused to eat in the same dining hall, name calling started and singing offending songs, had riots. 3. Integration: attempt to bring about cooperation between the two groups by solve problems such as water shortage together and pay and decide a movie.
Results: When new people meet together, they will still be able to form hierarchy. Friction phase: conflicts produced stereotypes for out-group. When conflicting group are brought together with a common goal(, they tend to work together to reach superordinate goal.
Conclusion: Tyerman and Spencer(1983) - UK sample couldn’t create the group friction. May be cultural.
Other topics: Prejudice and Conflict resolution
Harris and Fiske(2006)
Nickname: Homeless people
Aim: To investigate the role of the prefrontal cortex and the amygdala in reacting to “extreme out-group" eg. Homeless and addicts
Procedure: 22 US uni students randomly allocated to see images of people or objects. Before scanner, control and understood task by rate a series of neutral photos for pride, envy, pity and disgust). In fMRI, saw rich businessmen, older people, homeless people etc. After each image, asked to choose one of the four emotions.
Results: Brain sets off a series of reaction associated with disgust when saw homeless and addicts. Different response from other photos. Insula was activated which responded to non-human objects eg. Trash. Part of the brain when we think about people(medial prefrontal cortex) was not activated.
Conclusion: Out-group status may play a role in our perception of the out-group and how our brain reacts.
Other topics: Brain imaging, Stereotype, SIT
Fein and Spencer(1997)
Nickname: Young man go to NYC
Aim: To test the theory of threatened egotism
Procedure: 61 M uni randomly assigned to either being told they were 10% of uni or below average(false feedback). Then read a description of a young man's struggle to being an actor in NYC.
Results: If description implied gay, below average rated the actor in highly -ve and stereotypical terms. If straight, no difference in feedback.
Conclusion: Lowering one's self-esteem makes one more likely to discriminate. +ve distinctiveness
Savelkoul et al(2011)
Nickname: Anti-Muslim
Aim: To investigate the effect of the relative out-group size on anti-Muslim attitudes
Procedure: Found percentage of Muslims in geographical regions in Netherlands. Then national survey of 1375 people
Results: larger out-group increases people's level of perceived stress, increases anti-Muslim(RCT). But larger out-group increases likelihood that people will have Muslim friends and colleagues, decrease anti attitudes(contact theory).
Conclusion:
Moss-Reacusin (2012)
Nickname: Jennifer vs John
Aim: If faculty at universities would demonstrate a gender bias when hiring in sciences
Procedure: 2 resumes for a lab assistant position were sent to 100 professors in US uni. Only diff was Jennifer or John.
Results: Jennifer was rated as less competent than John. She was offered 13% less. Women favoured John.
Conclusion: Discrimination may have a significant effect on women getting job in the sciences.
Other topics: Stereotype
Origin of conflict and conflict resolution
Sherif ( 1961)
Nickname: Robbers Cave
Aim: To test realistic conflict theory, group conflict, -ve prejudices, stereotypes
Procedure: 3 stages. 1. In-group formation: Got 22 11 years old boys(middle class, same educational level, protestant, did not know each other) went to summer camp. They didn't know the existence of the other group. Produced in-groups by doing bonding activities. 2. Friction: Figured out the existence of the other group. Production of conflict by competitive activities eg. baseball, tug of war. Prizes were given to the winning team, no prizes to the losers. They refused to eat in the same dining hall, name calling started and singing offending songs, had riots. 3. Integration: attempt to bring about cooperation between the two groups by solve problems such as water shortage together and pay and decide a movie.
Results: When new people meet together, they will still be able to form hierarchy. Friction phase: conflicts produced stereotypes for out-group. When conflicting group are brought together with a common goal(, they tend to work together to reach superordinate goal.
Conclusion: Tyerman and Spencer(1983) - UK sample couldn’t create the group friction. May be cultural.
Other topics: Prejudice and Conflict resolution
McDoom(2012)
Nickname: Rwandan radio analysis
Aim: To investigate using a case study of Rwandan genocide to see if the threat of war would lead to group polarization, causing conflict.
Procedure: Content analysis of broadcast, surveys, follow-up interviews. Compared North(high threat) as were involved in fighting and were displaced vs South(low threat) as not that involved.
Results: Broadcast language became more -ve about the out-group(Tutsis). There were big differences in the language between North and South as South were less -ve.
Conclusion: Group polarization became more salient as threat increased. Eva: high ecological validity, cannot be carried out in actual conflict as self-reported data. Not safe to talk about.
Brown et al(2003)
Nickname: Racist sport teams
Aim: How contact between white and African American athlete influenced prejudice. If 'contact' makes a difference or whether actual interpersonal interaction was required
Procedure: Studied athletes who played on racial diverse teams and individuals sports who completed against people of the out-group.
Results: White athletes who are on diverse teams reported less prejudice.
Conclusion: Actual interpersonal interaction is required to reduce prejudice.
Steward et al(2003)
Nickname: Blue-eye simulation
Aim: To test the effectiveness of diversity simulation with US uni students
Procedure: Randomly selected from uni population. Randomly allocated to 'blue-eyed’, ‘brown-eyed' or heard a lecture on intergroup relation. 'Blue-eyed' were inferior. Levels of prejudice were measured using 3 separate tests over a period of 3 weeks to increase reliability
Results: Significantly more +ve attitudes toward American and Latino than lecture condition. Meh more +ve attitude toward African American. Reported felt angry at themselves for showing prejudiced. May have affected long-term effect
Conclusion: Simulation may not be highly effective in reducing prejudice
Paluck(2009)
Nickname: Rwanda media
Aim: To determine if media(radio soap opera) could be sued to reduce conflict between Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda
Procedure: 480 stratified sample randomly allocated to control group( listened to soap opera about AIDS and reproduction) or listened to soap opera about reconciliation between Hutu and Tutsi for 1 year. Later interview, focus group and observation.
Results: Experimental group demonstrated more trust of the out-group and were more willing to cooperate with them even if their own beliefs about the genocide has not changed.
Conclusion: Use of media as education rather than contact may allow people to think through difficult issues and experience intergroup contact in a vicarious and less threatening way.
Fisher et al (2005)
Nickname: Fishing for photos
Aim: To investigate if there are specific neural mechanisms associated with romantic love
Procedure: Conducted a semi-structured interview to establish the duration and intensity of participants' feeling. Completed Likert scale questionnaire that measured traits related to love. fMRI: looked at photo for 30s then neutral photo 6 times.
Results: Specific pattern of activation in the brain in response to photo of loved ones.
Activation was prominent in dopamine-rich brain areas. More passionate = more active the reward system
Conclusion: Dopaminergic activity plays a role in feelings of romantic love.
Other topic: Neurotransmitter
Zhou et al(2014)
Nickname: Urine affects gender identity?
Aim: To see if androstadienone(M) and estratetraenol(F) influenced sexual behaviour
Procedure: Asked to watch stick figures walk and determine their gender while being exposed to cloves with androstadienone(M), estratetraenol(F)or none.
Results: Androstadienone, straight females and gay males viewed the stick as more masculine and vice versa.
Conclusion: The corresponding pheromone has an effect of sexual behaviour
Other topic: Neurotransmitter
Ditzen et al (2009)
Nickname: Arguing couples
Aim: To investigate the possible role of oxytocin in how couples discuss a contentious(likely to cause argument) issue
Procedure: Each couple received either oxytocin or placebo nasally. Videotaped as they engaged in a discussion which will lead to an argument. Level of cortisol in saliva was measured.
Results: Oxytocin improved communication and lowered cortisol.
Conclusion: Oxytocin improved communication and lowered cortisol.
Other topic: Hormones
Wedekind (1995)
Nickname: T-shirt
Aim: To figure out if males’ Major Histocompatibility Complex (MHC, immune gene) affect mate choice in female
Procedure: Participants was typed for their MHC. Males were asked to wear a T-shirt for 2 night. No perfume soap, smoking, drinking, sex, females were asked to prepare their noses with a nasal spray and to sensitize their smell. Asked females to rank the smell of 7 shirts kept in a cardboard box in a room for intensity and pleasantness alone. 3/7 boxes with MHC similar. 1 shirt was control; not worn.
Results: More pleasant with dissimilar own genes. Odours of dissimilar reminded the women more often of their actual or former mates.
Conclusion: MHC or linked genes influence human mate choice.
Other topic: Genetics, Pheromones
Ronay and von Hippel (2010)
Nickname: Skateboarder
Aim: To determine if men would take greater risks in the presence of an attractive female. If testosterone played a role in this behaviour.
Procedure: Participants were asked to do one easy trick and one difficult trick which they did 10 times each. Did it again but in front of the same male researcher or an attractive female (attractiveness based on 20 males rating photo). Coded for success, crash landing or aborted attempt. Also, saliva samples were tested for testosterone + HR before and throughout
Results: Greater risk on difficult tricks in presence of the female researcher. Aborted fewer times. Testosterone levels were higher for female. No diff in HR.
Conclusion: Testosterone may have played a role in facilitating the risk-taking behaviour of the men.
Other topic: Hormones
Buss(1989)
Nickname: Pre- programmed love
Aim: To investigate cross-cultural similarities and diff in mate preferences in males and females.
Procedure: 37 samples, over 10,000 participants. Survey from 33 countries. Asked preferred age to get married, desired age diff, number of children. Rate 19 characteristics eg. Character, intelligence, in how desirable in mate. Survey were translated into language and back using 3 translators peer checking.
Results: Females wanted 'good financial prospect' . Supports evolutionary explanation of attraction because females try to maximize the survival of their children. Males valued 'physical attractiveness'. Support evolution that men want good fertility. Males wanted younger females; means more fertile. Females wanted older males, more maturity or experience.
Conclusion: Preference were consistent across cultures and fit well into the evolutionary explanation of attraction. Females seek resources. Male look for fertile.
Other topics: Evolution
Formation of personal relationships: COG
Walster/Hatfield et al(1966)
Nickname: Matching hypothesis
Aim: To investigate whether people are more likely to date someone of similar physical attractiveness
Procedure: Uni students were asked to put info into profile and questionnaire for matched dates. Four confederates secretly rated their physical attractiveness for few secs. Randomly assigned to date. Attitude toward their dates was assessed during intermission also after asked if dating for real
Results: Attractive were harsher and wanted less to date non-attractive. However, non-attractive wanted to date attractive.
Conclusion: Matching hypothesis was not supported. Would go after more attractive even if not.
Markey and Markey(2007)
Nickname: Similarity attraction model
Aim: To investigate how similarity affects how people choosing a partner
Procedure: Questionnaire describe their psychological characteristics, values and attitudes of their ideal romantic partner, then themselves.
Results: Couples described themselves similar to what their partner looked like. Couples who have the loving relationship are similar on some characteristics but not all
Conclusion: It is advantageous to have a partner who is similar to you but also a bit different.
Role of communication in personal relationships
Gottman(1989)
Nickname: Gottman's Four Horses of the Apocalypse
Aim: Tries to predict how relationship will unfold.
Procedure: Longitudinal research using observation, questionnaires and interviews. Biometric data also collected at the same time.
Results: Evaluation: Large rich data - Physiological + self-reported data. Good variety sample - straight and gay couples. Sample was made of couples who were close to ending their relationship, so these attributes would be really bad and cannot be generalized to starting off relationships. Ethics: last resort, but not providing counseling
Conclusion:
- Criticism - dispositional attribution about a person
- Contempt - treating someone with disrespect
- Defensiveness - claiming to be under attack for no reason
- Stonewalling – ignoring
Sheldon (2009)
Nickname: Social Penetration theory on Facebook
Aim: To investigate self-disclosure, social attraction, predictability and trust as predictors of Facebook relationship
Procedure: Questionnaire. When answering about interactions with other individual online to think about the person they talk to the most on Facebook.
Results: Perception of attraction drives self- disclosure eg. Number of topics. Increased disclosure associated with higher predictability hence more trust. Supports uncertainty reduction theory. More talk = less uncertainty = more like
Conclusion: People on Facebook initially disclose to the people they like. This leads to more predictability which increases trust, therefore more self-disclosure and then more liking.
Other topic: Digital technology
Stratton (2003)
Nickname: Attribution theory
Aim: to observe attributional styles in troubled families that went for help.
Procedure: Analyzed films of family therapy sessions from 8 families( w. stepparents and adoptive parents + whole nuclear) Interactions were coded for attribution behaviour.
Results: Parents often used attribution = children cause bad outcome. All parents made more dispositional attributions for their children than themselves. -ve behaviour of children were described as controllable more often then - ve behaviour of parents.
Conclusion: Troubled family had attribution style was 'blamed children'. Distress with associated with -ve(blaming) attributions.
Explanation for why relationships change or end
Flora and Seguin (2003)
Nickname: Satisfaction
Aim: To examine how perception of relational history predicted relational well-being in couples
Procedure: Relationship well-being (satisfaction and stability) measured 2 times, 6 months in between. semi-structured interview. Coding scheme was used. Questionnaire completed alone about relationship development breadth( completing specific behaviour to advance relationship eg. sex, thinking about them etc.)
Results: Break-up and lower satisfaction at time 2 were related to little breadth and -ve oral history appraising.
Conclusion: Variety of experiences are necessary for long-lasting relationship.
Gottman(1989)
Nickname: Gottman's Four Horses of the Apocalypse
Aim: Tries to predict how relationship will unfold.
Procedure: Longitudinal research using observation, questionnaires and interviews. Biometric data also collected at the same time.
Results: Evaluation: Large rich data - Physiological + self-reported data. Good variety sample - straight and gay couples. Sample was made of couples who were close to ending their relationship, so these attributes would be really bad and cannot be generalized to starting off relationships. Ethics: last resort, but not providing counseling
Conclusion:
- Criticism - dispositional attribution about a person
- Contempt - treating someone with disrespect
- Defensiveness - claiming to be under attack for no reason
- Stonewalling - ignoring
Cooperation and Competition
Sherif ( 1961)
Nickname: Robbers Cave
Aim: To test realistic conflict theory, group conflict, -ve prejudices, stereotypes
Procedure: 3 stages. 1. In-group formation: Got 22 11 years old boys(middle class, same educational level, protestant, did not know each other) went to summer camp. They didn't know the existence of the other group. Produced in-groups by doing bonding activities. 2. Friction: Figured out the existence of the other group. Production of conflict by competitive activities eg. baseball, tug of war. Prizes were given to the winning team, no prizes to the losers. They refused to eat in the same dining hall, name calling started and singing offending songs, had riots. 3. Integration: attempt to bring about cooperation between the two groups by solve problems such as water shortage together and pay and decide a movie.
Results: When new people meet together, they will still be able to form hierarchy. Friction phase: conflicts produced stereotypes for out-group. When conflicting group are brought together with a common goal, they tend to work together to reach superordinate goal.
Conclusion: Tyerman and Spencer(1983) - UK sample couldn’t create the group friction. May be cultural.
Other topics: Prejudice and Conflict resolution
De Dreu et al(2012)
Nickname: Oxytocin is not a friend
Aim: To investigate how oxytocin affects cooperation
Procedure: Modified version of the prisoner's dilemma game.
Results: After taking oxytocin, participants were more likely to pre-emptively compete with other groups out of fear that other would start first. Oxytocin engaged defense mood
Conclusion: Oxytocin increases cooperation with in-group and increases competition with out-group
Other topics: Hormones
Gabrenya et al(1985)
Nickname: US vs Taiwan
Aim: To test how individualistic vs collectivistic culture cooperate
Procedure: Schoolchildren from US(individualistic) and Taiwan(collectivistic) were asked to do an auditory task that required counting tone patterns either alone or in pairs
Results: US children showed lack of cooperation when in pairs, but when alone, put in lots of effort. Taiwan children worked better in pairs.
Conclusion: Culture plays a role in cooperation
Other topics: Culture
Prejudice and discrimination
Sherif ( 1961)
Nickname: Robbers Cave
Aim: To test realistic conflict theory, group conflict, -ve prejudices, stereotypes
Procedure: 3 stages. 1. In-group formation: Got 22 11 years old boys(middle class, same educational level, protestant, did not know each other) went to summer camp. They didn't know the existence of the other group. Produced in-groups by doing bonding activities. 2. Friction: Figured out the existence of the other group. Production of conflict by competitive activities eg. baseball, tug of war. Prizes were given to the winning team, no prizes to the losers. They refused to eat in the same dining hall, name calling started and singing offending songs, had riots. 3. Integration: attempt to bring about cooperation between the two groups by solve problems such as water shortage together and pay and decide a movie.
Results: When new people meet together, they will still be able to form hierarchy. Friction phase: conflicts produced stereotypes for out-group. When conflicting group are brought together with a common goal(, they tend to work together to reach superordinate goal.
Conclusion: Tyerman and Spencer(1983) - UK sample couldn’t create the group friction. May be cultural.
Other topics: Prejudice and Conflict resolution
Harris and Fiske(2006)
Nickname: Homeless people
Aim: To investigate the role of the prefrontal cortex and the amygdala in reacting to “extreme out-group" eg. Homeless and addicts
Procedure: 22 US uni students randomly allocated to see images of people or objects. Before scanner, control and understood task by rate a series of neutral photos for pride, envy, pity and disgust). In fMRI, saw rich businessmen, older people, homeless people etc. After each image, asked to choose one of the four emotions.
Results: Brain sets off a series of reaction associated with disgust when saw homeless and addicts. Different response from other photos. Insula was activated which responded to non-human objects eg. Trash. Part of the brain when we think about people(medial prefrontal cortex) was not activated.
Conclusion: Out-group status may play a role in our perception of the out-group and how our brain reacts.
Other topics: Brain imaging, Stereotype, SIT
Fein and Spencer(1997)
Nickname: Young man go to NYC
Aim: To test the theory of threatened egotism
Procedure: 61 M uni randomly assigned to either being told they were 10% of uni or below average(false feedback). Then read a description of a young man's struggle to being an actor in NYC.
Results: If description implied gay, below average rated the actor in highly -ve and stereotypical terms. If straight, no difference in feedback.
Conclusion: Lowering one's self-esteem makes one more likely to discriminate. +ve distinctiveness
Savelkoul et al(2011)
Nickname: Anti-Muslim
Aim: To investigate the effect of the relative out-group size on anti-Muslim attitudes
Procedure: Found percentage of Muslims in geographical regions in Netherlands. Then national survey of 1375 people
Results: larger out-group increases people's level of perceived stress, increases anti-Muslim(RCT). But larger out-group increases likelihood that people will have Muslim friends and colleagues, decrease anti attitudes(contact theory).
Conclusion:
Moss-Reacusin (2012)
Nickname: Jennifer vs John
Aim: If faculty at universities would demonstrate a gender bias when hiring in sciences
Procedure: 2 resumes for a lab assistant position were sent to 100 professors in US uni. Only diff was Jennifer or John.
Results: Jennifer was rated as less competent than John. She was offered 13% less. Women favoured John.
Conclusion: Discrimination may have a significant effect on women getting job in the sciences.
Other topics: Stereotype
Origin of conflict and conflict resolution
Sherif ( 1961)
Nickname: Robbers Cave
Aim: To test realistic conflict theory, group conflict, -ve prejudices, stereotypes
Procedure: 3 stages. 1. In-group formation: Got 22 11 years old boys(middle class, same educational level, protestant, did not know each other) went to summer camp. They didn't know the existence of the other group. Produced in-groups by doing bonding activities. 2. Friction: Figured out the existence of the other group. Production of conflict by competitive activities eg. baseball, tug of war. Prizes were given to the winning team, no prizes to the losers. They refused to eat in the same dining hall, name calling started and singing offending songs, had riots. 3. Integration: attempt to bring about cooperation between the two groups by solve problems such as water shortage together and pay and decide a movie.
Results: When new people meet together, they will still be able to form hierarchy. Friction phase: conflicts produced stereotypes for out-group. When conflicting group are brought together with a common goal(, they tend to work together to reach superordinate goal.
Conclusion: Tyerman and Spencer(1983) - UK sample couldn’t create the group friction. May be cultural.
Other topics: Prejudice and Conflict resolution
McDoom(2012)
Nickname: Rwandan radio analysis
Aim: To investigate using a case study of Rwandan genocide to see if the threat of war would lead to group polarization, causing conflict.
Procedure: Content analysis of broadcast, surveys, follow-up interviews. Compared North(high threat) as were involved in fighting and were displaced vs South(low threat) as not that involved.
Results: Broadcast language became more -ve about the out-group(Tutsis). There were big differences in the language between North and South as South were less -ve.
Conclusion: Group polarization became more salient as threat increased. Eva: high ecological validity, cannot be carried out in actual conflict as self-reported data. Not safe to talk about.
Brown et al(2003)
Nickname: Racist sport teams
Aim: How contact between white and African American athlete influenced prejudice. If 'contact' makes a difference or whether actual interpersonal interaction was required
Procedure: Studied athletes who played on racial diverse teams and individuals sports who completed against people of the out-group.
Results: White athletes who are on diverse teams reported less prejudice.
Conclusion: Actual interpersonal interaction is required to reduce prejudice.
Steward et al(2003)
Nickname: Blue-eye simulation
Aim: To test the effectiveness of diversity simulation with US uni students
Procedure: Randomly selected from uni population. Randomly allocated to 'blue-eyed’, ‘brown-eyed' or heard a lecture on intergroup relation. 'Blue-eyed' were inferior. Levels of prejudice were measured using 3 separate tests over a period of 3 weeks to increase reliability
Results: Significantly more +ve attitudes toward American and Latino than lecture condition. Meh more +ve attitude toward African American. Reported felt angry at themselves for showing prejudiced. May have affected long-term effect
Conclusion: Simulation may not be highly effective in reducing prejudice
Paluck(2009)
Nickname: Rwanda media
Aim: To determine if media(radio soap opera) could be sued to reduce conflict between Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda
Procedure: 480 stratified sample randomly allocated to control group( listened to soap opera about AIDS and reproduction) or listened to soap opera about reconciliation between Hutu and Tutsi for 1 year. Later interview, focus group and observation.
Results: Experimental group demonstrated more trust of the out-group and were more willing to cooperate with them even if their own beliefs about the genocide has not changed.
Conclusion: Use of media as education rather than contact may allow people to think through difficult issues and experience intergroup contact in a vicarious and less threatening way.
Information is mostly complied from:
Popov, Alexey. Psychology: for the IB Diploma. 2nd ed., Oxford University Press, 2018.
Crane, John. “IB Psychology.” ThinkIB Student Pages, www.student.thinkib.net/psychology?lg=8007.
Photo: Pande, Rachna. “Insights: Importance of Human Relations. The New Times | Rwanda, 14 Oct. 2011, www.newtimes.co.rw/section/read/98589.
Popov, Alexey. Psychology: for the IB Diploma. 2nd ed., Oxford University Press, 2018.
Crane, John. “IB Psychology.” ThinkIB Student Pages, www.student.thinkib.net/psychology?lg=8007.
Photo: Pande, Rachna. “Insights: Importance of Human Relations. The New Times | Rwanda, 14 Oct. 2011, www.newtimes.co.rw/section/read/98589.