Social Psychology
How we think about, influence, and relate to others: the psychology of social behavior.
Core Insight
Fundamental Attribution Error: We overestimate personality and underestimate situation when explaining others' behavior.
- Someone cuts you off in traffic → "They're a jerk" (personality)
- You cut someone off → "I was late for an emergency" (situation)
We grant ourselves situational context we deny others.
Social Cognition
How We Perceive Others
First impressions form in milliseconds:
- Trustworthiness: 100ms
- Attractiveness: 150ms
- Competence: 200ms
What drives impressions:
- Facial features
- Body language
- Voice
- Clothing
- Context
Halo effect: One positive trait colors perception of other traits
- Attractive → perceived as more competent, kind, intelligent
Attribution Theory
How we explain behavior:
| Attribution Type | Example |
|---|---|
| Internal (dispositional) | "They're lazy" |
| External (situational) | "The job is too hard" |
| Stable | "They're always like that" |
| Unstable | "They were tired today" |
| Global | "They fail at everything" |
| Specific | "They failed at this task" |
Actor-observer difference:
- Actors see situations
- Observers see personality
Schemas and Stereotypes
Schemas: Mental structures that organize knowledge
- Helps process information quickly
- Can lead to errors and biases
Stereotypes: Schemas applied to groups
- Often contain kernel of truth about group averages
- Fail when applied to individuals
- Self-perpetuating through confirmation bias
Social Influence
Conformity
Changing behavior to match group.
Asch conformity experiments: People gave obviously wrong answers to match group
Why we conform:
| Type | Motivation | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Informational | Others know better | Following locals in new city |
| Normative | Want to fit in | Laughing at unfunny joke |
Factors increasing conformity:
- Unanimous group
- Public response
- No prior commitment
- Ambiguous situation
- Expert or high-status group
Obedience
Following orders from authority.
Milgram experiments (1960s): In the most famous variation, 65% of participants delivered shocks to the maximum level when ordered. Note: later analyses of Milgram's archives and replications have raised serious methodology and ethics concerns (experimenter coercion, variation across conditions, selective reporting). Treat the "65%" figure as suggestive, not definitive.
Why we obey:
- Socialized to respect authority
- Gradual escalation
- Diffusion of responsibility
- Perceived legitimacy
Resisting harmful obedience:
- Question authority
- Recognize gradual escalation
- Affirm personal responsibility
- Find allies
Compliance Techniques
| Technique | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Foot-in-door | Small request → large request | Sign petition → donate money |
| Door-in-face | Large request refused → smaller request | Ask for $100, then "just $10" |
| Low-ball | Commit first, costs revealed later | Car price quoted, then fees added |
| That's-not-all | Initial offer, then bonus | "Wait, I'll throw in..." |
| Scarcity | Limited availability | "Only 3 left!" |
| Social proof | Others are doing it | "Best-selling product" |
| Authority | Expert endorsement | Doctor recommends |
| Liking | Request from liked person | Friends selling products |
| Reciprocity | After giving gift/favor | Free sample → purchase pressure |
Group Behavior
How Groups Affect Individuals
Social facilitation: Presence of others enhances performance on simple/well-learned tasks, impairs complex/new tasks
Social loafing: Less effort when individual contribution is hidden in group
Deindividuation: Reduced self-awareness in groups → less inhibited behavior
- Anonymous crowds
- Online anonymity
Group Decision Making
Groupthink: Desire for harmony overrides realistic appraisal
Symptoms:
- Illusion of invulnerability
- Rationalization
- Belief in group morality
- Stereotyping outgroups
- Pressure on dissenters
- Self-censorship
- Illusion of unanimity
- Mind guards
Prevention:
- Encourage dissent
- Bring in outsiders
- Leader speaks last
- Assign devil's advocate
- Anonymous input
Group polarization: Group discussion pushes opinions to extremes
- Moderate liberals → more liberal after discussion
- Moderate conservatives → more conservative after discussion
Bystander Effect
People may be less likely to help when others are present. The effect is real in many settings, but more recent work (including CCTV analyses of public conflicts) finds bystanders often do intervene, especially in clear emergencies. Treat it as a tendency, not a law.
Why:
- Diffusion of responsibility
- Pluralistic ignorance (no one acts → must not be emergency)
- Evaluation apprehension (fear of embarrassment)
Overcoming:
- Recognize the effect
- Point to specific person: "You in the blue shirt, call 911"
- Take personal responsibility
Prejudice and Discrimination
Definitions
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Stereotype | Generalized belief about group |
| Prejudice | Attitude (usually negative) toward group |
| Discrimination | Behavior based on group membership |
Sources of Prejudice
Cognitive: Categorization is natural; in-group/out-group thinking automatic
Motivational: Prejudice can serve psychological needs
- Self-esteem (in-group favoritism)
- Security (fear of different)
- Justification (rationalize inequality)
Social: Learned from family, culture, media
Reducing Prejudice
Contact hypothesis: Under right conditions, contact reduces prejudice
Optimal conditions:
- Equal status
- Common goals
- Intergroup cooperation
- Authority support
- Opportunity for personal relationships
Other strategies:
- Perspective-taking
- Recategorization (expand in-group)
- Education about biases
- Institutional change
Relationships
What Predicts Attraction?
| Factor | Description |
|---|---|
| Proximity | Physical and psychological nearness |
| Familiarity | Mere exposure effect |
| Similarity | Attitudes, values, interests |
| Reciprocity | We like those who like us |
| Physical attractiveness | Especially initially |
| Complementarity | Sometimes opposites attract (for specific traits) |
Love
Sternberg's Triangular Theory:
| Component | Description | Alone = |
|---|---|---|
| Intimacy | Closeness, bondedness | Liking |
| Passion | Physical attraction, arousal | Infatuation |
| Commitment | Decision to love, maintain | Empty love |
Combinations:
- Intimacy + Passion = Romantic love
- Intimacy + Commitment = Companionate love
- Passion + Commitment = Fatuous love
- All three = Consummate love
Relationship Maintenance
Equity theory: Relationships thrive when perceived inputs and outcomes are balanced
What predicts lasting relationships:
- Positive-to-negative interaction ratio (5:1)
- Managing conflict constructively
- Maintaining friendship
- Shared meaning and rituals
- Turning toward bids for connection
Aggression
Types
| Type | Description | Motivation |
|---|---|---|
| Hostile | Impulsive, angry | Harm the target |
| Instrumental | Calculated, cold | Achieve goal |
| Direct | Face-to-face | |
| Indirect | Gossip, exclusion |
Causes
Biological:
- Testosterone
- Low serotonin
- Brain damage (prefrontal cortex)
Psychological:
- Frustration-aggression
- Social learning
- Cognitive interpretation
Situational:
- Heat
- Crowding
- Pain
- Provocation
- Alcohol
- Weapons presence
Reducing Aggression
- Remove triggers
- Teach anger management
- Reduce exposure to violent media
- Model non-aggressive responses
- Change interpretations
Prosocial Behavior
Why People Help
| Motive | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Kin selection | Help genetic relatives | Parent sacrificing for child |
| Reciprocal altruism | Expectation of return | Helping neighbor who might help back |
| Social norms | Reciprocity, responsibility | Helping someone who helped you |
| Empathy-altruism | Feeling for other | Helping distressed stranger |
| Mood management | Feel good by helping | Donating to feel better |
Increasing Helping
- Make need clear
- Reduce ambiguity
- Increase personal responsibility
- Increase empathy
- Model helping behavior
- Reduce costs of helping
Practical Applications
Influence Ethically
Use influence principles for good:
- Be aware of techniques being used on you
- Use reciprocity genuinely
- Build real liking through common ground
- Use social proof honestly
- Use authority legitimately
Navigate Groups
- Recognize conformity pressure
- Speak up early to prevent groupthink
- Assign roles to prevent social loafing
- Be the one who acts (bystander effect)
- Value dissent
Build Better Relationships
- Invest in proximity and familiarity
- Look for genuine similarity
- Express liking
- Maintain equity
- Manage conflict constructively
- Turn toward bids for connection
Reduce Personal Bias
- Acknowledge your biases
- Seek contact with outgroups
- Practice perspective-taking
- Question first impressions
- Use System 2 for important judgments