Introduction to Social Psychology C8811

1
Introduction to Social Psychology C8811

• Lecture 1
• The nature of social psychology

2
What is social psychology?

• A useful working definition
• The scientific investigation of how the
  thoughts, feelings and behaviours of individuals
  are influenced by the actual, imagined or implied
  presence of others. (G. W. Allport, 1935)

3
What are theories for?

• Explaining the world relating the phenomenon to
  what has gone before or to other phenomena
  correlation and causation
• Predicting the world anticipating when and where
  the phenomenon will occur and its consequences
• Changing the world having a practical effect
  Research which produces nothing but books will
  not suffice (Lewin, 1948)

4
Testing theories some common methodologies

• Observation e.g. Pelligrinis (1986) study of
  rough-and-tumble play in children.

5
Rough-and-tumble play and social popularity
(Pelligrini (1986) Developmental Psychology, 24,
802-806)

• N 94 children, aged 5 10 years
• Observation of playground behaviour, 5 sec time
  intervals (RTP)
• Popularity through peer nominations
• Social problem solving test (SPS)
• Anti-social behaviour ratings from teachers (AS)

• Popular children
• RTP was correlated with SPS (.56), but not with
  AS (-.11)
• Unpopular children
• RTP was correlated with AS (.47), but not with
  SPS (-.21).

6
Methodologies in social psychology

• Weaknesses

• Strengths
• Observation
• Field research
• Experiments

7
Testing theories some common methodologies

• Observation e.g. Pelligrinis (1986) study of
  rough-and-tumble play in children
• Field research e.g. e.g. Struch Schwartz
  (1989) study of intergroup aggression in Israel

8
Predictors of intergroup aggression (Struch, N.
Schwartz, S.H. (1989) Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 56, 364-373)

• Surveyed 156 Israeli residents in two
  neighbourhoods threatened by incursion of
  ultra-orthodox religious Jewish group
• Measured perceived conflicts of interests
  between own religious group and ultra-orthodox
  group (do interests of your group and other
  group conflict?) identification with own
  religious group (how important is that group to
  you?) and intergroup aggression (e.g. support
  for boycotts of ultra-orthodox businesses,
  encouraging others to play loud music to irritate
  ultra-orthodox neighbours )
• Found strong relationship between perceived
  conflict and aggression (.54, p lt .001), and
  that relationship was even stronger for those who
  identified strongly with their own religious
  group (.63) than those who didnt (.32).

9
Testing theories some common methodologies

• Observation e.g. Pelligrinis (1986) study of
  rough-and-tumble play in children
• Field research e.g. Struch Schwartz (1989)
  study of intergroup aggression in Israel
• Experimentation e.g. Bandura, Ross Ross
  (1963) study of the imitation of aggression

10
Imitation of aggression live, film and cartoon
(Bandura, A., Ross, D. Ross, S.A. (1963)
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66,
3-11)

• Young children, aged 5 6 years were randomly
  allocated to one of 4 conditions
• Live aggressive model
• Filmed aggressive model
• Cartoon aggressive character
• Control (no aggression witnessed)
• Their subsequent play behaviour was observed

11
The studies we did today Study 1 acculturation
preferences

• Acculturation preferences which model do people
  in a multi-ethnic society like Britain prefer?
• Integration
• Assimilation
• Separation
• Marginalization
• We were interested in the distribution of these
  preferences in this sample of students, in
  connection with some other research we are
  planning on attitudes to immigrants

12
Study 2 reactions to perceived deprivation

• Identification and Deprivation When a group is
  deprived (e.g. economically) do its members
  identify more or less with that group?
• More deprivation, more identification
  solidarity in adversity? E.g. Tropp Wright
  (1999, Eur. J. Soc.Psych)
• More deprivation, less identification group no
  good, no good for me? E.g. Zagefka Brown (in
  press, Pers. Soc. Psych. Bull.)
• Both may apply in different situations EXTERNAL
  cause (the system is to blame), INTERNAL cause
  (something about us).
• Different newspaper articles made Britain seem
  more or less deprived, and attributed this to the
  system(i.e., the EU), or to the ingroup
  (i.e., British consumer behaviour). These
  comprised the different conditions of the
  experiment.
• Which article people received was randomly
  decided, an important methodological device for
  ensuring equivalence between conditions.
• Key measure level of identification with
  Britain, does it vary between different
  conditions?

13
Choosing a method pack the right bags for the
journey you have to make

• Each method has its strengths and weaknesses, no
  single method is best
• Trade-off between control (simplicity) and
  realism (complexity)
• Experiments good for testing and refining
  specific hypotheses field research good for
  generating the hypotheses in the first place, and
  for gaining new insights into the phenomenon
• Choose your method by the problem, not vice versa!