Sociocultural Cognition
- Describe the role of situational and dispositional factors in explaining behaviour.
Attribution is defined as how people interpret and explain causal relationships in the social world. Humans have a need to understand why things happen.
The origin of attribution theory can be traced to the influential writings of Fritz Heider in “The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations”(1958). People try to understand behavior from observing other people’s actions. People tend to make an attribution about behavior depending on whether they are performing it themselves or observing somebody else doing it, also known as the actor-observer effect. When people discuss their own behavior, they tend to attribute it to situational factors – that is, something to do with external factors; when people observe someone else’s behavior they tend to attribute it to dispositional factors – that is, something to do with personal (internal) factors.
Example. One person is sitting in a restaurant, waiting for his date to show up. She is late. Most of the people would start to look for explanations as to why she has not arrived yet. For example, “she is always late” or “she has missed her bus”. First one is an example of dispositional factors, while the other one is situational.
The origin of attribution theory can be traced to the influential writings of Fritz Heider in “The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations”(1958). People try to understand behavior from observing other people’s actions. People tend to make an attribution about behavior depending on whether they are performing it themselves or observing somebody else doing it, also known as the actor-observer effect. When people discuss their own behavior, they tend to attribute it to situational factors – that is, something to do with external factors; when people observe someone else’s behavior they tend to attribute it to dispositional factors – that is, something to do with personal (internal) factors.
Example. One person is sitting in a restaurant, waiting for his date to show up. She is late. Most of the people would start to look for explanations as to why she has not arrived yet. For example, “she is always late” or “she has missed her bus”. First one is an example of dispositional factors, while the other one is situational.
- Discuss two errors in attributions (for example, fundamental attribution error, illusory correlation, self-serving bias).
Two Errors in attribution
- When people overestimate the role of dispositional factors in an individual’s behavior- and underestimate the situational factors- it is called the fundamental attribution error. It’s basically, when a person blames bad luck to other people.
- Example would be that after watching George Clooney playing a several roles as a lovely, kind male, when people were asked to describe him, people said that he was kind and loving. One attributes these characters to his personality which is a dispositional factor and not to the fact that he auditioned for and was given these roles in the films is a situational factor.
- Some people are more likely to say that a murderer is evil than to refer to the environmental factors as explanations. In the western judicial system, juries look for a satisfactory motive if they are to convict someone of murder.
- Another error of attribution is the self-serving bias, this is seen when people take credit for the successes, attributing them to dispositional factors. It is basically when people fail doing something, and they try to blame on other things but not on themselves.
- Lau and Russel (1980) found that American football coaches and players tend to credit their wins to internal factors- for example, being in a good shape, the hard work they have put in, the natural talent of the team- and their failures to external factors- for example, injuries, weather, fouls committed by the other team.
- Greenberg et al. (1982) argue that the reason we do this is to protect our self-esteem.
- According to Miller and Ross (1975), if we expect to succeed, and we do succeed, we attribute it to our skill and ability. If we expect to succeed, and we do not succeed, then we feel that it is bad luck or external factors that brought about this unexpected outcome.
- It has been found that people who are severely depressed tend to make more dispositional attributes thus blaming themselves for feeling miserable.
- Kashima and Triandis (1986) found significant differences between US and Japanese students. The students were asked to remember details of slides. The Americans tended to
- Evaluate social identity theory, making reference to relevant studies.
Henri Tajfel’s social identity theory assumes that individuals strive to improve their self-image by trying to enhance their self-esteem, based on either personal identity or various social identities. People can boost their self-esteem through personal achievement or through affiliation with successful groups. Social identity theory is based on the cognitive process of social categorization.
Tajfel argues that people who belong to a group – or, even more interestingly, when people are randomly assigned to a group – they automatically think of that group as their in-group (us) and all others as an out-group (them). They exhibit in-group favoritism, and discrimination against the out-group. The individual’s self-esteem is maintained by social comparison – benefits of belonging to the in-group. The outcome of these comparisons influences our own self-esteem.
Cialdini et al. (1976) demonstrated this phenomenon among college football supporters. After a successful football match, the supporters were more likely to be seen wearing college insignia and clothing than after defeats.
It is assumed that our need for a positive self-concept will result in a bias in these intergroup comparisons, so that one is more positive towards anything that one’s own group represents. Tajfel found that when people are casually assigned to a group – either by the flip of a coin, the drawing of a number from a hat, or by preference for a previously unknown artist – they see themselves as being similar in attitude and behavior, and a bond if formed among group members, even if they did not know each other before their assignment to the group.
In the famous Kandinsky versus Klee experiment, Tajfel et al. (1971) observed that boys who were assigned randomly to a group, based on their supposed preference for the art of either Kandinsky or Klee, were more likely to identify with the boys in their group, and were willing to give higher awards to members of their own group. Asked for ratings of in-group and out-group on traits such as likeability, psychologists found that the out-group was rated as less likeable, but was never actually disliked.
As later research would show, group identity alone appears not to be responsible for intergroup conflict. In the absence of competition, social comparison does not necessarily produce a negative outcome.
Social identity theory has some limitations:
Tajfel argues that people who belong to a group – or, even more interestingly, when people are randomly assigned to a group – they automatically think of that group as their in-group (us) and all others as an out-group (them). They exhibit in-group favoritism, and discrimination against the out-group. The individual’s self-esteem is maintained by social comparison – benefits of belonging to the in-group. The outcome of these comparisons influences our own self-esteem.
Cialdini et al. (1976) demonstrated this phenomenon among college football supporters. After a successful football match, the supporters were more likely to be seen wearing college insignia and clothing than after defeats.
It is assumed that our need for a positive self-concept will result in a bias in these intergroup comparisons, so that one is more positive towards anything that one’s own group represents. Tajfel found that when people are casually assigned to a group – either by the flip of a coin, the drawing of a number from a hat, or by preference for a previously unknown artist – they see themselves as being similar in attitude and behavior, and a bond if formed among group members, even if they did not know each other before their assignment to the group.
In the famous Kandinsky versus Klee experiment, Tajfel et al. (1971) observed that boys who were assigned randomly to a group, based on their supposed preference for the art of either Kandinsky or Klee, were more likely to identify with the boys in their group, and were willing to give higher awards to members of their own group. Asked for ratings of in-group and out-group on traits such as likeability, psychologists found that the out-group was rated as less likeable, but was never actually disliked.
As later research would show, group identity alone appears not to be responsible for intergroup conflict. In the absence of competition, social comparison does not necessarily produce a negative outcome.
Social identity theory has some limitations:
- It describes but does not accurately predict human behavior.
- Using the theory in isolation is reductionist – it fails to address the environment that interacts with the “self”.
- Explain the formation of stereotypes and their effect on behaviour.
Social representations
Stereotyping
Stereotype threat: the effect of stereotypes on an individual’s performance
The formation of stereotypes
- Mosovici (1973) developed the ideas of group theory with his concept of social representation.
- He defined social representations as the shared beliefs and explanations held by the society in which we live or the group to which we belong.
- He argues that social representations are the foundation of social cognition- they help us to make sense of our world and to master it.
- Social representations are in a sense, cultural schemas that are fundamental to the identity of the group, and they provide a common understanding for communication within the group.
- Caroline Howarth (2002) carried out focus-group interviews with adolescents living in Brixton in London. She wanted to see how social representations of Brixton affected the identity of adolescent girls. She found that very negative representations of “being from Brixton” by those from outside the area was not shared by the people live in there. People from Brixton found that the people who lived there were “a diverse, creative and vibrant”.
Stereotyping
- A stereotype is defined as a social perception of an individual in terms of group membership or physical attributes. It is a generalization that is made about the group and then attributed to members of that group.
- Such a generalization may be either positive or negative. For example, women are talented speakers or women are bad drivers.
- Stereotyping is a form of categorization that affects the behavior of those who hold the stereotype, and those who are labeled by a stereotype. Researchers now explain stereotyping as a result of schema processing.
Stereotype threat: the effect of stereotypes on an individual’s performance
- According to Steele (1997) stereotype threat turns on spotlight anxiety, which causes emotional distress and pressure that may undermine performance.
- Spencer et al. (1977) tested the effect of the stereotype threat on intellectual performance. The researches gave a difficult mathematics test to students who were strong in mathematics. They predicted that women under the stereotype threat would underperform compared to the men taking the test. This was because of the negative stereotype about the women’s mathematics ability. Such a stereotype may result in an interfering pressure in interfering pressure in test situations. Spencer et al. found that this was true: women in the experiment underperformed compared with equally qualified men on the difficult mathematics test. However, women scored quite high in the literature test the two groups scored equally well. This was because women are not stereotype threatened in this area.
The formation of stereotypes
- How is it developed? Though Tajfel argues that this is a natural cognition process of social categorization.
- Campbell (1967) maintains that there are two key sources of stereotypes: personal experience with individuals and groups, and gatekeepers- the media, parents and other members of our culture.
- His gain of true hypothesis argues that an experience with an individual from a group will then be generalized to the group.
- Hamilton and Gifford (1976) argues, instead, that stereotypes are the result of an illusory correlation- That it people see a relationship between two variables even when there is none.
- Once illusory correlations are made, people tend to seek out or remember information that supports this relationship. This is an example of confirmation bias.
- Research on stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination is difficult to carry out. Often, social desirability effect is a confounding variable in such research.