Outline principles that define the sociocultural level of analysis and explain how they are demonstrated in research. Discuss why those research methods are used, and the ethical implications of those methods.
Humans are social animals with an inherent need to belong.
This is demonstrated in studies such as the Asch Line Study. Asch had a group of people judge comparative line length, and then report their judgments. Only one person in the group was a participant; the rest were confederates of the researcher. They judged line length three times. All the confederates reported before the participant, and all gave the correct answer the first two times; the third time, they unanimously gave the wrong response. In the critical (last) condition, participants gave the group’s wrong answer 33% of the time. This indicates the willingness of humans to go against their personal beliefs to maintain group belonging.
This is an experiment. Experiments are used because they allow researchers to manipulate one variable while holding others constant to determine the impact of that variable on behavior. In sociocultural research, this allows psychology to be more science based; otherwise, this perspective relies largely on observational and correlational research that cannot establish cause and effect.
An ethical concern is that experiments require consent, which is crucial to obtain. A concern specific to conformity research is that the study is very likely to cause distress, as participants are confused and stressed when all of the confederates give the wrong answer.
Culture influences behavior.
Hoefstede used surveys and correlational research to identify various culture dimensions that influence individual behavior. For example, one cultural dimension he identified is individualistic/ collectivistic. A country’s position on this scale can influence people’s tendency to conform; Smith and Bond did a meta-analysis that found higher levels of conformity in more collectivistic societies.
These studies use surveys and correlational research. This allows researchers to study situations and variables that cannot be practically manipulated; no researcher will ever be able to create their own cultures to manipulate and study. By using correlational research, researchers can at least establish a relationship between variables, even if they cannot establish cause. It also allows for the creation of theories that can then, perhaps, be studied experimentally.
An ethical concern is that correlational studies may allow people to draw discriminatory conclusions about people and/or cultures even though the correlational research can
People construct a social identity for themselves.
This happens as a part of group membership, even when the group in question is marginal, as the Sherif’s Robber’s Cave Study. In the Robber’s Cave Study, boys who did not know each other were assigned to one of two groups, the Eagles or the Rattlers. Quickly, the boys established group identities and norms, even though they did not know each other before the study began. They also behaved antagonistically toward the other group, displaying out-group hostility as a result of competition for sports prizes. This hostility was only overcome because of goals which required cooperation (superordinate goals).
This study combines covert observation with experiment. Covert observation allows a researcher to study situations that would by their very nature be changed by being observed, such as groups who are illegal (gangs, drug dealers). It also allows researchers to study groups that would refuse to be studied if asked (cults).
An ethical concern is that these studies, by their very nature, require deception of the participants and cannot involve informed consent.
People's worldviews are resistant to change.
Even in the face of contrary evidence, people hold on to established beliefs, as did the subjects of Festinger’s Doomsday Study. Festinger went undercover into a doomsday cult to study their reaction when the predicted end of the world did not come to pass. When the world continued, the group members displayed rationalization, saying that the world had been spared due to their prayers. Instead of changing their beliefs, this actually strengthened them. Members had to hold onto their beliefs despite contrary evidence because to do otherwise would harm their self-esteem. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_Prophecy_Fails)
This is a covert participant observational study. Covert participant observation allows a researcher to study situations that would by their very nature be changed by being observed. It also allows researchers to study groups that would refuse to be studied if asked.
An ethical concern is that these studies, by their very nature, require deception of the participants and cannot involve informed consent.
Describe the role of situational and dispositional factors in explaining behavior.
Situational factors are ways of explaining a behavior/event based on external factors, attributes of the event. Situational factors are generally used when explaining an event that the person is involved in. This is because, since the person is in the event, they have a clearer understanding of the external reasons for the outcome. This is a result of actor-observer effect.
Dispositional factors are explanations that attribute an event to something internal, inherent to the person. Outside observers tend to use dispositional factors to explain an event. Since they are not involved, they do not see the situational factors. This is a result of actor-observer effect.
The use of these explanations is impacted by several attributional biases/errors (see below).
Discuss two errors in attributions.
Fundamental attribution error is the tendency to overestimate the impact of dispositional factors when explain behavior, especially other people’s behavior, while underestimating or ignoring the impact of situational factors. This is likely because, while people are privy to their own internal decision making process, which considers the situation, they cannot get inside other people’s heads, and thus attribute actions to fixed characteristics of the person rather than changeable aspects of situation. This error is especially common in individualistic cultures, where the individual rather than the group/situation is blamed for events.
Self-serving bias is when people credit themselves for success but blame external factors for failure. This protects self-esteem.
Modesty bias is the tendency in collectivist cultures to attribute failure to personal factors. This is because their self-esteem is based on group, not individual, performance, and so they protect the group by blaming themselves for failure.
Evaluate social identity theory, making reference to relevant research studies.
Social identity theory says that group belonging is a source of self-esteem. This leads people to try to join successful groups, to praise their own group, and to form negative views of out-groups.
Cialdini has shown this in football supporters, who are more likely to were team insignia after success than defeats, supporting self-esteem by identifying with a group that is successful while minimizing identification with unsuccessful groups.
Tajfel et al. (1971) finds that groups need not be based on any significant factors; minimal groups still show patterns of in-group/out-group bias, even when they are only thrown together based on painting preference.
However:
This is more a descriptive than a predictive theory.
It does not explain why sometimes, personal identity overpowers group identity.
It also does not consider environment as an explanation for personal and group behavior (cultural expectations, potential rewards, poverty).
Explain the formation of stereotypes and their effect on behavior.
A stereotype is a social perception of an individual based on their group membership.
Stereotypes are formed based on personal experience and on information received from gatekeepers like parents and the media.
Two explanations for how stereotypes are formed are:
The grain of truth hypothesis (Campbell, 1967), which states that one experience with an individual (meeting a girl who is bad at math) causes that conclusion to be generalized to a group (all girls are bad at math). This means that stereotypes are based, loosely, on reality.
Illusory correlation is seeing a relationship between two things when none exists. This is particularly likely to happen when two rare events co-occur, such as crime and blackness.
David Hamilton and Richard Gifford (1976) examined the role of illusory correlation in stereotype formation. Subjects were read descriptions of behaviors performed by members of groups A and B. Negative behaviors were rare, and group B was small, making making both relatively infrequent and distinctive. Participants were then asked who had performed a given behavior: a person of group A or group B. Results showed that subjects overestimated the frequency of the two distinctive events, membership in group B and negative behavior, co-occurring, and evaluated group B more negatively. This despite the fact the proportion of positive to negative behaviors was equivalent for both groups and that there was no actual correlation between group membership and behaviors. The impact is more pronounced for negative than positive traits.
Once a stereotype is formed, confirmation bias protects and propagates it. This means people will pay particular attention to evidence that confirms their beliefs, however rare or unlikely, and ignore evidence that challenges the belief, however common or persuasive.
Snyder and Swann studied this by telling female college students to prepare a list of questions for either an introvert or an extrovert. They tended to create questions that would confirm their beliefs about what an introvert/extrovert is like.
They impact behavior both of the person who has the stereotype and the person being stereotyped.
The person with the stereotype will treat other people according to assumptions, rather than according to reality.
Stereotypes will change how members of the stereotyped group interpret outside feedback. They can attribute it either to personal shortcomings, such as lack of ability or poor effort, or the evaluator's stereotypes and prejudice toward their social group. Alternatively, positive feedback can either be attributed to personal merit or discounted as a form of sympathy or pity.
Crocker et al. (1991) showed that when black participants were evaluated by a white person who was aware of their race, black subjects mistrusted the feedback, attributing negative feedback to the evaluator's stereotypes and positive feedback to the evaluator's desire to appear unbiased. When the black participants race was unknown to the evaluator, they were more accepting of the feedback.
In situations where the stereotyped characteristic is relevant, stereotype threat will negative impact performance. This is because people are afraid of being judged stereotypically or of confirming the stereotype.
Steele and Aaronson (1995) found that African Americans do worse than European Americans on tests of verbal ability, but they do the same on tests of problem solving strategies-even though the tests are identical.
Explain social learning theory, making reference to two relevant studies.
Social learning theory is the process by which people are assumed to learn through observation of models, without extrinsic motivation.
Models can be live (a real person), verbal (verbal instructions) or symbolic (TV, books).
There are four factors necessary for social learning to occur:
Attention: the learner must pay attention to the model’s behavior.
Retention: the learner must remember the behavior.
Reproduction: the learner must have the ability to reproduce the behavior.
Motivation: including consistency, identification with the model, rewards/punishment, liking the model
Two studies:
Bandurra (1961)
Kimball and Zabrack (1986) found that children became more aggressive after TV was introduced to their Canadian towns. However, this does not indicate a causal relationship.
Discuss the use of compliance techniques.
Lowballing
The asker secures agreement to a request and then reveals additional added cost; because the person has already agreed to the small request, they will carry through despite the hidden costs.
Study: Cialdini (1978) asked students 1) if they would participate in a 7 am study or 2) if they would participate in a study. In the first case, most people said no. In the second case, people who said yes were told the study occurred at 7 am; most people still showed up. They had committed to something small, and kept committing despite the added burden.
Explanation: this may be a result of cognitive dissonance. Festinger theorized that people want their behavior and their views of self to remain consistent, protecting self-esteem. To reduce tension as a result of a mismatch, we may change beliefs, actions, or perception of the action. In this case, people see themselves as committed, but are annoyed at the added burden; to remain consistent, they will change their view of the burden.
Foot-in-the-door
Requester makes a small request, secures agreement, and to be consistent the agreer will agree to the subsequent larger, real request.
Study: Sherman (1980) called people to ask if they would theoretically volunteer for 3 hours for the American Cancer Society. Then three days later they were called back and asked to actually give time; those who hypothetically said yes were more likely to actually volunteer (31% vs. 4% just called and asked for time).
Explanation: self-perception theory (Bem 1972) says that people infer their attitudes from their actions, and so when people agreed theoretically, they decided they were helpful people, and helpful people then said yes to actually volunteering time.
Door-in-the-face
A large request is made and refused, so, feeling bad, the person agrees to a subsequent smaller, real request.
Study: Cialdini (1975) asked participants if they would escort delinquent children on a field trip; most people said no. Another group was asked if they would mentor children 2 hours/week for 2 years; again, most said no. The third group was first asked to mentor, said no, and the request was lowered to just chaperoning the field trip; 50% said yes this time.
Explanation: this may be a result of the norm of reciprocity, meaning we reciprocate favors done towards us. Lowering the request is seen as a favor, so people do a favor in return and volunteer their time.
Evaluate research on conformity to group norms.
Asch had a group of people judge comparative line length, and then report their judgments. Only one person in the group was a participant; the rest were confederates of the researcher. They judged line length three times. All the confederates reported before the participant, and all gave the correct answer the first two times; the third time, they unanimously gave the wrong response. In the critical (last) condition, participants gave the group’s wrong answer 33% of the time. This indicates the willingness of humans to go against their personal beliefs to maintain group belonging.
Issues:
All the participants were white males; the high levels of conformity could thus be a reflection of the participants’ culture; the 1950’s were a very homogeneous, conformity heavy time.
Perrin and Spencer (1981) reproduced the experiment with college science majors, and found drastically lower rates of conformity. However, an issue with this research is that science majors may have been trained to be more independent in their judgments.
Discuss factors influencing conformity.
Group size: the larger the group of people giving the wrong answer, the stronger the effects of conformity, up to a point; past 4-5, conformity stays the same or drops, possibly because people become suspicious.
Presence of dissenters: in another study, Asch (1951) added a dissenting confederate to the group, and found that that reduced conformity by 80%.
Culture: Smith and Bond (1996) conducted a meta-analysis of conformity studies and found that conformity is higher in collectivist cultures than in individualist cultures. Individualism implies a strong personal identity based on one’s unique features whereas collectivism implies commonality and interconnections with others. Also, compared to people in individualist cultures people in collectivist cultures are more concerned about their relationships with others, value tradition more highly, and define themselves more in terms of their social roles. All these factors should increase conformity in collectivist cultures compared to individualist cultures.
Define the terms “culture” and “cultural norms”.
Culture:
Matsumoto describes culture as a changing system of rules, explicit and implicit, that groups establish to ensure survival and unity.
Hoefstede describes culture as a set of internalized, group schemas that influence thinking, emotions and behavior. It is learned through group interaction.
Cultural norms are behavior patterns typical of a group. They may also be defined as group beliefs about how people should behave in a given context.
Examine the role of two cultural dimensions on behavior.
Individualism and conformity
Smith and Bond (1996) conducted a meta-analysis of conformity studies and found that conformity is higher in collectivist cultures than in individualist cultures. Individualism implies a strong personal identity based on one’s unique features whereas collectivism implies commonality and interconnections with others. Also, compared to people in individualist cultures people in collectivist cultures are more concerned about their relationships with others, value tradition more highly, and define themselves more in terms of their social roles. All these factors should increase conformity in collectivist cultures compared to individualist cultures.
However, just because a culture tends to be collectivist does not prove that a group will conform. Conformity is strongly predicted/influenced by other factors, for example, collectivist cultures will conform more if they are in a group to which they have real ties (ex: a group of family, friends, coworkers) vs. a group of randomly chosen people (Williams and Sogon, 1984).
Proxemic Theory
Hall (1966) describes a cultural dimension of need for personal space. Cultures have varying norms on how close people can stand to one another, and on who is allowed in peoples’ bubbles. Americans tend to feel comfortable with much more personal space than people in other cultures, leading them to feel uncomfortable when a person from another cultures stands “too close”.
Using one or more examples, explain “emic” and “etic” concepts.
Emic concepts are concepts considered meaningful in a single culture, and so emic research considers only one country/culture.
Fancy definition: Emic constructs are accounts, descriptions, and analyses expressed in terms of the conceptual schemes and categories that are regarded as meaningful and appropriate by the members of the culture under study. Am emic construct is correctly termed “emic” if and only if it is in accord with the perceptions and understandings deemed appropriate by the insider’s culture. The validation of emic knowledge thus becomes a matter of consensus- namely, the consensus of native informants, who must agree that the construct matches the shared perceptions that are characteristic of their culture. Note that the particular research technique used in acquiring anthropological knowledge has nothing to do with the nature of that knowledge. Emic knowledge can be obtained either through elicitation or through observation, because it is sometimes possible that objective ob- servers can infer native perceptions.
Etic concepts are descriptions of behavior from outside observers that allow cross-cultural comparisons; they attempt to avoid any cultural bias or limiting perspective.
Fancy definition: Etic constructs are accounts, descriptions, and analyses expressed in terms of the conceptual schemes and categories that are regarded as meaningful and appropriate by the community of scientific observers. An etic construct is correctly termed “etic” if and only if it is in accord with the principles deemed appropriate by science (i.e., etic constructs must be precise, logical, comprehensive, replicable, falsifiable, and observer independent). The validation of etic knowledge thus becomes a matter of logical and empirical analysis--in particular, the logical analysis of whether the construct meets the standards of falsifiability, comprehensiveness, and logical consistency, and then the empirical analysis of whether or not the concept has been falsified and/or replicated. Again, the particular research technique that is used in the acquisition of anthropological knowledge has no bearing on the nature of that knowledge. Etic knowledge may be obtained at times through elicitation as well as observation, because it is entirely possible that native informants could possess scientifically valid knowledge.
Example: An example of research in cross-cultural psychology is Mead’s ( 1935 ) study of gender development in three different tribes in New Guinea. She found that the Mundugumor tribe exhibited ‘masculine’ characteristics as both men and women were aggressive. The Arapesh tribe exhibited’ feminine ‘ traits as both men and women were emotional and nonaggressive. Amongst the Tchambuli people she found a gender reversal. The men ran the household whilst the women ran the village. Such ethnographic studies illustrate the role of culture on behavior. Mead argued that gender roles are culturally determined rather than biologically determined by innate sex differences as believed in the West, noting that behavior regarded as masculine in one culture could be considered feminine in another. This study may also demonstrate an imposed etic in research. An imposed etic is a technique or a theory which is rooted within the personal culture of the researcher and is then used to study other cultures. Mead’s study could be considered an imposed etic in that she was using Western notions of masculinity/femininity to document gender roles in nonwestern cultures. To describe the Arapesh people as ‘feminine’ attaches a western construct to a set of behaviours which may be unique to the Arapesh people.
