Chapter 10: Social Judgment

Social Psychology by Tom Gilovich, Dacher Keltner, and Richard Nisbett

Topics we will cover

Quality of information available How we judge probabilities Errors and biases in social though

Biases in Information Presented Firsthand

Pluralistic Ignorance - misperception of a group norm that results from observing people who are acting at variance with their private beliefs out of a concern for the social consequences - behavior that reinforces the erroneous group norm

Biases in Information Presented Firsthand

b. Memory Biases

Sensory Input Attention

Encoding

Retrieval

Sensory Memory Short-Term Memory Long-Term Memory

Rehearsal

Biases in Information Presented Firsthand

b. Memory Biases

flashbulb memories - vivid recollections of the moment one learned some dramatic, emotionally-charged news

Biases in Information Presented Secondhand

a. Sharpening and Leveling sharpening - emphasizing important or more interesting elements in telling a story to someone elseleveling - eliminating or deemphasizing seemingly less important details when telling a story to someone else

These processes influence our judgment of secondhand information in a number of ways.

The Information Available for Judgment

b. Secondhand Impressions of Other People

c. Ideological Distortions

d. Distortion in the Media

e. Perceptual Vigilance and the Asymmetry Between Positive and Negative

How Information is Presented: Impression Formation

Impression Formation- how we form impressions of others– central traits (e.g., warm-cold) strongly shape

the overall impression of a stranger– primacy effect- information presented first often

has stronger impact on impressions– impressions of others consist of both exemplars

(examples of specific behavior) and abstractions (mental summaries of general behavior)

How Information is Presented

2. Framing Effects

the influence on judgment resulting from the way information is presented, including the order of presentation

a. spin framing

b. gains and losses

Prior Knowledge and Knowledge Structures

Bottom-up processes - “data driven” mental processing in which one takes in and forms conclusions on the basis of the stimuli encountered in one’s experience

Top-down processes - “theory driven” mental processing in which one filters and interprets new information in light of preexisting knowledge and expectations

Prior Knowledge and Knowledge Structures

Schema- mental framework built around a specific theme (organizes social information)

Types of Schemas– person- schemas about people

“nerd”, “jock”, “librarian”– role- schemas relating to specific roles

“professor”, “student”, “physician”– event (script)- indicates typical sequence of events

“restaurant”, “exam”, “first date”

Prior Knowledge and Knowledge Structures

1. How Do Schemas Influence Judgment? a. Attention b. Inference and Construalc. Memory

encoding - filing information away in memory based on what is attended to and the initial interpretation of information

retrieval - the extration of information from memory

Sources of Error (“Tilts”)

To understand the social world we can use:– rational processing- follows basic rules of logic– intuitive processing- relies on hunches (gut-level)

intuitive processing used more for processing social information

automobile safety devices (e.g., air bags) have not been proven to be safer, yet intuitively they should work

Psychic Powers Demo

• Pick a number from 1-9• Subtract 5• Multiply by 3• Square the number• Add digits until you only get 1 digit• If number < 5 add 5; else subtract 4• Multiply by 2• Subtract 6• Map the digit to a letter in alphabet• Pick name of country that starts with letter• Take second letter in country name and think of mammal• Think of color of mammal

Reason, Intuition, and Heuristics

Heuristics- mental shortcuts for making decisions (help to reduce information overload)

Representativeness- judging by resemblance– Bob is a lawyer, because he looks like typical lawyer

Note: often population base rates are ignored

Availability- judging by how quickly examples come to mind

– k as first letter seems more common than k as third

priming- increased availability of information resulting from exposure (e.g., “medical student syndrome”)

Forward

Rothman and Hardin Study

3.59

4.344.55

3.59

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

Impo

lite

ness

Rat

ings

Ingroup Outgroup

3 Behaviors6 Behaviors

More likely to rely onamount of informationavailable.

More likely to rely onease with which theycould bring informationto mind.

Hypothesis 1: Participants will rate their own gender (in-group) as more impolite when they had recalled six behaviors rather three behaviors.

Hypothesis 2: Participants will rate the other gender (outgroup) as more impolite when they had recalled three behaviors rather six behaviors.

Previous research shows it is easier to remember three examples as opposed to six examples of behavior. Thinking of three examples should affect ease of recall.Thinking of six examples should influence amount of information recalled.

Asked male and female students to recall either 3 or 6 impolite behaviors they had recently seen by members of their own gender (in-group) and members of the other gender (outgroup).

Asked them to rate women and men on several dimensions, including impoliteness.

Reason, Intuition, and Heuristics

2. The Representativeness Heuristic a. The Resemblance Between Members and Categories: Base-Rate NeglectKahneman and Tversky (1973)b. The Planning Fallacy

tendency for people to be unrealistically optimistic about how quickly they can complete a projectc. The Resemblance Between Cause and Effect

Planning Fallacy

Planning Fallacy (Optimistic Bias)- tendency to:– make optimistic predictions for completing a task– assume we are more likely than others to experience

good outcomes, and less likely to experience bad It occurs because we tend to:

– focus on future while ignoring related past events– overlook important potential obstacles

as motivation to complete task increases, so does the planning fallacy

Buehler, Griffin, & MacDonald

17

28

1315

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Num

ber

of D

ays

Pri

or t

o D

eadl

ine

Predicted Actual

No RefundRefund

Persons expecting a refund predictedthey would file much sooner thanpersons not expecting refund.

Both groups submitted forms later than expectedPhoned people at random and asked them if they expected a tax refund.Also asked people when they expected they would file their return.

Hypothesized that people expecting a refund would have strong motivation to complete the task and therefore make overoptimistic predictions about when they would file their return.

Magical Thinking

Magical Thinking- thinking based on irrational assumptions

law of contagion- two objects in contact pass properties to one another– fear of wearing sweater worn by AIDS patient

law of similarity- things that resemble each other share basic properties– fear of eating chocolate shaped like a spider

Thought Suppression

Thought Suppression- preventing unwanted thoughts from entering consciousness

Thought suppression involves two processes:– monitoring- automatically searches for unwanted thoughts– operating- conscious attempt to distract oneself

Rebound effect- suppressing unwanted thoughts may actually increase them

– people high in reactance- react negatively to threats to freedom- more likely to show rebound effect

Edwards & Bryan

5

2.5

1.9

1.4

0

1

2

3

4

5

Inde

x of

Per

ceiv

ed G

uilt

and

H

arsh

ness

of

Sent

ence

Emotion Provoking Neutral

IgnoreDon't Ignore

Participants told to ignore emotion provokinginformation rated him as most guilty and mostdeserving of a harsh sentence.

Reasoned we have little control over our emotional reactions.Once we are exposed to emotion arousing information, it is difficultto ignore.Study participants read a transcript of a murder trial containing infoabout defendant’s past criminal record.

In one condition, the transcript contained a detailed account of a viciousattack the defendant had made on a woman (EMOTION PROVOKING).

In the other condition, the transcript mentioned the defendant wasaccused of a prior assault ( NEUTRAL).

Half of the subjects in each condition were told this information wasinadmissible and they should ignore it.

Mental contamination- our judgements are influenced by unconscious,and uncontrollable mental processing.

The subjects were then asked to rate the guilt of the suspect and recommend a sentence for the defendant..

Study Smarter: Student Website

http://www.wwnorton.com/socialpsych

Chapter Reviews

Diagnostic Quizzes

Vocabulary Flashcards

Apply It! Exercises