class 22. social psychology we are a social species
TRANSCRIPT
….in three ways
1. We think about other people
2. We develop relationships with them
3. We are influenced by them
These are the three sections of chapter 13
KEY POINTS
Power of social situations
They affect everyoneFactors: power, persuasion, emotionSometimes unconsciouslye.g., INTERPERSONAL ATTRACTION
Purpose
to test the impact of emotional state on the development of relationships
recall Schachter’s 2-factor theory: Emotion = Affect & Cognition
Applied to Interpersonal Attraction
Effects of ambiguous arousal on interpersonal attraction
Feels like love
Illusion, delusion, or reality?
Basic Procedure
Young men walking across a bridge
are interviewed by a young female experimenter
Under one of 2 conditions
Procedure
Experimenter interviewed every guy walking alone across either bridge
She asked them to do a brief survey: All agreed
She requested interpretations of a T.A.T. picture: What is happening in this picture?
She gave the participant a debriefing sheet (including her phone number) to take home
Independent Variable
Conceptual variable Level of arousal (high vs. low)
Operationalization high bridge vs. low bridge
Dependent Variables
Conceptual variable Physical attraction
OperationalizationsA. Sexual & romantic content in
T.A.T. storiesB. probability of calling
experimenter for a date
Results
Both Dependent Variables worked as expected
i.e., attraction to the experimenter was higher among men who were interviewed on the high bridge
Problem with the study
Not a real experiment
Participants were not randomly assigned to conditions
A serious problem that ruins the validity of the study
Self-selection
The guys chose the bridge alternative explanation ?
The kind of guy who would choose to walk over a high bridge is the same kind of guy who would be willing to call up a woman he hardly knew for a date.
i.e., extraverted, confident, sensation-seekers
The opposite personality would choose the low bridge
Alternative Experimental Designs
How would we redesign the study to eliminate the self-selection problem?
NEW DESIGN 1
randomly assign guys to bridges as they enter the park
e.g., flip coin and then change signs or guide them to the right bridge
NEW DESIGN 2
Conduct the interview as guys approach the bridge
Shows whether different personalities choose different bridges
Suggest that original results caused by self-selection, not causal effect of arousal
BUT -- if conditions do not differ, then we can safely use the original design
Meston & Frohlich (2003)
Conceptual Replication
Roller coaster vs. non-threatening ride
Same results
But has same problems with self-selection
Lab Studies vs. Real World Studies
IT’S A TRADE-OFFLab studies are the most rigorous:
Many extraneous effects can be controlled
But do they generalize outside of lab? Real world studies more relevant to real
lifeBut often suffer from self-selectionWhy ? Because we can’t randomly assign
people to important life conditions