2 psychology discussions (300 words EACH) - due in 24 hours

combs

01CH_Feenstra_Social.pdf

Home >Psychology homework help >2 psychology discussions (300 words EACH) - due in 24 hours

Spencer Grant/age fotostock/SuperStock

Learning Objectives

By the end of the chapter you should be able to:

• Define social psychology

• Describe the history of social psychology

• Describe the scientific method

• Discuss the observational method and explain when that method is most appropriate to the research question

• Discuss the correlational method and explain when that method is most appropriate to the research question

• Discuss the experimental method and explain when that method is most appropriate to the research question

Discovering Social Psychology 1

• Define terms associated with the experimental method including independent and dependent variable, experimental group and control group, random assignment and random sampling, internal and external validity, generalizability, experimental and mundane realism, and demand characteristics

• Understand the dangers of hindsight bias

Chapter Outline

1.1 What Is Social Psychology?

1.2 Where Did Social Psychology Come From? • Social Psychology Before 1950 • Social Psychology Since 1950

1.3 How Do We Do Social Psychology? • Observational Method: What Is Happening? • Correlational Method: What Might Happen? • Experimental Method: What Causes That? • Statistical Measurement • Ethics in Research

Chapter Summary

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 1 7/16/13 9:53 AM

CHAPTER 1Section 1.1 What Is Social Psychology?

One in every seven people on Earth is registered on Facebook. The site added the 1 billionth user in September 2012. Each U.S. user has an average of around 260 friends (Statista, 2012; Vance, 2012). In 2011 there were an estimated 181 million blogs by people from around the world (Nielsenwire, 2012). On its sixth birthday in March 2012, Twitter reported an average of 340 million Tweets a day, with a 140 million users (Twitterblog, 2012). What can we conclude from this informa- tion? Human beings are intensely interested in and regularly seek out interaction with other human beings. Social psychology is a field that is also interested in human beings. Social psychologists study people—in particular, people interact- ing with one another.

1.1 What Is Social Psychology?

Social psychology is the scientific study of human thoughts, feelings, and behavior as humans relate to and are influenced by others. However, many academic disciplines are interested in human thoughts, feelings, or behavior. If you were to take a literature course, you would find yourself contemplating the thoughts of Ishmael in Moby Dick or the actions of Lady Macbeth in Macbeth. In an art course you might work on translating a particular feeling into a sculpture or a painting. What makes social psychology different is the method it employs to study humans. As with other science-related fields, social psy- chologists use the scientific method to learn about human beings, a method that employs careful observation and empirical evidence to come to conclusions. The focus of social psychology, however, is on the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of people, rather than the physical pieces that together make up a person like DNA, cells, or muscles, and constitute the focus of natural science fields like biology. Social psychology, as a branch of psychol- ogy, focuses on how individuals are affected by others; and, as related to sociology, social psychology looks at a person’s social setting within the dynamics of the social system.

Social psychology is often paired with another branch of psychology, personality psychology. One of the largest organizations for social psy- chologists, the Society for Personal- ity and Social Psychology (SPSP), includes personality psychologists. Social psychologists emphasize how different people act in similar ways in similar situations, documenting how outside forces affect behav- ior. Personality psychologists focus on differentiating people from one another, observing how forces inside the person affect behavior. For exam- ple, to explain why your friend Stu- art joined a cult, a social psychologist

Christin Gilbert/age fotostock/SuperStock

Humans use social networking websites to stay connected and interact with other people.

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 2 7/16/13 9:53 AM

CHAPTER 1Section 1.1 What Is Social Psychology?

might look at the persuasive techniques the cult used to convince all of their converts to join. In contrast, a personality psychologist would focus on how Stuart’s tendency toward following those in authority makes him, but not someone else, particularly vulnerable to cults. Because situational forces interact with personal characteristics, explanations for behavior must address both. Social and personality psychologists therefore largely address both in the work they do.

Social psychologists study a wide variety of topics, including views of the self, persua- sion, attraction, and group processes. In general, social psychologists are interested in how people relate to and influence one another, but there are many facets that do not fit this definition. Social psychology is a large, unwieldy, and largely disjointed field of study. In a history of the field of psychology, science writer Morton Hunt (1983) aptly summa- rizes the issue: “The problem,” he writes, “is that social psychology has no unifying con- cept; it did not develop from the seed of a theoretical construct . . . but grew like crabgrass in uncultivated regions of the social sciences” (p. 397). Welcome to the study of crabgrass.

Large, unwieldy, and disjointed as it may be, social psychology offers the student and the scientist a way of answering the questions that haunt our daily lives. How do I under- stand who I am and my capabilities? What should I do in this new situation? Is that per- son interested in dating me? Does that infomercial really convince anyone to buy the product? How do I get my school or work group to work better together? The diversity of topics found in social psychology also allows for wonderful interconnections with other areas of psychology. Both social psychologists and cognitive psychologists are interested in decision making and attributions. Social psychologists and developmental psycholo- gists are both interested in attachment and romantic relationships. The special expertise and focus of the different areas means we know more about these topics than we might if they were studied in only one field of psychology.

Test Yourself

Given the preceding introduction to the field of social psychology, which of the following questions would best be answered by social psychology?

• What happened in Gettysburg in July 1863?

While the answer to this question might involve human behavior, it is a question better answered using methods found in studies of history than social psychological methods.

• Does playing violent video games cause people to behave more aggressively toward others?

This question is well suited to social psychology; it focuses on human behavior in rela- tion to others and can be studied using the scientific method.

(continued)

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 3 7/16/13 9:53 AM

CHAPTER 1Section 1.2 Where Did Social Psychology Come From?

Test Yourself (continued)

• Can playing hard-to-get make a person more attractive to others?

This question is well suited to social psychology; it focuses on human behavior in rela- tion to others and can be studied using the scientific method.

• Is there a God?

This is not a question appropriate to social psychology. Social psychology is the scientific study of human thoughts, feelings, and behavior, and this question would be difficult or impossible to study scientifically.

1.2 Where Did Social Psychology Come From?

In 1898, Norman Triplett published an article posing a question about bicyclists. He wondered why cyclists seemed to race faster when in the presence of other cyclists than when racing against the clock alone. To explore the effect of others on individ- ual action, Triplett developed a few hypotheses and then tested them using the scientific method. For this reason, Triplett is considered by many social psychologists to have con- ducted the first social psychological research study (Allport, 1954; Jones, 1998; though there is some disagreement, see Danziger, 2000 and Haines & Vaughan, 1979). Triplett found that, in general, participants in his study were able to perform actions more quickly when in the presence of others.

The other study often cited as one of the first in the field of social psychology was per- formed by Max Ringelmann, a French agricultural engineer. He carried out his work in the 1880s and published his findings in 1913 (Kravitz & Martin, 1986). In his research, Ringelmann asked participants to pull on a rope either alone, in a group of 7, or in a group of 14. He then assessed how hard the participants pulled. He found that in the group of 14, the average per person force was much less than the average per person force when participants were pulling alone: 61.4 kg of force versus 85.3 kg of force. In a later study where participants pushed a cart in pairs or alone, he also found less individual exertion of force when participants were working with others. Both Triplett’s and Ringelmann’s studies used the scientific method to better understand how an individual’s performance is affected by others, the essence of social psychology.

Social Psychology Before 1950 If we date the start of social psychology to 1898, we realize that the field is not very old, at least not for a scientific discipline. Work in the field began slowly, and before 1950 the number of researchers and theories was small. Muzafer Sherif (1936) did some early work on the power of the group to influence judgments, discovering that norms were quickly and naturally developed in groups of people. Miller and Dollard studied aggression and proposed a link between frustration and aggression (Dollard, Doob, Miller, Mowrer, &

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 4 7/16/13 9:53 AM

CHAPTER 1Section 1.2 Where Did Social Psychology Come From?

Social Psychology in Depth: Lewin’s Contributions

The psychologist finds himself in the midst of a rich and vast land full of strange happenings: There are men killing themselves; a child playing; a person who, having fallen in love and being caught in an unhappy situation, is not willing or not able to find a way out; . . . there is the reaching out for higher and more difficult goals; loyalty to a group; dreaming; planning; exploring the world; and so on without end.

It is an immense continent full of fascination and power and full of stretches of land where no one ever has set foot.

Psychology is out to conquer this continent, to find out where its treasures are hidden, to investigate its danger spots, to master its vast forces, to uti- lize its energies. How can one reach this goal? (Lewin, 1940, cited in Mar- row, 1969, p. 3)

(continued)

Sears, 1939; Miller, 1941). In early work on attitudes, Richard T. LaPiere (1934) found that our attitudes and our actions do not always align, while Fritz Heider (1946) proposed a theory of attitudes that focused on balance.

In these early days the field struggled to define itself, its method, and its subject of interest. Two major figures in the field held opposing views. Floyd Henry Allport (1890–1979) wrote an early textbook for social psychology, published in 1924. Allport was a strong proponent of the use of a rigorous scientific method. He advocated for a focus on individuals, not groups or norms, and the behaviors of people, not thoughts or feelings. Another major figure was Kurt Lewin (1890–1947), a refugee from Nazi Germany who moved to the United States in 1933. Lewin had a major influence on the field of social psychology. He believed that outside forces affect the behavior of the individual, that the actions and decisions of the individual are constrained by fields of force, similar to how the planets in our solar system are constrained in their movement by the pull of gravity from the bodies that surround them. But Lewin’s contribu- tions were primarily in the realm of theory and method—it was the way he did social psychology that people emulated. For more on what Lewin did and his disagreement with Allport, see the Social Psychology in Depth box.

Associated Press

Kurt Lewin, an important early social psychologist, emphasized the importance of theories and methods.

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 5 7/16/13 9:53 AM

CHAPTER 1Section 1.2 Where Did Social Psychology Come From?

Social Psychology in Depth: Lewin’s Contributions (continued)

As a young science, social psychology struggled to find its direction and focus. Kurt Lewin helped the field find its way, while also making great contributions to child development and industrial/organizational psychology (Ash, 1992). Lewin explained that behavior (B) was a function (f) of both the person (P) and the environment (E), resulting in an equation writ- ten as B 5 f (P, E). For human beings, the environment (E) most often includes other people, so Lewin was intensely interested in the effect we have on one another. In fact, Lewin was the person who coined the term group dynamics (Berscheid, 2003).

Lewin saw the importance of studying people outside the laboratory, in everyday situations. He also studied the important issues of the day, focusing psychological study on the particu- lar social issues that needed to be solved. The study that initially gained him popularity in the United States was one of leadership styles. Lewin and his colleagues (Lewin, Lippitt, & White, 1939) compared the behavior of children assigned to groups led by adults using an authoritarian and laissez-faire style with the behavior of children led by those using a more democratic style. They found that hostile behavior was usually higher in the groups led using an authoritarian or laissez-faire style than led using a democratic style. Lewin believed that groups could be studied experimentally and did so in studies like the one on leadership styles.

Another prominent psychologist, Floyd Allport (1924), argued that only the individual could be the subject of study. Allport maintained that psychology studies the individual, so extending psychology to groups goes against the definition of the field. Allport also believed that social psychologists should focus on laboratory studies. It was Allport who pointed to Triplett’s 1898 study as the first in the history of social psychology, not because Triplett him- self saw it as a social psychological study but because it fit Allport’s model of what a study in social psychology should be (Berscheid, 2003). Allport was a good salesman.

The topics that social psychologists study, however, are more in line with Lewin’s ideas of appropriate subjects for the field than Allport’s ideas. Social psychologists study the interac- tion of the person and environment, and groups—both large groups and very small groups (those made up of two people). The Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, an organization Lewin helped start, is alive and well. Lewin’s ideas continue to be used in the area of action research, which focuses on making improvements to difficult situations while advancing scientific knowledge (Bargal, 2008; Sommer, 2009). Given the big issues we face in the world today—war, poverty, and discrimination, to name a few—one can hope for Lewin’s tradition to continue.

Social Psychology Since 1950 In the 1950s and 1960s, the number of social psychologists and research within the field expanded rapidly. A number of factors contributed to this increased interest in the field. One desire of a number of social psychologists, and therefore a topic of study in this period, was to explain the violent events leading up to and taking place during World War II. Researchers focused on subjects such as the causes of aggression, group actions (e.g., conformity and social facilitation), and individual actions (e.g., obedience). In the United

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 6 7/16/13 9:53 AM

CHAPTER 1Section 1.2 Where Did Social Psychology Come From?

States the field benefited from a number of psychologists who fled Europe before or dur- ing World War II. Serious study of many of the topics you will read about throughout this text began in these decades. These concepts, the researchers, and their major findings are summarized in Table 1.1. As we explore social psychology throughout the coming weeks, keep this table in mind.

Table 1.1: Social psychological topics and researchers of the 1950s and 1960s

Topic Researcher, Date, Title, and Journal Major Finding

Aggression Berkowitz, L., & LePage, A. (1967). Weapons as aggression-eliciting stimuli. In the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

The presence of a weapon elicited greater aggression than the presence of a neutral stimulus or no object.

Attraction Walster, E., Aronson, V., Abrahams, D., & Rottmann, L. (1966). Importance of physical attractiveness in dating behavior. In the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

Attractive individuals were liked more, more likely to be pursued for a later date, and rated their dates more harshly.

Cognitive dissonance

Festinger, L., & Carlsmith, J. M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced compliance. In the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology.

Participants receiving a small reward to lie to another participant were more likely to report they enjoyed the boring study and would participate in a similar study in the future than those who received a large reward.

Conformity Asch, S. E. (1956). Studies of interdependence and conformity: A minority of one against the unanimous majority. In Psychological Monographs.

Even when an answer was obviously wrong, individuals conformed to a unanimous group at least some of the time.

Helping Latane, B., & Darley, J. M. (1968). Group inhibition of bystander intervention in emergencies. In the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

Participants alone helped more quickly when alone than when in the presence of unresponsive others or other naïve participants.

Obedience Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. In the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology.

Commands of obedience were obeyed even when the commands appeared to harm another individual.

Persuasion Hovland, C. I., & Weiss, W. (1951). The influence of source credibility on communication effectiveness. In Public Opinion Quarterly.

After time, participants accepted an originally rejected message from an untrustworthy source.

Social facilitation

Zajonc, R. B., Heingartner, A., & Herman, E. M. (1969). Social enhancement and impairment of performance in the cockroach. In the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

Cockroaches running a difficult maze took a shorter time when they were alone than when they were observed by other cockroaches. Cockroaches running an easy maze took a longer time when they were alone than when they were observed.

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 7 7/16/13 9:53 AM

CHAPTER 1Section 1.2 Where Did Social Psychology Come From?

Since the 1960s, psychology as a whole has put more emphasis on cognition or thinking processes rather than just observable behavior. In research on the self, for example, social psychologists have found that the way we think about ourselves influences the way we approach the world. People who view themselves as possessing particular qualities tend to notice those qualities in others. Our cognitive processes also impact the decisions we make, an idea we will explore in the chapter on making judgments. Basic cognitive pro- cesses such as categorization also impact how we think about others. Because of our ten- dency to categorize, we assume people who share one characteristic share others as well, resulting in stereotypes.

As our technologies for looking inside the brain have improved, so too have our abilities to see how brain anatomy and brain processes relate to the social aspects of the person. Researchers have found that when we think about ourselves, we use a different part of the brain than if we are thinking about other people or things. Processing information about the self utilizes a unique location in the brain, and when people are thinking about themselves, this part of the brain shows heightened activation. Other parts of the brain are activated when people are paying attention to what others are doing, either in attempting to understand others’ thought processes or evaluating whether their actions may be threatening. We also use different parts of our brain when we are attempting to regulate our thoughts or behaviors in social situa- tions (Heatherton, 2011). Social neuroscience is still a relatively new field; researchers are only beginning to explore all the ways our brain reflects our social activities.

In more recent decades, social psychologists have also paid more attention to the impact of cultural differences on the person (e.g., Markus & Kitayama, 1991). They have found that people may think differently about themselves and their relationships and interact with one another differently depending on culture. For example, studies show that young people in the United States place more emphasis and importance on romantic relation- ships than people in South Korea do. College students in the two countries were surveyed at the beginning and the end of the spring semester to assess stability of romantic relation- ship status, romantic loneliness, and closeness. The researchers then compared the South Korean and U.S. students—those who were in stable romantic relationships and those who were not. U.S. students in stable romantic relationships showed less loneliness than their U.S. counterparts without a stable romantic relationship. Korean students had only a small decrease in loneliness when in a stable romantic relationship. In other words, when not in a romantic relationship, Korean young adults do not experience as much romantic loneliness as young adults in the United States do. Within relationships, young adults in the United States report greater closeness to their partner than young adults in Korea do (Seepersad, Choi, & Shin, 2008). These findings suggest that young adults in the United States place greater importance on romantic relationships for combatting loneli- ness and gaining closeness with another person. Friends or family may be more important for South Korean young adults in meeting social needs.

Expand Your Knowledge: Looking for More?

The Inquisitive Mind, or In-Mind, is a website with interesting, accessible articles on social psychology for the general public. If you would like to learn more about current findings in the field from respected researchers, take a look at http://beta.in-mind.org/.

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 8 7/16/13 9:53 AM

http://beta.in-mind.org/

CHAPTER 1Section 1.2 Where Did Social Psychology Come From?

Social psychologists have also begun incorporating evolu- tionary theories to explain various psychological find- ings. According to evolution- ary theory, those characteristics of an organism that allow it to survive and reproduce within its environment are most likely to appear in later generations. Evolutionary theory is often used in biology and other sciences, but within psychology our focus is more often on adap- tive behaviors (e.g., being afraid of strangers) rather than on adaptive biological characteris- tics (e.g., opposable thumbs). Adaptive behaviors may still have a biological mechanism that can be passed on through the genes. For instance, in evolutionary history, individuals who showed a strong response to strangers in the amygdala, the brain structure largely respon- sible for the emotion of fear, were more likely to survive an attack by a rival group. Their sur- vival meant they had children and passed the genes responsible for their stranger-activated amygdala on to future generations.

Evolutionary psychology can act as a metatheory, a theory that explains other theories (Duntley & Buss, 2008). For example, on the theme of romantic relationships, evolution- ary psychologists would suggest that a man capable of identifying a fertile woman and keeping that woman away from other men will be more successful in passing down his genes to future generations. A woman, on the other hand, would want to identify a man who is willing and able to invest in her and her offspring, given the long investment she has in pregnancy and a dependent infant. We find exactly these kinds of patterns across cultures (Buss, Larsen, Westen, & Semmelroth, 1992; Buss & Schmitt, 1993; Kaighobadi, Shackelford, & Buss, 2010). Men report greater interest in physical attractiveness, desire more sexual partners, and are more jealous of sexual infidelity than emotional infidelity. Women, on the other hand, show more interest in status and income and are more jealous when a partner becomes emotionally close to another woman, which could potentially lead him to stop investing in her and their offspring.

Expand Your Knowledge: Looking for More?

Test Yourself

• The first study in social psychology was conducted by Triplett in

a. 1809 b. 1898 c. 1950 d. 1989

Correct answer: b

• When did the number of researchers in the field of social psychology begin to increase?

In the 1950s and 1960s, after World War II, the number of social psychologists, and the topics they studied, grew.

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 9 7/16/13 9:53 AM

http://beta.in-mind.org/

CHAPTER 1Section 1.3 How Do We Do Social Psychology?

1.3 How Do We Do Social Psychology?

What makes social psychology a science? The common theme among the chemist in the lab, the physicist at the Large Hadron Collider, the ecologist out in the forest, and the psychologist is the method all use to explore the subject matter: the scien- tific method. The scientific method begins with a testable prediction, a hypothesis, which can be inspired by experiences in the world or developed from a theory, which is a set of principles or a framework for a set of observations based on previous research. Once a hypothesis has been developed, the researcher will want to actually test the prediction. There are three basic methods for testing hypotheses: the observational method, the correlational method, and the experimental method. Which one to use depends on the question asked.

Observational Method: What Is Happening? When a researcher simply wants to know what is happening within a situation or with a particular phenomenon, observational methods are most appropriate. For example, while watching one of those long commercials on late-night television called an infomercial, a researcher might wonder how many include a “free bonus gift.” An observational method can help to answer this question. When using observational methods, a researcher simply observes a behavior or situation and records what is happening.

Observational methods are system- atic in nature. Before conducting the observation, a researcher most often decides exactly what constitutes the behavior being studied. For example, in investigating how many infomer- cials offer a free gift, the researcher might specify that the free gift must come with the purchase and not require separate shipping and han- dling charges. Decisions must also be made about when to sample the behavior. A researcher could decide to sample infomercials occurring between 12:00 p.m. and 3:00 a.m. on network television or between 1:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekends on cable television. Depending on the research question, observational research might take place in a wide variety of settings. An interest in children’s aggressive behavior might lead to observations in a day care setting. For a research question about the actions of people sitting in waiting rooms, data collection could take place at a local dentist’s office.

Observational methods are helpful in describing if or how often something might hap- pen. Many observational studies take place in naturalistic settings, so people’s behaviors are generally the same as in their everyday lives. One drawback of this method is that relatively rare or private behaviors, such as sexual activity, are difficult or unethical to observe. Scientists using this method also need to be careful to not allow their presence to affect the behavior being observed.

Belinda Images/SuperStock

Observational studies allow researchers to observe people and their behavior in naturalistic settings.

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 10 7/16/13 9:53 AM

CHAPTER 1Section 1.3 How Do We Do Social Psychology?

Test Yourself

• Describe several research questions that would best be answered using the observational method.

Examples: How often do people jaywalk? How often do people hold open the door for strangers when going into a store? Do people read the magazines in a doctor’s office waiting room?

Correlational Method: What Might Happen? Researchers often want to be able to predict if one behavior (or feeling or thought) will occur as a result of another behavior. In these cases, they use the correlational method. If a researcher was interested in whether the age of people is associated with their likeli- hood of buying an infomercial product, the correlational method would be used. To apply this method, people’s ages would need to be recorded, as well as how many infomer- cial products they had purchased within a specified period, for instance, within the last month. In research, the entities assessed when using a correlational method are called variables. A variable is literally something that varies or can vary. In this study, two vari- ables are assessed: age and purchases. Researchers are interested in whether there is a relation between the two variables they are comparing. Does knowing a person’s age tell us anything about the number of advertised products bought last month? Are these vari- ables co-related?

Correlational research often involves the use of survey methods. Surveys help researchers gather information about people by asking individuals to answer a question or a series of questions about themselves and what they think, feel, or do. Surveys may be conducted in a wide variety of ways. Sometimes researchers do face-to-face interviews, or talk to people on the telephone to collect information. Other times a paper-and-pencil survey is sent to potential participants or people sit in a group setting, like a classroom, to fill out a survey. Surveys are also administered online. Surveys can be helpful in collecting a lot of information in a relatively short period, but researchers must be careful of the wording of questions within a survey so they do not lead people to a desired answer.

Another concern of survey research is the reliability of the survey. A reliable survey is one that provides consistent information. For example, if an individual was surveyed about his or her religious beliefs one week and then again 2 weeks later, the answers on the survey should be similar both times, unless, of course, the person surveyed experi- enced a religious conversion in that time. If two administrations of a survey provided very different results and there is no alternative explanation for the lack of consistency, the survey is unreliable and should not be used in research. Surveys are often used in correlational research but may also be used in experiments to find out how people think, feel, or behave.

Beyond the survey method, other methods can be used when collecting data on vari- ables, combining more than one research method. For example, if the researcher was interested in whether children’s aggressive behavior was related to the number of

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 11 7/16/13 9:53 AM

CHAPTER 1Section 1.3 How Do We Do Social Psychology?

teachers observing the children’s play, the children could be observed on the playground, and the number of teachers watching could also be recorded. If a researcher wanted to know if the number of aggressive acts by children was related to parental attitudes toward violence, observations might be paired with a survey of parental attitudes toward violence. Data might also be obtained from other sources. A research question about the relation between age and purchasing from infomercials might be answered with a sur- vey of individuals but could also be addressed if the researcher received permission to look at people’s credit card purchases of infomercial products, as well as the credit card company’s data concerning their clients’ ages. Note that with the correlational method, the researcher is not manipulating the environment or attempting to change people’s behavior, but rather, looking at what people are naturally doing, specific attributes, or what they are thinking or feeling.

The correlational method can be very useful, but it must be used with caution. If knowl- edge of one variable (age) helps predict another (buy- ing), does that mean that one causes the other? Not neces- sarily. It is possible that the first variable caused the sec-

ond, or that the second variable caused the first, or that some other variable caused both variables. Without further research we cannot know which possibility is true. For exam- ple, a researcher might find a negative correlation in schools between the number of teach- ers monitoring hallway behavior and the number of acts of aggression in the hallway. It is possible that more teachers in the hallway caused lower aggression, but it is also possible that there were fewer teachers in the hallway in the face of aggression because they had left to avoid it. Knowing that there is a correlation between two events does not tell us which, if either, is the cause. In fact, it is quite common to have a third variable cause a correlation between two other variables. For example, sunburn and outdoor temperature are correlated. Does this mean that hot weather causes sunburn or that sunburn causes hot weather? Of course not. The summer sun causes both sunburn and hot weather. Cum hoc propter hoc—correlation does not imply causation.

Expand Your Knowledge: Participate in Research

Want to see what social psychological research is really like? Participate in online research. One clearinghouse for studies can be found at the Social Psychology Net- work website: http://www.socialpsychology.org/.

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 12 7/16/13 9:53 AM

http://www.socialpsychology.org/

CHAPTER 1Section 1.3 How Do We Do Social Psychology?

Test Yourself

• If a researcher were to give a test of creativity to a participant and get a score of 12 and a week later give the same test again and get a score of 12, that creativity test would have what quality?

Reliability. A test that provides consistent scores is reliable.

• If two variables are correlated, does that mean that one of them causes the other?

No. Two variables can be correlated but both be caused by another variable. Correlation is not causation.

Experimental Method: What Causes That? A researcher interested in causality would use the experimental method (see Figure 1.1). For example, if we are interested in whether offering a free gift makes people more likely to buy things, we would do an experiment. In this basic experiment half of a group of people would be randomly assigned to watch an infomercial where a free gift is offered at the end, and the other half of the group would watch an identical infomercial but without reference to a free gift. Each person would then be asked how much they would like to buy the product.

The Experimental Study In an experiment, the group that receives the treatment or experiences a change in their environment is called the experimental group. In the study of free gifts in infomercials, the group that is offered the free gift would be the experimental group, and the group to which nothing was offered is called the control group. Researchers use other terms for other parts of an experiment. The variable manipulated in an experiment, in this case the presence or absence of a free gift offer, is called the independent variable. The variable we measure in an experiment, in this case desire to buy, is the dependent variable. An experiment tests whether the independent and dependent variable have a cause and effect relationship. If the presence or absence of a gift (i.e., the independent variable) changes buying behavior (i.e., the dependent variable), the assumption is that gifts cause a desire to buy.

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 13 7/16/13 9:53 AM

CHAPTER 1Section 1.3 How Do We Do Social Psychology?

Figure 1.1: The experimental method

A simple experiment can be designed to test a hypothesis.

Many experiments involve random assignment, which means that each individual in the sample has an equal chance of being in each of the groups (levels of the independent variable). In the study of infomercials, the researcher might flip a coin and assign those who got heads to get the free gift and those who got tails to be offered no free gift. Ran- dom assignment is important because it lessens the possibility of extraneous variables affecting the study. Extraneous variables are things that are outside of our interest but that may affect the results of the study. For example, if a researcher assigned the first half of the people who volunteered to be part of the study to watch the infomercial with the free gift, they may be more likely to buy because they are generally eager people. They signed up quickly for the study and were also very interested in other opportunities, like a free gift. If, instead, the researcher randomly assigned individuals to the two groups, the eager people would likely be distributed fairly equally between the two groups. Random assignment allows preexisting differences within participants to be randomly distributed among the groups in a study.

Experimental group People who watch an infomercial that offers a free gift at the end.

Offering a free gift in an infomercial makes people more

likely to buy the item.

The desire to buy the infomercial product of the

experimental group is compared to that of the control group.

Control group People who watch the same

infomercial without the offer of a free gift.

People are randomly assigned to one of two groups.

Independent variable:

Dependent variable:

Hypothesis:

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 14 7/16/13 9:53 AM

CHAPTER 1Section 1.3 How Do We Do Social Psychology?

Test Yourself

• Identify the independent and dependent variables.

a. To see if college students ate less when served on smaller plates, students received a normal cafeteria meal on the regular plates or on plates that were 1 inch smaller in diameter.

Independent variable: size of plate; Dependent variable: amount eaten

b. Investigating whether receiving candy while taking a test improved test scores, students either received a small candy bar while taking a test or no candy.

Independent variable: candy; Dependent variable: test scores

c. Looking at the difference clothing might make on perceived trustworthiness of a newscaster, the newscaster either wore very casual clothes or his usual suit and tie to present the news. Both the viewers who saw him wearing casual clothes and the viewers who saw him in his usual clothing rated his trustworthiness.

Independent variable: clothing; Dependent variable: perceived trustworthiness

(continued)

Despite researchers’ best efforts, there are times when a particular kind of extraneous vari- able interferes with research conclusions. Confounding variables, also known as “third” or “latent” variables, are variables that change or are inadvertently manipulated along with the independent variable. For example, imagine we found a difference in buying behavior between the experimental group and control group in our study of infomercial free gifts. If every participant saw the same infomercial in our study, and only the experi- mental group saw a final segment offering them a free gift, we might reasonably assume that a free gift encourages buying. But this might not be the case. If the offer of the free gift took another 20 seconds, perhaps the extra processing time influenced the buying behav- ior of the experimental group. Along with our independent variable manipulation (offer of a free gift), came a confounding variable (extra processing time). Extraneous variables, and in particular confounding variables, are notoriously difficult to control and, at times, even see. As you read about research in social psychology, be on the lookout for extrane- ous variables and keep in mind their potential impact on our conclusions.

A study free from extraneous and confounding variables, where we are fairly certain that the independent variable caused the observed change in the dependent variable is described as having internal validity. But having humans as research participants creates special problems for those who study them. For example, demand characteristics occur when research participants change their behavior because of what they perceive to be the purpose of the study. If participants believe a researcher is looking at whether free gifts made people happy, those participants might report being happy when getting a gift, even though they actually find the free gift an annoying distraction. When demand character- istics are in play, the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable cannot be clearly seen. The researcher would not know if the participants were acting happy because they were being nice or because the free gift actually made them happy. One way to avoid demand characteristics is to use deception to mislead participants about the true focus of the study. However, deception brings with it a variety of ethical problems.

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 15 7/16/13 9:53 AM

CHAPTER 1Section 1.3 How Do We Do Social Psychology?

Test Yourself (continued)

• For each of the preceding scenarios, identify the experimental and the control group.

a. Experimental group: students eating off the plates that were 1 inch smaller in diameter; Control group: students eating off the regular plates

b. Experimental group: students receiving candy; Control group: students receiving no candy

c. Experimental group: viewers who saw the newscaster in casual clothing; Control group: viewers who saw the newscaster in his usual suit and tie

Application of an Experiment Researchers want the findings of their work to have generalizability. A study that is gen- eralizable is one whose results can be applied in a variety of situations. If the findings of

a study apply only to the laboratory setting or only with the type of peo- ple that participated, the findings are not very useful to everyday people in everyday situations. Studies that are generalizable are said to have external validity, which is the extent to which the results of a particular study are applicable to other places, other people, and other times.

To ensure that findings are relevant to a variety of people, researchers try to get a representative sample of the population to be part of the study. In a study of the effect of free gifts in infomercials on buying behavior, a researcher could recruit a number of friends to be part of the study. The problem with this idea is

that the results might apply only to people like the researcher, likely of similar age and life situation. Would the findings also apply to an 80-year-old widow, 50-year-old busi- nessperson, and 30-year-old stay-at-home dad? To make certain the findings will apply to a wide variety, researchers try to get a random sample from a population. A random sample is a group of individuals chosen from a population where every member of the population had an equal chance of being part of the study. Random samples give us a good chance of getting a sample that is representative of the population, and therefore, results that are applicable back to the population. Random samples are important not just when using the experimental method but for the observational and correlational method as well.

If a psychological study is conducted with only adolescent-aged males, do the results have external validity?

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 16 7/16/13 9:53 AM

CHAPTER 1Section 1.3 How Do We Do Social Psychology?

True random samples can be difficult to obtain. Getting the contact information for every- one at a somewhat small workplace might be relatively easy, but what if the population is the entire television-viewing public in the United States? How does one assure that every U.S. television viewer has an equal chance of being part of a study? Choosing a sample from all the people listed in phone books would be excluding those with only cell phones, unlisted numbers, or no phone. A sample from all the addresses of U.S. house- holds, assuming such a list could be obtained, would exclude the homeless and those in transition between residences.

The issue of random sampling has been problematic in social psychology. Many social psychologists teach and do research at colleges and universities, so they use the partici- pants that are easily available to them: college students. In one assessment of this problem Henry (2008) looked at articles on prejudice and stigma published in the top three journals in social psychology between 1990 and 2005, finding that between 87% and 98% used student samples. While this tells us a great deal about “college sophomores in the labora- tory,” as Sears (1986) put it, the findings may not apply well to those not in college, those of middle age, or the elderly.

When drawing conclusions about social behavior, there is a temptation to believe that the conclusion reached was obvious all along. This tendency to overestimate your ability to have predicted the results is known as hindsight bias (Bernstein, Atance, Loftus, & Melt- zoff, 2004; Fischhoff, 1975; Werth & Strack, 2003). An example of hindsight bias is when someone says that they knew which team was going to win a championship game, after that team had already won. Or, after telling your grandma about your recent engagement, she informs you that she “knew all along that girl was ‘the one.’” Many students of social psychology face hindsight bias when studying various social phenomenons. As you read about the research of social psychologists, you may think that the conclusion was obvious, so much so that it seemed like a silly study to do in the first place. But what is obvious is not always right.

Researchers want to be able to apply results to different people and to settings outside of the laboratory. If participants act differently in a research lab than they do in everyday life, a researcher can only predict what happens in research labs, not in the real world. In order to encourage participants to act naturally, some researchers try to make the experimental setting as similar to the real-life setting as possible. When the environment participants experience is similar to what they would experience in real life, the study is said to have mundane realism. For example, in a study of infomercials, researchers might ask partici- pants to sit on a comfortable couch in a decorated room to simulate the home environment rather than have participants sit at a desk or on a hard office chair.

Even without mundane realism, it is possible to encourage experimental realism in a research study. Experimental realism occurs when research participants are completely involved and engaged in what they are doing. With experimental realism, the partici- pants’ immersion in the activity causes them to act as they would in their everyday lives. Researchers generally prefer experimental realism over mundane realism. Participants watching an infomercial on a comfortable couch may experience the real-life setting but still act in the way they think the experimenter wants them to, showing demand

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 17 7/16/13 9:53 AM

CHAPTER 1Section 1.3 How Do We Do Social Psychology?

characteristics and providing a response they would not in their everyday life. Mundane realism can encourage experimental realism, but experimental realism can occur even without mundane realism. Participants might feel very comfortable watching the info- mercial on the couch and pay as much attention to it as they would in their own living room at home, but it is possible they might have been equally engaged while sitting on a hard chair in a stark room.

Test Yourself

• Why is generalizability important?

Without generalizability, the findings of research are only applicable to the situations or types of settings in which the data were collected. Social psychologists want to know how people normally behave in everyday situations, so they want their findings to apply to those situations and types of settings.

• What is the difference between random sampling and random assignment?

With random sampling, researchers are obtaining participants from a population. Sam- pling involves getting participants for a study. Random assignment is what a researcher may or may not do after acquiring a sample. Random assignment involves actually put- ting participants into the experimental or control group(s). Just because a researcher does one, it does not mean the research has done the other. It is possible to do random sampling and then fail to randomly assign participants and to do non-random sampling and then randomly assign participants to group.

• If you were doing a study on conflict in romantic relationships, what might you do to encourage mundane realism?

Place participants in a setting that approximates real life. For example, couples are likely to spend much of their time in conflict at home, so a researcher could ask couples to sit in a room that looks like a living room and talk about a topic that causes conflict in their relationship.

• Why is the hindsight bias also known as the I-knew-it-all-along phenomenon?

When people engage in the hindsight bias, they believe that what they did not know earlier is so obvious they must have known it all along.

Statistical Measurement The results of research need to be organized and summarized so they can be understood and shared. Researchers use various statistical measures to help them see what the col- lected information means and to communicate this information succinctly. Within obser- vational research, counting the total number of behaviors seen and describing the range can be helpful. For example, a researcher could observe aggression shown by different children on the playground and report the total number of aggressive acts shown by each child. Table 1.2 shows the results from one observation of seven children on a playground. A researcher could report that the range of scores was between 2 and 7 acts, with a total of 5 acts between the most aggressive and least aggressive child. This may be helpful

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 18 7/16/13 9:53 AM

CHAPTER 1Section 1.3 How Do We Do Social Psychology?

information, but it would also be interesting to know the number of aggressive acts most children engage in or the average number of aggressive acts.

One way to report this information would be to describe the most common number of aggressive acts seen in the children. Reporting the most common response is reporting the mode. As seen in Table 1.2, three of the seven children engaged in three aggressive acts; 3 was the most common number of acts, so the mode for this group is 3. Another way of looking at the average score is to line the scores up from smallest to largest and see what score falls in the middle. The middle score in such a list is called the median. For the num- ber of aggressive acts performed by children, the numbers from the table would line up like this: 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 6, 7. The middle number in that list is the last 3, so the median for this group is 3. The final way of looking at the most common score is to find the arithmetic aver- age of the scores, called the mean. To find the mean the scores are summed and divided by the number of scores. In the list of scores in the table, 4 1 6 1 3 1 3 1 2 1 7 1 3 5 28. The sum (28) divided by the number of scores (7) equals 4. The mean for this group of scores is 4. In observational research the mean, median, or mode are reported to help com- municate the most common score.

Table 1.2: Number of aggressive acts observed

Child Number of aggressive acts

Child 1 4

Child 2 6

Child 3 3

Child 4 3

Child 5 2

Child 6 7

Child 7 3

In correlational research, researchers often use the results of a statistical test to describe any potential relation between variables. The primary statistic used with the correlational method is the aptly named correlation coefficient (technically a Pearson product-moment correlation). A correlation coefficient is a number that describes a relationship between two variables, varying from a 21.0 to a 11.0. There are three possibilities for a correlation. The first possibility is that as one variable increases, the other variable increases as well. If the older people in a study of buying behavior and age bought more than the younger people, and the older they were the more they bought, the relationship would be described as a positive correlation. A correlation coefficient between 0 and 11.0 is a positive correla- tion. The second possibility is that as one variable increases, the other variable decreases. If the older that people are, the less they buy—that is, if buying goes down as age goes up—the relation would be described as a negative correlation. A correlation coefficient between 0 and 21.0 is a negative correlation. The final possibility is that the two variables are not related to one another. In this instance age would have no relationship to buying,

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 19 7/16/13 9:53 AM

CHAPTER 1Section 1.3 How Do We Do Social Psychology?

no correlation. A correlation coefficient of 0 indicates no correlation. Scores closer to 0, either positive or negative, indicate a weaker correlation; and scores closer to 21 or to 11 indicate a stronger correlation. Figure 1.2 shows what positive, negative, and no correla- tion might look like.

Figure 1.2: Scatterplot of a positive correlation, negative correlation, and no correlation

In a positive correlation (A), when one variable increases, so does the other. For a negative correlation (B), as one variable decreases, the other decreases as well. When there is no correlation (C), no discernible pattern exists.

In experimental research, experimenters often compare the means of groups to see if they are different. If means are quite different from one another and the study was well designed, and therefore high in internal validity, it is likely that the differences are due to the manipulation of the independent variable. When the means of groups are close to one another, it is possible that any difference is due simply to chance. Various statistical tests might be used to look at whether the differences between the means are likely to be due to a real difference and not because of chance, but two of the most basic statistical tests are “t tests” and “analysis of variance.” A t test is used when a researcher is comparing two groups and looking for a difference between them. Analysis of variance is used when there are three or more groups and a researcher is looking at whether there are differences among them.

When looking at the qualities of a group, psychologists use a variety of scores ranging from very high to very low. Much of the time, very few people have very low scores and very few people have very high scores, with the majority of people in the middle. When averaging those high, low, and medium scores, we end up with an average right in the middle. When there are a few high scores, a few low scores, and a large number in the middle, we have a distribution of scores called a normal distribution, also known as a normal curve or a bell curve. When looking at differences between groups, we get two

V ar

ia b

le B

Variable A 0 10 20 30 40 50

A: Positive correlation

0 10 20 30 40 50

Variable A

B: Negative correlation

V ar

ia b

le B

0 10 20 30 40 50

V ar

ia b

le B

Variable A

C: No correlation

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 20 7/16/13 9:53 AM

CHAPTER 1Section 1.3 How Do We Do Social Psychology?

distributions of scores. The averages of two groups might be vastly different (far apart) or extremely similar (close together). When the averages are close together, their distribu- tions are likely to overlap (see Figure 1.3). Overlapping distributions mean that a number of people in one of the groups have similar scores to the people in the other group. When the averages are farther apart, there is likely to be less overlap of the distributions, so many members of the two groups are likely to have different scores. The amount of over- lap between two distributions also depends on the spread of the scores in the distribution, that is, how variable the scores are. Two very spread out distributions may have a great deal of overlap despite having averages that are far apart.

Figure 1.3: Overlapping distributions

Overlapping distributions indicate that a number of participants in one group have similar scores to participants in the other group.

One technique psychologists use extensively is meta-analysis. In meta-analysis, research- ers use a statistical technique to combine the results of a large number of studies. By com- bining results we get a better idea of what is truly happening because many more people are included in the analysis—an extraneous variable that might have impacted the results of one of the studies will have only a small effect when many studies are combined. The statistic most often used to describe the results of a meta-analysis is called an effect size. The effect size takes into account how much difference there is between distributions. If there is no difference between two groups, the distributions of the groups should overlap completely. Sometimes there is very little difference between two groups, and their distri- butions overlap a great deal. When this is true, we have a low effect size. It is hard to see differences with a low effect size without using statistics. A medium effect size might be visible to someone who is paying attention. This is when the distributions do overlap, but the differences between the groups are big enough to see. A large effect size is one that is very easy to see. The averages of the two groups and the distributions do not show a lot of overlap.

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 21 7/16/13 9:53 AM

CHAPTER 1Section 1.3 How Do We Do Social Psychology?

Ethics in Research When conducting research, it is important to safeguard the well-being of participants. Social psychologists must solve a difficult problem: While seeking to discover how a nor- mal person in a normal situation might act, simply watching the action might change the nature of the action. For example, if you knew someone was watching you in a public restroom, you might spend more time washing your hands than you normally do. In one study of this phenomenon, researchers found that women observed in the bathroom were more likely to wash their hands than those who believed they were not observed (Peder- sen, Keithly, & Brady, 1986).

To avoid this problem, researchers have disguised the purpose of their studies, the identity of the researchers, or, at times, not told research participant that they were participating in research. A number of studies have included someone trained by the experimenter to appear to be a naive part of the situation, usually pretending to be another participant. This individual, called a confederate, helps create a situation that would be otherwise impossible to set up. However, the practice is ethically question- able because it involves deception.

Deception is a potentially dangerous practice in research, and hiding the nature of a study introduces a number of problematic issues. One obvious problem is that being lied to could cause distress in the short term and even affect how individuals feel about themselves over the long term. Angry or upset people may be a problem for the deceptive researcher and may cause larger problems for research in general. Knowing they may be deceived, participants may be less likely to volunteer to participate and more suspicious during a study, leading to behavior that is not as natural as a researcher might desire. If researchers become known as liars, the results they are reporting might be questioned as well. If they were willing to lie to research participants, why not lie about the results as well?

After a number of studies with questionable ethics in the 1960s, the field of psychology as a whole has paid more attention to issues of the rights of participants and the ethics of research methods. Studies involving human participants must go through an institu- tional review board, which is a committee at a university, college, or other organization where research is done that evaluates the ethics of a research study. For most studies

Test Yourself

• What is the most common score in a list of scores called?

The most common score is the mode.

• Name two variables that are likely to be positively correlated.

Examples: time spent studying and course grade, number of calories consumed and weight, age and number of gray hairs.

• Name two variables that are likely to be negatively correlated.

Examples: number of sick days used and amount of work produced, amount of caffeine consumed and hours of sleep, hours spent sitting per day and physical fitness.

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 22 7/16/13 9:53 AM

CHAPTER 1Section 1.3 How Do We Do Social Psychology?

researchers must obtain informed consent from participants. Informed consent involves researchers telling the participants what they can expect within their participation, and informing them of their rights as participants—including the right to discontinue partici- pation (see Figure 1.4). Research participants can then be part of the research knowing what is expected of them or decline to participate. Deception is still used in some social psychological research but only when deemed absolutely necessary. Researchers who use deception are also careful to talk to participants afterward and address any negative feel- ings that might have come up. Almost all research in social psychology now includes an explanation to participants about the nature of the study, whether or not study included deception. This explanation is called a debriefing. A major goal in debriefing is to identify and address any distress a research participant might have experienced in the course of the study.

Figure 1.4: APA’s ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct

The APA has formulated strict literature on the nature of informed consent in psychological research.

Source: Copyright © 2010 by the American Psychological Association. Reproduced with permission. The official citation that should be used in referencing this material is: American Psychological Association (2010a). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct (2002, amended June 1, 2010). Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx. No further reproduction or distribution is permitted without written permission from the American Psychological Association.

3.10 Informed Consent

(a) When psychologists conduct research or provide assessment, therapy, counseling or consulting services in person or via electronic transmission or other forms of communication, they obtain the informed consent of the individual or individuals using language that is reasonably understandable to that person or persons except when conducting such activities without consent is mandated by law or governmental regulation or as otherwise provided in this Ethics Code.

(b) For persons who are legally incapable of giving informed consent, psychologists nevertheless (1) provide an appropriate explanation, (2) seek the individual's assent, (3) consider such persons' preferences and best interests, and (4) obtain appropriate permission from a legally authorized person, if such substitute consent is permitted or required by law. When consent by a legally authorized person is not permitted or required by law, psychologists take reasonable steps to protect the individual's rights and welfare.

(c) When psychological services are court ordered or otherwise mandated, psychologists inform the individual of the nature of the anticipated services, including whether the services are court ordered or mandated and any limits of confidentiality, before proceeding.

(d) Psychologists appropriately document written or oral consent, permission, and assent.

8.02 Informed Consent to Research

(a) When obtaining informed consent as required in Standard 3.10, Informed Consent, psychologists inform participants about (1) the purpose of the research, expected duration and procedures; (2) their right to decline to participate and to withdraw from the research once participation has begun; (3) the foreseeable consequences of declining or withdrawing; (4) reasonably foreseeable factors that may be expected to influence their willingness to participate such as potential risks, discomfort or adverse effects; (5) any prospective research benefits; (6) limits of confidentiality; (7) incentives for participation; and (8) whom to contact for questions about the research and research participants' rights. They provide opportunity for the prospective participants to ask questions and receive answers.

(b) Psychologists conducting intervention research involving the use of experimental treatments clarify to participants at the outset of the research (1) the experimental nature of the treatment; (2) the services that will or will not be available to the control group(s) if appropriate; (3) the means by which assignment to treatment and control groups will be made; (4) available treatment alternatives if an individual does not wish to participate in the research or wishes to withdraw once a study has begun; and (5) compensation for or monetary costs of participating including, if appropriate, whether reimbursement from the participant or a third-party payor will be sought.

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 23 7/16/13 9:53 AM

http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx

CHAPTER 1Chapter Summary

Conclusion Social psychology is a broad field, covering a variety of topics. At the heart of social psy- chology is an interest in people as they relate to others. Although relatively new, it is a field of much richness and diversity. Social psychologists study a variety of topics includ- ing attraction, helping, aggression, obedience, and attitudes. To conduct these studies, researchers use various methods to learn about these topics and more.

Chapter Summary

What Is Social Psychology? Social psychology is all about people: what they do, how they think, and what they feel. As a branch of the larger field of psychology, social psychology is unique in its attention to how people relate to and influence one another. Social psychologists use the scientific method to study how others affect our thinking, actions, and feelings.

Where Did Social Psychology Come From? Most date the beginning of social psychology to 1898 with Norman Triplett’s study on the effects of the presence of others on bicyclists’ speeds and Max Ringelmann’s 1913 study of people working together on a task. After World War II, social psychology expanded as a field and now covers a wide range of topics. In more recent years, greater attention has been paid to cognition, neuroscience, and evolutionary psychology.

How Do We Do Social Psychology? Social psychologists use the scientific method—a hypothesis, or testable prediction, is developed and then tested using observational, correlational, or experimental methods. These different methods answer different kinds of questions. Observational methods answer questions relating to what is happening. Correlational methods look at relation- ships between variables, enabling prediction. Correlation, however, does not allow us to determine causation. With the experimental method, researchers manipulate one variable, the independent variable, and measure the effect of that manipulation through assess- ment of the dependent variable. At times, once one knows the results of a research study, those results may seem obvious, but people tend to fall short when truly predicting results

Test Yourself

• Describe a research question or topic that would be difficult to study without the use of deception.

Example: It may be difficult to study participants helping in emergency situations with- out setting up a scenario where they believe someone is injured or in danger or a dan- gerous or troubling situation is happening.

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 24 7/16/13 9:53 AM

CHAPTER 1Key Terms

confederate A person covertly working with an experimenter, appearing to the participant to be another participant or part of the situation.

confounding variable Within the experi- mental method, a variable that changes or is inadvertently manipulated along with the independent variable.

control group Within the experimental method, the group that is not manipulated does not receive the treatment or experi- ence a change. Contrast with experimental group.

correlation coefficient A number that describes a relationship between two variables.

correlational method A research method that allows researchers to predict the value of one variable if provided with informa- tion about a second variable.

debriefing Explanation of the study’s true purpose given at the end of a research study. If deception was used or a stress- ful situation was encountered during the study, the researcher uses the debriefing to identify and address the issues.

demand characteristics A change in the behavior of participants in a research study because of their perceived knowledge of the hypothesis or variables in the study.

dependent variable The variable we mea- sure in an experiment.

beforehand. This sense that “you knew it all along” is called the hindsight bias. In research, attention is paid to potential ethical issues. Researchers have their research plans checked by an institutional review board, and participants provide informed consent and are debriefed at the end of participation.

Critical Thinking Questions

1. What makes social psychology different from other academic disciplines? 2. What makes social psychology different from other areas of psychology? 3. If social psychology were the only discipline we could use to answer questions,

what types of questions would we have difficulty answering? 4. As a discipline that is just over 100 years old and covers a wide variety of topics,

what issues might social psychology encounter and present that an older or more focused field might avoid?

5. Consider a topic such as online shopping. What research questions might a social psychologist ask about this topic? For these questions, what research method might you use to answer them?

6. If two things are correlated, why is this correlation not evidence of causation? 7. Experiments are designed to investigate causality. How do they do that? 8. Why is hindsight bias dangerous?

Key Terms

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 25 7/16/13 9:53 AM

CHAPTER 1Key Terms

experimental group Within the experi- mental method, the group that is manipulated, receives the treatment, or experiences a change in its environment. Contrast with control group.

experimental method A research method involving manipulation of one variable to investigate whether the manipulated vari- able causes change in a second, measured, variable.

experimental realism The phenomenon that occurs when research participants are completely involved and engaged in what they are doing.

external validity The extent to which the results of a study are applicable to other places, other people, and other times. Studies with greater external validity have more generalizability.

extraneous variables Variables that are outside of our interest but may affect the results of a study.

generalizability A research study is high in this if what the participants do in the study is similar and can be applied to what people tend to do in the world. A study that is generalizable is one whose results can be applied in a variety of situations.

hindsight bias Our tendency to believe, after the fact, that something was obvi- ous. Also known as the I-knew-it-all-along phenomenon.

hypothesis A testable prediction.

independent variable The variable we manipulate in an experiment.

informed consent Obtained from research participants. Within informed consent researchers tell the participants what they can expect within their participation and about their rights as participants, includ- ing the right to discontinue participation.

institutional review board A committee at a university, college, or other organiza- tion where research is done that evaluates the ethics of a research study.

internal validity A study free from extra- neous and confounding variables where it is fairly certain that the independent variable caused the observed change in the dependent variable.

mean Arithmetic average, found by sum- ming all of the scores in a group and divid- ing by the number of scores.

median Middle score, found by listing the scores in order and locating the score at the halfway point.

mode Most common score, found by counting the number of each response and locating the one that is used the most.

mundane realism Within an experimental study, when the environment participants experience is similar to what they would experience in real life.

negative correlation A relationship between two correlated variables in which one variable increases as the other variable decreases.

normal distribution A distribution of scores where there are a few high scores, a few low scores, and a large number in the middle. Also known as a normal curve or a bell curve.

observational method A research method that involves observing participants and not manipulating any variables within the situation. This method answers questions about what is happening.

positive correlation A relationship between two correlated variables in which one variable increases as the other variable increases.

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 26 7/16/13 9:53 AM

CHAPTER 1Key Terms

random assignment Within an experi- ment, each individual in the sample has an equal chance of being in each of the groups (levels of the independent variable).

random sample A group of individuals chosen from a population where every member of the population had an equal chance of being part of the study.

reliability Consistency of a survey.

social psychology The scientific study of human thoughts, feelings, and behavior as they relate to and are influenced by others.

theory A set of principles or a framework for a set of observations and research findings.

variable Something that varies or can vary; the factors assessed when perform- ing an experiment.

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 27 7/16/13 9:53 AM

fee85798_01_c01_001-028.indd 28 7/16/13 9:53 AM