Editing Social psychology (section)

== Core theories and concepts ==
=== Attitudes ===
{{Main|Attitude (psychology)}}
In social psychology, an attitude is a learned, global evaluation that influences thought and action.<ref name="Sison">{{cite book|last=Sison|first=Erick Louie A.|title=The Dynamics of Persuasion|publisher=Lawrence Erlbaum|year=2008|location=New York}}</ref> Attitudes are basic expressions of approval and disapproval or likes and dislikes. For example, enjoying chocolate ice cream or endorsing the values of a particular political party are examples of attitudes.<ref>{{cite book|last=Bem|first=D.|url=https://archive.org/details/beliefsattitudes00bemd|title=Beliefs, Attitudes, and Human Affairs|publisher=Brooks/Cole|year=1970|location=Belmont, CA|url-access=registration}}</ref> Because people are influenced by multiple factors in any given situation, general attitudes are not always good predictors of specific behavior. For example, a person may generally value the environment but may not recycle a plastic bottle because of specific factors on a given day.

One of the most influential 20th century attitude theories was [[Cognitive dissonance theory]]. According to this theory, attitudes must be logically consistent with each other. Noticing incongruence among one’s attitudes leads to an uncomfortable state of tension, which may motivate a change in attitudes or behavior.<ref name="Festinger, L. 1957">Festinger, L. (1957). ''A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance''. California: Stanford University Press.</ref>

Research on attitudes has examined the distinction between traditional, [[Self-report study|self-reported]] attitudes and [[Implicit stereotype|implicit, unconscious attitudes]]. Experiments using the [[implicit-association test|Implicit Association Test (IAT)]], for instance, have found that people often demonstrate implicit bias against other races, even when their explicit responses profess impartiality.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=McConnell|first=Allen|date=September 2001|title=Relations among the Implicit Association Test, Discriminatory Behavior, and Explicit Measures of Racial Attitudes|journal=Journal of Experimental Social Psychology|volume=37|issue=5|pages=435–442|doi=10.1006/jesp.2000.1470|s2cid=31010334}}</ref> Likewise, one study found that in interracial interactions, explicit attitudes correlate with verbal behavior, while implicit attitudes correlate with nonverbal behavior.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Heider|first1=J. D|last2=Skowronski|first2=J. J|year=2007|title=Improving the Predictive Validity of the Implicit Association Test|journal=[[North American Journal of Psychology]]|volume=9|pages=53–76}}</ref>

Attitudes are also involved in several other areas of the discipline, such as [[Conformity (psychology)|conformity]], [[interpersonal attraction]], social perception, and [[prejudice]].<ref>{{Cite web|title=Social Psychology|url=https://psynso.com/social-psychology/|access-date=21 November 2021|website=Psynso|language=en-US|archive-date=21 November 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211121021024/https://psynso.com/social-psychology/|url-status=live}}</ref>

=== Persuasion ===
{{Main|Persuasion}}
Persuasion is an active method of influencing that attempts to guide people toward the adoption of an attitude, idea, or behavior by rational or emotive means. Persuasion relies on appeals rather than strong pressure or [[coercion]]. The process of persuasion has been found to be influenced by numerous variables that generally fall into one of five major categories:<ref>{{Cite book|last=Myers|first=David|title=Social Psychology|publisher=McGraw-Hill|year=2010|isbn=978-0-07-337066-8|edition=10th|location=New York|pages=234–253}}</ref>
#[[Orator|Communication]]: includes [[credibility]], [[expert]]ise, [[trustworthiness]], and [[Physical attractiveness|attractiveness]].
#[[Message]]: includes varying degrees of [[reason]], [[emotion]] (e.g., fear), one-sided or two-sided arguments, and other types of informational content.
#[[Audience]]: includes a variety of [[demographics]], [[personality trait]]s, and [[preference]]s.
# [[Media (communication)|Medium]]: includes printed word, radio, television, the internet, or face-to-face interactions.
#[[Social environment|Context]]: includes environment, group dynamics, and preliminary information.

[[File:Elm-diagram.jpg|thumb|469x480px|The Elaboration Likelihood Model is an influential model of persuasion.]]

[[Dual process theory|Dual-process theories]] of persuasion (such as the [[elaboration likelihood model]]) maintain that persuasion is mediated by two separate routes: central and peripheral. The central route of persuasion is influenced by facts and results in longer-lasting change, but requires [[motivation]] to process. The peripheral route is influenced by superficial factors (e.g. smiling, clothing) and results in shorter-lasting change, but does not require as much motivation to process.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Austen |first=Jane |author-link=Jane Austen |title=Northanger Abbey & Persuasion |date=1919 |publisher=J.M. Dent |isbn=0-665-83283-4 |oclc=1111908588}}</ref>

=== Social cognition ===
{{Main|Social cognition}}
Social cognition studies how people perceive, recognize, and remember information about others.<ref>{{Cite book |last=DeLamater |first=John D. |author-link=John DeLamater |display-authors=etal |title=Social Psychology |date=8 July 2014 |publisher=Avalon |isbn=978-0-8133-4951-0 |oclc=883566075}}</ref> Much research rests on the assertion that people think about other people differently than they do non-social, or non-human, targets.<ref>{{cite book|last=Moskowitz|first=Gordon B|title=Social Cognition: Understanding Self and Others|year=2005|publisher=Guilford|isbn=978-1-59385-085-2|series=Texts in Social Psychology|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=_-NLW8Ynvp8C&q=%22Social+Cognition%22+Moskowitz}}</ref> This assertion is supported by the [[Social cognitive theory|social-cognitive]] deficits exhibited by people with [[Williams syndrome]] and [[autism]].<ref>{{cite news|last1=Dobbs|first1=Davis|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/08/magazine/08sociability-t.html|title=The Gregarious Brain|date=8 July 2007|newspaper=[[The New York Times Magazine]]|url-access=subscription|access-date=23 February 2017|archive-date=11 December 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081211031201/http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/08/magazine/08sociability-t.html|url-status=live}}</ref>

====Attribution====
{{Main|Attribution (psychology)}}
A major research topic in social cognition is [[Attribution (psychology)|attribution]].<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Reisenzein|first1=Rainer|last2=Rudolph|first2=Udo|title=50 Years of Attribution Research|journal= [[Social Psychology (journal)|Social Psychology]] |volume=39|issue=3|year=2008|pages=123–124|issn=1864-9335|doi=10.1027/1864-9335.39.3.123}}</ref> Attributions are explanations of behavior, either one's own behavior or the behavior of others.

One element of attribution ascribes the cause of behavior to internal and external factors. An internal, or dispositional, attribution reasons that a behavior is caused by inner traits such as personality, disposition, character, and ability. An external, or situational, attribution reasons that a behavior is caused by situational elements such as the weather.<ref name="Aaronson1">
{{cite book|last1=Aronson|first1=Elliot|url=https://archive.org/details/Social_Psychology_7th_edition_by_Elliot_Aronson_Timothy_D._Wilson_R_M._Akert|title=Social Psychology|last2=Wilson|first2=Timothy D.|last3=Akert|first3=Robin M.|publisher=[[Prentice Hall]]|year=2010|edition=7|author-link=Elliot Aronson}}</ref>{{rp|111}}A second element of attribution ascribes the cause of behavior to stable and unstable factors (i.e., whether the behavior will be repeated or changed under similar circumstances). Individuals also attribute causes of behavior to controllable and uncontrollable factors (i.e., how much control one has over the situation at hand).

Numerous biases in the attribution process have been discovered. For instance, the [[fundamental attribution error]] is the bias towards making dispositional attributions for other people's behavior.<ref name="Myers">
{{cite book|last=Myers|first=David G.|url=https://archive.org/details/psychology8thedit00myer|title=Psychology|publisher=Worth Publishers|year=2007|edition=8|location=New York|url-access=limited|via=Internet Archive}}</ref>{{rp|724}}The actor-observer bias is an extension of the theory, positing that tendency exists to make dispositional attributions for other people's behavior and situational attributions for one's own.<ref name="Aaronson1" />{{rp|107}} The [[self-serving bias]] is the tendency to attribute dispositional causes for successes, and situational causes for failure, particularly when self-esteem is threatened. This leads to assuming one's successes are from innate traits, and one's failures are due to situations.<ref name="Aaronson1" />{{rp|109}}

====Heuristics====
{{Main|Heuristics in judgment and decision making}}
[[Heuristics in judgment and decision making|Heuristic]]s are cognitive shortcuts which are used to make decisions in lieu of conscious reasoning. The [[availability heuristic]] occurs when people estimate the [[probability]] of an outcome based on how easy that outcome is to imagine. As such, vivid or highly memorable possibilities will be perceived as more likely than those that are harder to picture or difficult to understand. The representativeness heuristic is a shortcut people use to categorize something based on how similar it is to a prototype they know of.<ref name="Aaronson1" />{{rp|63}} Several other biases have been found by [[social cognition]] researchers. The [[hindsight bias]] is a [[Confabulation|false memory]] of having predicted events, or an exaggeration of actual predictions, after becoming aware of the outcome. The [[confirmation bias]] is a type of bias leading to the tendency to search for or interpret information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions.<ref>{{Citation|title=Availability Bias, Source Bias, and Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis|work=Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings|year=2015|pages=513–551|publisher=SAGE Publications, Ltd|doi=10.4135/9781483398105.n13|isbn=978-1-4522-8689-1}}</ref>

==== Schemas ====
{{Main|Schema (psychology)}}
[[Schema (psychology)|Schemas]] are generalized mental representations that organize knowledge and guide information processing. They organize social information and experiences. Schemas often operate [[automaticity|automatically]] and unconsciously. This leads to biases in perception and memory. Schemas may induce expectations that lead us to see something that is not there. One experiment found that people are more likely to misperceive a weapon in the hands of a black man than a white man.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Correll|first1=Joshua|last2=Park|first2=Bernadette|last3=Judd|first3=Charles M|last4=Wittenbrink|first4=Bernd|title=The police officer's dilemma: Using ethnicity to disambiguate potentially threatening individuals|journal= [[Journal of Personality and Social Psychology]] |volume=83|issue=6|year=2002|pages=1,314–1,329|issn=0022-3514|doi=10.1037/0022-3514.83.6.1314|citeseerx=10.1.1.466.7243|pmid=12500813}}</ref> This type of schema is a [[stereotype]], a generalized set of beliefs about a particular group of people (when incorrect, an [[ultimate attribution error]]). Stereotypes are often related to negative or preferential attitudes and behavior. Schemas for behaviors (e.g., going to a restaurant, doing laundry) are known as ''scripts''.<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Sternberg|first1=Robert J.|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=NISqDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA368|title=The Psychology of Human Thought: An Introduction|last2=Funke|first2=Joachim|date=22 August 2019|publisher=BoD – Books on Demand|isbn=978-3-947732-35-7|language=en}}</ref>

=== Self-concept ===
{{Main|Self-concept}}
[[File:Daryl Bem.jpg|thumb|Daryl Bem]]
Self-concept is the whole sum of beliefs that people have about themselves. The self-concept is made up of cognitive aspects called [[self-schema]]s—beliefs that people have about themselves and that guide the processing of self-referential information.<ref name=":2">{{cite journal |last=Markus |first=Hazel |year=1977 |title=Self-Schemata and Processing Information |journal=[[Journal of Personality and Social Psychology]] |volume=35 |issue=2 |pages=63–78 |doi=10.1037/0022-3514.35.2.63 |s2cid=16756658}}</ref> For example, an athlete at a university would have multiple selves that would process different information pertinent to each self: the student would be oneself, who would process information pertinent to a student (taking notes in class, completing a homework assignment, etc.); the athlete would be the self who processes information about things related to being an athlete. These selves are part of one's identity and the self-referential information is that which relies on the appropriate self to process and react to it.

There are many theories on the perception of our own behavior. [[Leon Festinger]]'s 1954 ''[[social comparison theory]]'' posits that people evaluate their own abilities and opinions by comparing themselves to others when they are uncertain of their own ability or opinions.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Festinger|first=Leon|author-link=Leon Festinger|year=1954|title=A theory of social comparison process|journal=[[Human Relations (journal)|Human Relations]]|volume=7|issue=2|pages=117–40|doi=10.1177/001872675400700202|via=SAGE Journals|s2cid=18918768}}</ref> [[Daryl Bem]]'s 1972 ''self-perception theory'' claims that when internal cues are difficult to interpret, people gain self-insight by observing their own behavior.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Bem|first=Daryl J.|title=Self Perception Theory|publisher=Academic Press|year=1972|isbn=978-0-12-015206-3|series=Advances in Experimental Social Psychology|volume=6|pages=1–62|chapter=Self-Perception Theory|doi=10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60024-6|author-link=Daryl Bem}}</ref>

=== Social influence ===
{{Main|Social influence}}
Social influence is an overarching term that denotes the persuasive effects people have on each other. It is seen as a fundamental concept in social psychology. The study of it overlaps considerably with research on attitudes and persuasion. The three main areas of social influence include [[conformity]], [[Compliance (psychology)|compliance]], and [[Obedience (human behavior)|obedience]]. Social influence is also closely related to the study of group dynamics, as most effects of influence are strongest when they take place in social groups.<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Vuong|first1=Quan-Hoang|title=Mindsponge Theory|date=2023|publisher=De Gruyter|isbn=9788367405140}}</ref>

The first major area of social influence is conformity. Conformity is defined as the tendency to act or think like other members of a group. The identity of members within a group (i.e., status), similarity, expertise, as well as cohesion, prior commitment, and accountability to the group help to determine the level of conformity of an individual. Conformity is often driven by two types of social influences: [[informational social influence]], which involves conforming to gain accurate information, and normative social influence, which involves conforming to be accepted or liked by the group.<ref>{{cite web |url=Lord, K. R., Lee, M. S., & Choong, P. (2001). Differences in Normative and Informational Social Influence. Advances in consumer research, 28(1).}}</ref> Individual variations among group members play a key role in the dynamic of how willing people will be to conform.<ref name="Aaronson2"/>{{rp|27}} Conformity is usually viewed as a negative tendency in American culture, but a certain amount of conformity is adaptive in some situations, as is nonconformity in other situations.<ref name="Aaronson2">
{{cite book|last=Aronson|first=Elliot|title=The Social Animal|title-link=The Social Animal (Aronson book)|publisher=Worth Publishers|year=2008|isbn=978-1-4292-0316-6|edition=10th|author-link=Elliot Aronson|orig-year=1972}}</ref>{{rp|15}}

The second major area of social influence research is [[Compliance (psychology)|compliance]], which refers to any change in behavior that is due to a request or suggestion from another person. Two common compliance strategies are 'foot-in-the-door,' which involves getting a person to agree to a small request to increase the likelihood of agreeing to a larger one, and 'door-in-the-face,' which involves making a large request that is likely to be refused to make a subsequent smaller request more likely to be accepted. The [[foot-in-the-door technique]] is a compliance method in which the persuader requests a small favor and then follows up with a larger favor (e.g., asking for the time and then asking for ten dollars). A related trick is the [[bait and switch]], which is a disingenuous sales strategy that involves enticing potential customers with advertisements of low-priced items which turn out to be unavailable in order to sell a more expensive item.<ref>{{cite book|last=Cialdini|first=R.B|year=2000|title=Influence: Science and Practice|publisher=[[Allyn and Bacon]]}}</ref>

The third major form of social influence is [[Obedience (human behavior)|obedience]]; this is a change in behavior that is the result of a direct order or command from another person. Obedience as a form of compliance was dramatically highlighted by the [[Milgram study]], wherein people were ready to administer shocks to a person in distress on a researcher's command.<ref name="Aaronson2" />{{rp|41}}

An unusual kind of social influence is the [[self-fulfilling prophecy]]. This is a prediction that, by being made, causes itself to become true. For example, in the financial field, if it is widely believed that a [[stock market crash|crash]] is imminent, investors may lose confidence, sell most of their stock, and thus cause a crash. Similarly, people may expect hostility in others and induce this hostility by their own behavior.<ref name="Aaronson1" />{{rp|18}}

Psychologists have spent decades studying the power of social influence, and the way in which it manipulates people's opinions and behavior. Specifically, social influence refers to the way in which individuals change their ideas and actions to meet the demands of a social group, received authority, social role, or a minority within a group wielding influence over the majority.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.psychologistworld.com/influence/social-influence|title=Social Influence {{!}} Psychology of Influence|last=Waude|first=Adam|date=20 July 2017|website=Psychologist World|access-date=8 April 2019|archive-date=8 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190408045245/https://www.psychologistworld.com/influence/social-influence|url-status=live}}</ref>

{{Clear}}

===Group dynamics===
{{Main|Group dynamics}}

[[File:Soc-psy diagram.jpg|thumb|right|Social psychologists study interactions within [[social group|groups]], and between both groups and individuals.]]

Social psychologists study group-related phenomena such as the behavior of [[crowd]]s. A [[Social group|group]] can be defined as two or more individuals who are connected to each other by [[interpersonal relationship|social relationships]].<ref name=":3">{{cite book|last=Forsyth|first=Donelson R.|url=https://archive.org/details/groupdynamics00fors_0|title=Group Dynamics|publisher=Thomson-Wadworth|year=2006|edition=4th|location=Belmont, CA|isbn=9780495007296|oclc=1035146459|url-access=limited}}</ref> Groups tend to interact, influence each other, and share a common identity. They have a number of emergent qualities that distinguish them from coincidental, temporary gatherings, which are termed social aggregates:<ref name=":3" />

* [[Norm (sociology)|Norms]]: Implicit rules and expectations for group members to follow.
* [[Role]]s: Implicit rules and expectations for specific members within the group.
* [[Interpersonal relationship|Relations]]: Patterns of liking within the group, and also differences in prestige or status.

The shared social identity of individuals within a group influences [[Intergroup relations|intergroup behavior]], which denotes the way in which groups behave towards and perceive each other. These perceptions and behaviors in turn define the social identity of individuals within the interacting groups.

The tendency to define oneself by membership in a group may lead to intergroup [[discrimination]], which involves favorable perceptions and behaviors directed towards the in-group, but negative perceptions and behaviors directed towards the out-group.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia|year=1986|title=The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior|editor1-last=S. Worchel and W.G. Austin|encyclopedia=Psychology of Intergroup Relations|location=Chicago|publisher=Nelson-Hall|author1=Tajfel, H. |author2=J. C. Turner}}</ref>

Groups often moderate and improve [[decision making]],<ref>{{Cite web|title=Group Decision Making {{!}} Principles of Social Psychology|url=https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-social-psychology/chapter/group-decision-making/|access-date=12 May 2021|website=courses.lumenlearning.com|language=en-US|archive-date=12 May 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210512084639/https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-social-psychology/chapter/group-decision-making/|url-status=live}}</ref> and are frequently relied upon for these benefits, such as in committees and juries. Groups also affect performance and [[productivity]]. Social facilitation, for example, is a tendency to work harder and faster in the presence of others.

Another important concept in this area is [[deindividuation]], a reduced state of [[self-awareness]] that can be caused by feelings of anonymity. Deindividuation is associated with uninhibited and sometimes dangerous behavior. It is common in crowds and mobs, but it can also be caused by a disguise, a uniform, alcohol, dark environments, or online anonymity.<ref>{{cite book|author1=Baron, R. S. |author2=Norbert L. Kerr|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=XubtAAAAMAAJ|title=Group Process, Group Decision, Group Action|publisher=Open University Press|year=2003|isbn=9780335206988|editor=N. L. Kerr|edition=2nd|series=Mapping Social Psychology|location=Buckingham|url-access=limited|s2cid=142783727}}</ref><ref>In the online domain, (e.g., see Rosen, Larry D., Nancy A. Cheever, and L. Mark Carrier. 2015. ''The Wiley Handbook of Psychology, Technology and Society''. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.  {{ISBN|9781118771952}}. {{doi|10.1002/9781118771952}}.)</ref>

=== Interpersonal attraction ===
{{Main|Interpersonal attraction}}
[[File:Factors influencing Interpersonal attraction.svg|thumb|Factors influencing [[interpersonal attraction]]]]
A major area of study of people's relations to each other is interpersonal attraction, which refers to all factors that lead people to like each other, establish relationships, and in some cases fall in love. Several general principles of attraction have been discovered by social psychologists. One of the most important factors in interpersonal attraction is how similar two particular people are. The more similar two people are in general attitudes, backgrounds, environments, worldviews, and other traits, the more likely they will be attracted to each other.<ref>Byrne, Donn. (1961). "[https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1962-06365-001 Interpersonal attraction and attitude similarity] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210214005653/https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1962-06365-001 |date=14 February 2021 }} {{Access indicator|closed}}." ''[[Journal of Abnormal Psychology|Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology]]'' 62(3)'':''713–15. {{doi|10.1037/h0044721}}. {{PMID|13875334}} – via [[American Psychological Association|APA]] PsycArticles.</ref>

[[Physical attractiveness]] is an important element of romantic relationships, particularly in the early stages characterized by high levels of [[limerence|passion]]. Later on, similarity and other compatibility factors become more important, and the type of love people experience shifts from passionate to companionate. In 1986, [[Robert Sternberg]] suggested that there are actually three components of love: intimacy, passion, and commitment.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Sternberg|first=Robert J|author-link=Robert Sternberg|year=1986|title=A Triangular Theory of Love|url=https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1484/6e479240d11894b714117a4031166b140829.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210227101654/https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1484/6e479240d11894b714117a4031166b140829.pdf|url-status=dead|archive-date=27 February 2021|journal=[[Psychological Review]]|publisher=[[American Psychological Association|APA]]|volume=93|issue=2|pages=119–35|doi=10.1037/0033-295X.93.2.119|s2cid=7047234}}</ref> When two (or more) people experience all three, they are said to be in a state of consummate love.

According to [[social exchange theory]], relationships are based on rational choice and cost-benefit analysis. A person may leave a relationship if their partner's "costs" begin to outweigh their benefits, especially if there are good alternatives available. This theory is similar to the [[minimax principle]] proposed by mathematicians and [[Economist|economists]]. With time, long-term relationships tend to become communal rather than simply based on exchange.<ref>{{Cite book|author1=Mills, Judson |author2=Margaret S. Clark|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=hfpBz22oMVMC|title=Theoretical Frameworks for Personal Relationships|publisher=Psychology Press|year=1994|isbn=978-0805805734|editor1=Erber, Ralph |editor2=Robin Gilmour|location=Hillsdale, NJ|at=[https://books.google.com/books?id=hfpBz22oMVMC&pg=PA33 p. 33]|chapter=Communal and Exchange Relationships: Controversies and Research|url-access=limited}}</ref>