Showing papers in "Advances in Experimental Social Psychology in 1965"

Inequity In Social Exchange

Abstract: Publisher Summary The process of exchange is almost continual in human interactions, and appears to have characteristics peculiar to itself, and to generate affect, motivation, and behavior that cannot be predicted unless exchange processes are understood. This chapter describes two major concepts relating to the perception of justice and injustice; the concept of relative deprivation and the complementary concept of relative gratification. All dissatisfaction and low morale are related to a person's suffering injustice in social exchanges. However, a significant portion of cases can be usefully explained by invoking injustice as an explanatory concept. In the theory of inequity, both the antecedents and consequences of perceived injustice have been stated in terms that permit quite specific predictions to be made about the behavior of persons entering social exchanges. Relative deprivation and distributive justice, as theoretical concepts, specify some of the conditions that arouse perceptions of injustice and complementarily, the conditions that lead men to feel that their relations with others are just. The need for much additional research notwithstanding, the theoretical analyses that have been made of injustice in social exchanges should result not only in a better general understanding of the phenomenon, but should lead to a degree of social control not previously possible. The experience of injustice need not be an accepted fact of life.

From Acts To Dispositions The Attribution Process In Person Perception1

Abstract: Publisher Summary This chapter describes the naive explanation of human actions, theory of correspondent inferences, personal involvement and correspondence, and the recent research concerning phenomenal causality and the attribution of intentions. The cognitive task of establishing sufficient reason for an action involves processing the available information about, or making assumptions about, the links between stable individual dispositions and observed action. The dispositional attributes are inferred from the effects of action, but not every effect is equally salient in the inference process. The perceiver's fundamental task is to interpret or infer the causal antecedents of action. When a person's actions have certain consequences, it is important for the perceiver to determine whether the person was capable of producing these consequences in response to his intentions. Where an actor fails to produce certain effects that might have been anticipated by the perceiver, there may be ambiguity as to whether the actor did not want to produce the effects, or wanted but was not able to. The attribution of intentions is that actions are informative to the extent that they have emerged out of a context of choice and reflect a selection of one among plural alternatives. However, the distinctiveness of the effects achieved and the extent to which they do not represent stereotypic cultural values, determine the likelihood that information about the actor can be extracted from an action. To say that an inference is correspondent, then, is to say that a disposition is being rather directly reflected in behavior, and that this disposition is unusual in its strength or intensity. In-role behavior is supported by too many reasons to be informative about the actor. However, out-of-role behavior is more informative because the effects of such actions are distinctive and not to be dismissed as culturally desirable.

Group Problem Solving1

Abstract: Publisher Summary This chapter provides an overview of the experimental evidence on group problem solving, factors that inhibit and promote the effective problem solving, and the present state of group problem solving research. The major barriers to effective problem solving are those conditions, which prevent the free expression of ideas in a group. Factors both obvious and subtle, such as pressures toward uniformity may be detrimental to the group's effectiveness if it prevents search for and discussion of alternative possibilities. The sources of pressures could be personnel characteristics, group member's perceived ability, or prior experience. The larger the group the more inhibited the introverted people are, unless they have a strong stake in the outcome; and power structures in groups, while possibly mitigating the negative effects of personality factors, may also create new barriers to effective problem solving. Another contributor to ineffective problem solving is the failure of most groups to organize or plan their attack on the problem. There are several factors that promote the effective problem solving, such as intellectual ability of the group members, the member's motivation to work cooperatively on the problem, and the diversity of the points of view and information relevant to the problem within the group. A formally appointed leader can also enhance a group's effectiveness by ensuring the free expression of ideas; however, he hinders the group's operation, if he tends to dominate the discussion. The efforts directed to inventing and testing new ways of encouraging creative group problem solving should advance our understanding of the problem-solving process and, when successful, would have practical value for society as well.

Vicarious Processes: A Case of No-Trial Learning1

Abstract: Publisher Summary The vicarious-learning experiences and response-guidance procedures involving both symbolic and live models are utilized extensively in social learning to short-circuit the acquisition process, and to prevent one-trial extinction of the organism in potentially hazardous situations. This chapter is mainly concerned with the theoretical analysis of the process of no-trial learning, and behavioral effects of exposure to modeling stimuli. While, the perceptual and cognitive aspects of vicarious learning are given emphasis, the motivational and reinforcement variables may influence indirectly the level of response acquisition by augmenting or reducing the occurrence of requisite observing responses and facilitative covert rehearsal. Further to response learning, witnessing the reinforcement contingencies of a model is highly influential in modifying the extent to which similar existing patterns of social behavior can be exhibited by observers. The strength of inhibitory responses may likewise be significantly altered, and emotional responses may be vicariously conditioned and extinguished as a function of observing the reinforcing consequences to a model and his attendant affective reactions. The chapter identifies some of the social-learning variables determining the diverse behavioral effects on observers of exposure to socially modeled stimulus events.

Situational Factors In Conformity1

Abstract: Publisher Summary Conformity to the group is a complex phenomenon, which should be differentiated into several distinct psychological processes, and has often been contrasted with nonconformity or independence. This chapter describes the various aspects of conformity, public compliance and private change, conditions of responding, characteristics of the group, and nature of the task. Nonconformity consists of two conceptually distinct types of behavior, and may reflect independence, or it may actually be anticonformity. These three types of behavior—conformity, independence, and anticonformity—are related to each other as the apexes of a triangle. It makes a great deal of difference whether agreement with the group is public compliance, or true private change, or whether nonconformity represents independence or anticonformity. Although, there have been a few studies of generalization of conformity, little is known of the generality of conformity, and investigations have not been conducted on the generality of conformity across situations outside the laboratory. A subject in a conformity situation has information and beliefs about several important features of the situation: the task, other members of the group, and the experimenter. Theories of conformity, which have been advanced in recent years, include psychoanalytic, cognitive, reinforcement, and even mathematical models. Research should be directed toward understanding the variables that affect nonconformity, as well as conformity.

The Concept of Aggressive Drive: Some Additional Considerations

Abstract: Publisher Summary Aggression is a kind of behavior, whose goal is the injury of some person or object. This chapter discusses the concept of aggression including instinct, frustration and learning, the drive concept, and purpose in aggressive behavior. Aggressive actions undoubtedly are sometimes carried out to achieve certain purposes, as the ego formulation maintains, yet, it is also apparent that automatic processes, unaffected by ego controls, also occasionally govern the magnitude of aggression displayed in a given situation. A frustration arouses instigation to aggression, and a thwarting will produce instigations to many different kinds of responses. Several critics have maintained that only certain kinds of frustrations give rise to hostile reactions, but mere deprivations supposedly lead to other consequences, such as frustrations can intensify the strength of the responses following immediately afterward. Animals and humans can be trained to respond nonaggressively to situations that ordinarily produce hostile responses. The physiologically aroused subjects may have acted aggressively and then interpreted their feelings as anger, because of what they had done. Cues in the situation, such as the confederate's aggressive and perhaps unpleasant behavior, could have evoked aggressive responses from the physiologically aroused people. This knowledge, which was perhaps also considerably influenced by the confederate's behavior, could have prevented various nonaggressive actions from appearing.