overhead

Four Basic perspectives in Social Psychology

1. Behavioral

A. Watson (1914): Behavioral Perspective

B. Skinner: Operant Conditioning

C. Thibout & Kelly, Homans: Social Exchange Theory

D. Bandura: Social Learning Theory

2. Cognitive

A. Heider: Attitude Consistency (Balance)

B. Makus&Zajonc: symbols and cognitive structure

3. Structural

A. Linton: Role Theory

B. Berger: Expectation-States Theory

4. Interactionist Perspective

A. Mead: Symbolic Interactionism

B. Stryker: Identity Theory

C. Goffman: Dramaturgical

D. Garfinkel: Ethnomethodology

Behavioral

Watson: Behaviorist Principle

Stimulus => Black Box => Response

· Behavior is segmented into responses

· The environment is segmented into stimuli

· “Black Box” approach: Stimuli enter the “box” (organism), and out come responses.

· Cognitive mechanisms that work in the organism black box are of no interest.

overhead

Skinner: Operant Conditioning

· “Operant behavior is any behavior that operates on the environment in such a way as to produce some consequence”(Wiggins, Wiggins, and Zanden 1994, p.4).

· “Reinforcement is the process in which a consequence or change in the environment strengthens the future probability of a particular behavior”(p.4).

Social Exchange Theory

· Homans (1958, 1961)

· Thibaut and Kelley (1959)

· Emerson (1962)

· Blau (1964)

Homans:

Social exchange theory is a social psychological and Sociological perspective that explains social change and stability as a process of negotiated exchanges between parties.

Principles of exchange:

· Equity (in business)

· Equality (legal)

· Need (in family or friendship network)

Equity

Profit _{person 1} = Profit _{person 2}

Reward _{person 1} - Cost _{person 1} = Reward _{person 2} - Cost _{person 2}

Thibaut and Kelley

All human relationships are formed by the use of a subjective cost-benefit analysis and the comparison of alternatives.

When people are deciding whether to remain in a relationship, they will not consider the rewards and costs in isolation” (Franzoi 2006 p.402)

Costs and rewards of the current relationship will be compared to alternative relationships.

Explanation why people are in dissatisfying relationships:

If there are no alternatives, or the alternatives appear not to be more rewarding people will stay in their current relationships.

Cognitive Perspective

Heider: Attitude Consistency (Balance)

0verhead

p person

o other

x impersonal entity

U Unit forming connections:

NotU not connected

L liking

DL disliking

L Factors that produce Liking

1. similarity

2. proximity

3. familiarity

4. ownership

5. similarity of beliefs and goals

overhead

Example of Balance:

Actor behavior object of behavior

You love your sweetheart

Good person loves good person

+ * + * + = + => balanced

Example of Imbalance:

Your partner cheats on you

Good person shows bad behavior to good person

+ * - * + = - => imbalance

Makus&Zajonc: symbols and cognitive structure

How does this tree come into my head and why does it relate to forests?

Information is processed in form of symbols. Cognitive structure of schemata put these symbols into relation

Structural Perspective

We are machines that follow normative expectations of others.

Overhead

Structural Perspective

We are machines that follow normative expectations of others.

Linton: Role Theory

Shakespeare: All the world's a stage

The structure of society provides positions where individuals play specific roles.

Playing a role we have to meet normative expectations of others.

These normative expectations are learned though socialization.

These positions change within the life course.

Berger: Expectation-States Theory

Status characteristics affect performance expectations
example: Let's give a group of five fresh(wo)men and one senior student a work assignment. Then we ask the group to choose one student to present the results to the class. Group members will expect the senior student to present.

Interactionist Perspective

Overhead

The three premises of Symbolic Interactionism

#1. People act on the basis of their meaning.

#2. Meaning arises from social interaction.

#3. Meanings are modified through interpretation by the person.

Meaning is symbolic: In interaction we use language and facial or bodily expressions as symbols to express meaning.

The minimum unit of analysis is an event (ABO)

Overhead

Stryker: Identity Theory

1. Identities are created through the interaction of individual selves and structural roles.

2. We have multiple identities that are organized in their a salience hierarchy.

3. Just as roles, identities are evoked, depending on the situation.

4. Identities a represented symbolically in interaction.

Goffman: Dramaturgical

We use gestures to create impressions of ourselves (roles)

Impressions need management (negotiation).

Garfinkel: Ethnomethodology

Investigates methods used by ordinary lay people to make sense out of their daily life.

These methods can lead to right or wrong predictions:

Probably true: bad kids com from bad parents

Definitely wrong: I lost 35 times on the roulette table, next time I have to win.

Overhead

PERSPECTIVE	INVESTIGATION OF AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR
Behaviorist	Learning experience that reinforces aggressive behavior
Cognitive	How people perceive interpret and think about aggressive behavior
Social Exchange Theory	Social rewards that people gain by using aggression
Role Theory	Social expectations that specify aggressive behavior in particular social positions
Symbolic Interactionism	Investigates the meanings of aggression for people and the reaction in interaction.
Ethnomethodology	Methods people employ in indicating aggression. The application of rules to specific acts of aggression.

Some critical thoughts:

How do we create reality

Constructionism: "What is perceived as real is real in its consequences"
Symbolic Interactionism: Our identities are self-meanings created in symbolic interaction
Symbolic Interactionism: We learn about ourselves through the observation of others.
Goffman: We engage impression management to manipulate other persons seeing us as we would like to be.

If we can project our constructed identities to other people who in turn affirm them, are we living in constant delusion? If there a reality check or do we truly life in gagaland? Does the physical environment provide this reality check or is also constructed?

Some extremes used in positive thinking. Take firewalking as an example. Explore yourself:

Back to the homepage of Dr. Andreas Schneider http://www2.tltc.ttu.edu/Schneider/

Disclaimer: The documents linked to other sources on the WWW, others than http://www2.tltc.ttu.edu/Schneider/ and its subdirectories, do not necessarily express the views of Texas Tech University or Dr. Andreas Schneider. @Copyright 2007 Andreas Schneider