Running head: SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY PAPER

Social Psychology Paper Evangeline Catungal Psych 555 August 08, 2011 Dr. Anthony Casas

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY PAPER Social Psychology Paper From a broader view, social psychology is about people influencing other people. This simplistic definition of social psychology is exemplified by the recent Vancouver riot. On June 16, 2011, hours after a crushing Stanley Cup defeat of Vancouver Canucks at

the hands of the Boston Bruins, Canucks fans went on a rampage in downtown Vancouver. Cars were upturned and set ablaze, banks, stores, and other establishments were looted, and fists flew in anger and frustration. All of these behaviors reflected not only the deep disappointment of Vancouver sports fans, but also triggered the eruption of devastating large- scale riots. This post-game incident put Canada to shame, as global news report. A newspaper sports reporter, Schwartz (2011), says that riots following big sporting events have become predictable but they are usually celebratory sports riots. The genesis of riots interests social scientists. Generally, they believe that the onset of riots also follows the stimulus-response model. A sociologist, Lewis (2007), using the Smelser Theory of Collective Behavior, explains that the determinant of riots such as structural conduciveness, structural strain, growth of generalized belief, mobilization for action, and social control (p. 9) give rise to a precipitating collective behavior that is instigated by an active human core. The observers of this provocation, in turn, create an arena of public disorder. While sociologists focus on the levels of social groups in relation to social activity, e.g., riot instigator group, social psychologists draw on their knowledge about social influence, conformity, and obedience in relation to social contexts. To understand how individuals are influenced by other people, social psychologists emphasize on the power of situational variables that are influencing behaviors to enable them to explore issues such as riot outbreaks and other forms of social responses to social situations.

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY PAPER The discussion in this paper centers on the conceptual foundations of social psychology. The purposes of this paper are: to analyze the components of social psychology and to explain the impact of the interactions between social group and social situation have on social behaviors and social responses. Pertinent to the main topic are the discussions of the following: the definition of social psychology, the four characteristics of psychology, the concept and role of situationism in social psychology, and the five core social motives and their impact in social psychology. Definition of Social Psychology

According to Fiske (2010), social psychology is the scientific attempt to explain how the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of individuals are influenced by the actual, imagined, or implied presence of other human beings (p. 4). This definition which was derived from an American psychologist, Gordon Allport (1954a, p. 5) (Fiske, 2010, p. 4), puts forward the study on wide-ranging circumstances of social influence on another individuals or social groups behavior. In its effort to study social influence in various social contexts, social psychology involves three key elements: people influencing other people, degrees of perceived human presence, and operational levels of human cognition, affect, and behavior. People Influencing Other People On the individual level, many professors will avow the phenomenon of the first-day-ofclass-experience. As he or she enters the classroom, the din from the students fades into reverential dead-silence. Every one sits still with eyes straight at the professor as they await his or her first course orientation speech. On the group level, the stillness and attentiveness of the church guests as the bridal entourage enters the bridal path is less compared to the total silence when the bride enters the aisle.

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY PAPER Degrees of Perceived Human Presence Actual presence. The two situational examples about people influencing other people given above depict the actual presence of the stimulus, or the source of the influence. Fiske (2010) asserts that other peoples actual presence is very powerful to sway other people (p. 4). This thought also applies perfectly to variety of peer-pressure situations. Imagined presence. On the other hand, the imagined presence of others also influences other people. Picture the anxiety of a newly hired but brilliant advertising designer in his work room moments before he presents his ads design for Microsoft Company before Bill Gates and other Microsoft branch vice-presidents. This ads designer is very nervous as he imagines the reactions of Bill Gates and by those people with him. He asked himself, Am I professionally presentable? What if I voice falters during my presentation? What if my hands shake? What if they think that my ads design is just a heap of garbage? According to Fiske (2010), people are influenced by their imagination and they monitor their own behavior against the imagined reactions of other people (p. 5). Implied presence. The influence of the implied presence of others to other people involves not only the presence of a person but also social artifacts that imply the interests and presence of a specific person (Fiske, 2010, p. 5). A note pad, pen, and coffee mug on a

conference table imply that someone had already occupied that spot and the seat in front of these social artifacts regardless of who it is. In seeing these set on the table directs ones decision to find another place around the conference table. Levels of Human Cognition, Affect, and Behavior The actual presence, imagined presence, and implied presence of people (and social artifacts) and their influence on other people process the levels of human cognition, feeling, and

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY PAPER behavior of those experiencing these presences (Fiske, 2010, p. 5). Cognition assesses the situation that in turn affects and produces specific feelings and corresponding behaviors. This interaction of social group or individual to a given social situation and the impact it produces intertwine social science, psychology, and neuroscience. As Santrock (2010) puts it, the biological, cognitive, and socioemotional processes are inextricably intertwined. Those human responses (students tension, wedding guests silence, anxiety of the ad designer) depend on biological processes (physiological arousal), cognitive processes (ability to recognize and understand situations), and socioemotional processes (feeling toward social stimuli) (p. 15). Four Key Characteristics of Social Psychology Social psychology confronts vast sources of social thinking, social influence, and social relations to derive knowledge regarding the interaction of people and social situations. This

challenge illustrates the four key characteristics of social psychology: social psychology is broad in scope, constitutes a culturally mandated source of knowledge, follows scientific methods, and reflects an ongoing search for wisdom (Fiske, 2010, p. 31). Broad Scope As social science, social psychology studies various social groups in different social contexts. The main goal of these studies centers on the influence of individual, groups of people, and also social artifacts, on other individual and social group. Because people are cognitively and behaviorally complex, social groups are diverse, and social contexts involve numerous situations, the topics in social psychology are practically inexhaustible. The major areas under which these topics are included are social thinking, social influence, and social relations (Myers, 2003). Cultural Mandate

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY PAPER According to Fiske (2010), social psychology is [A] culturally mandated translation of our understanding of human behavior from an older language into a newer one (p. 33). This assertion points to the changing explanations given to the motives of influence of social groups

to other social groups. These changes in motives are culturally based. Basically, culture dictates how an individual or group reacts to a specific social stimulus. A culture whose total way of life was well-ordered its religious beliefs prohibits pre-marital relationship has succumbed to the changing views of its people regarding this proscription. People began to live together prior to marriage. This new form social relationship that, in the long run, influenced other members of the culture created a new social norm. No longer would social psychology categorize this new marital relationship as immoral but a way of life. Similarly, because of the imperative of culture change, changes in gender roles in the family that influence other family members roles will have to be explained in terms of family social structure and gender roles. Scientific Methods The Sherif experiments on social influence using the autokinetic effect approach (Fiske, 2010, p. 30) exemplify the scientific aspect of social psychology. Similar to other social sciences, social psychology involves scientific methods in studying social influence. These are: development of systematic theories to predict causality, construction of hypotheses, and use of research design, techniques, and procedures. Search for Wisdom The goal of social sciences is to obtain wisdom from social phenomena in an effort to understand these for the purpose of solving social issues and improving human conditions regarding relationships (Fiske, 2010, p. 34). The scientific nature of social psychology serves this purpose. Specifically, social psychologists gather empirical data from various social contexts and

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY PAPER

study diverse social relationships and the motives of these relationships to sort out various social influences that create relationships, negative or positive. The general knowledge that is derived from a micro-level social relation adds up to wisdom that in turn benefits the macro-level of human relations. Questions that address small group culture-based conflicts can lead to answers to those questions concerning large-scale national or global conflicts. In the same manner, solutions that resolve problems at the grassroots level might also help to determine the solutions to problems at the upper-level of social groups. Finally, these four key characteristics of social psychology are tied up in the review article of Magnusson (2011) on human diversity in new ways. In her discourse, the author gives specific regard to those psychological theory and research that intend to undertake study on human diversity in new ways and relates these with her observation and suggestion. Her observation on todays human diversity, which she describes as intersectionality, (centrality of the mutual interrelatedness of central categorization such as gender, ethnicity and race, social class and sexualities) is the focus of current psychological theory and research. In the midst of this current view on human diversity, Magnusson (2011) argues [That] for psychological research to be able to usefully theorize and study diversity in everyday lives, it needs to find new ways to incorporate the impact on individual lives of both large and small sociocultural, and sometimes political, contexts into research. Gender studies within psychology, as well as crossdisciplinary gender studies, have developed bodies of theory and empirical research about many diversity issues that can give helpful contributions to such developments of psychological theory and research (para. 1). Concept and Role of Situationism in Social Psychology

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY PAPER Empirically, situationism is a premise that behavior is mainly a response to immediate

situations or contexts. On the social level, Fiske (2010) says that the thoughtfulness given to the role played by social situations on social response is overshadowed by the attention given to personality theories as bases for individual or social responses (p. 7). Instead, social psychologists such as Lewin (1951) and later on, Ross and Nisbett (1991), assert that social situation influences social response and social behavior (Fiske, 2010, p. 7). Social psychologists emphasize situations as opposed to personalities for four reasons: First, ordinary people rely too much on personality in explaining behavior. Second, ordinary people underestimate or overlook the power of situations. Third, while scientists think that personality is complex enough to require its own separate subfield and its own methods, the nonscientists think personality is easy to assess and routinely use it to predict and explain behavior. Fourth, the common people reliant on personality instead of the power of situations in explaining behaviors can be right but is incomplete (pp. 9-10). The examples for actual, imagined, and implied situations discussed earlier in paper illustrate the power of social situations. The explanations for the phenomenon of the power of social situations on social response and social behavior are attended by two phases toward social integration. First, the social group is reduced to democratic level. People experiencing the same social situation are brought to the same level regardless of their socioeconomic class and personality distinctions. Second, added to the adaptive direction of group conformity for survival (Fiske, 2010, p. 11), the development of the sense of belongingness to and being one with the group. A related study on the sense of belongingness is that of Cremer (2004). Cremer examined whether or not the extent to which people include other group members in the self, influences depersonalized self-perception (i.e., perceiving self and others as similar in terms of group

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY PAPER characteristics). The result of this study showed that self-other merging positively influenced feelings of belongingness and identification with the in-group (Cremer, 2004). Five Core Social Motives and their Impact in Social Psychology Fiske (2010) explains that the idea that we need other people for our basic survival underlies the development of some core social motives that interact with the social situations to help people survive in groups (p. 14). The psychological adaptive mechanisms of core social motives are thinking, feeling, and behaving in situations involving other people. These core social motives mediate between the interplay of social group and social situations (p. 15). As to the core social motives impact on social psychology, Fiske (2010) also explains that these motives characterize a social psychological analysis because the result of social situation in relation to social response and behavior can be described as based on their unique combination (p. 15). Situationism, the premise that behavior is mainly a response to immediate situations or contexts requires explanations based on core social motives in which these determine the nature

of the situation that was interpreted by the person. In studying the influence of social contexts on social groups or individual, social psychologists focus on the relevance of the core social motives into the premises involved in situationism. The five core social motives are: belonging, understanding, controlling, enhancing self, and trusting. Belonging People are motivated to associate and establish a more stable relationship with each other. The basic motive of affiliating with other individual or group is to survive, to have a sense of identity, security and safely, and sense of belongingness, among other. The motive to belong benefits the groups tasks and activities that are intended for common survival. Thus, the

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY PAPER motive to belong helps individuals to survive psychologically and physically (Fiske, 2010, p.

10

18). In this system, belonging is the root need, the essential core social motive. With the system of all these motives, to belong is the core (p. 18) and the rest facilitates the functioning of the social group. Understanding The problems uncertainties motivate people to understand their environment and to predict events and what decisions they will make to make sense of the predicted events (Fiske, 2010, p. 18). Surrounded by common predicaments, people prefer to develop interpretations that are shared with another people and to develop upon these their common decision for actions. Also called as social representation (Moscovici, 1988) (Fiske, 2010, p. 19). Shared understanding is adaptive for survival as a group member and for the survival of the group. Controlling People are motivated to feel competitive and effective in confronting their physical and social environments and themselves (Fiske, 2010, p. 21). This is the motivation to control. Friske explains that control involves a relationship between what people do and what they get (a contingency between behavior and outcomes) (p. 21) and in doing so, people want to be effective, to have some sense of control and competence. The inability to control triggers continued search for reasons and actions in an effort to restore or gain control (Gleicher & Weary, 1995; Pittman, 1998) (Fiske, 2010, p. 21). Enhancing Self The motive of self-enhancement involves either maintaining self-esteem or being motivated by the possibility of self-improvement. Self-enhancement, in turn, is an effort to fit as a member of a specific group. The motive of self-enhancement underlies the fear of rejection by

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY PAPER

11

the group one belongs and assurance that membership to the group is maintained (Fiske, 2010, p. 23). Trusting Viewing the world as benevolent enables people to participate in many group activities with confidence and devoid of doubt or apprehension. Peoples pervading cognitive, emotional, and behavioral outlook is attended by trust. The motive of trust toward others is driven by the need of others to depend on especially in difficult circumstances and situations, according to Boon, 1995) (Fiske, 2010, p. 24). Among the advantages of trusting is that it facilitates group cohesion because it is rewarding and efficient. According to Fiske (2010), Trusting facilitates the attachment and interdependence found in close relationships. (p. 25). Conclusion Social psychology is the scientific attempt to explain how the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of individuals arising from the actual, imagined, or implied presence of other human beings. Situationism or the belief in the power of social contexts, and the five core social motives, both contribute major intellectual bases for social psychology. As social science that confronts gamut information for scientific research, analyses, and humanistic application, social psychology is characterized by its broad scope, culturally mandated source of knowledge, scientific methods, pursuit for wisdom.

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY PAPER

12

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY PAPER References

13

Cremer, D. D. (2004). The closer we are the more we are alike: The effect of self-other merging on depersonalized self-perception. Current Psychology, 22(4), 316-325. Retrieved from https://ehis.ebscohost.com/eds/detail?vid=2&hid=102&sid=8e9fa06d-9b33-45669fdsb39c429d9948%40sessionmgr111&bdata=JnNpdGU9zWRzLWxpdmU %3d#db=f5h&AN=14268686 Fiske, S. T. (2010). Social beings: Core motives in social psychology (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Lewis, J. (2007). Sports fan violence in America. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.. Magnusson, E. (2011). Women, men, and all categories: Psychologies for theorizing human diversity. Nordic Psychology, 63(2), 88-114. Retrieved from https:// Myers, D. (2003). Exploring psychology in modules (5th ed.). New York, NY: Worth Publishers. Santrock, J. W. (2010). A topical approach to life-span development (5th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Schwartz, D. (2011). Vancouver riots. CBS News. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/201106/16/f-vancouver-riot-effect.html