BPCC 107 Full Textbook

bPCC - 107
social psychology
BPCC-107
SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
School of Social Sciences

Indira Gandhi National Open University
EXPERT COMMITTEE
Prof. Swaraj Basu Prof. Swati Patra
Director, SOSS, IGNOU, New Delhi Professor of Psychology
Prof. Vimala Veeraraghavan SOSS, IGNOU, New Delhi
Former Emeritus Professor Prof. Suhas Shetgovekar
Discipline of Psychology, IGNOU, Professor of Psychology
New Delhi SOSS, IGNOU, New Delhi
Prof. Purnima Singh Dr. Monika Misra
Professor Sr. Assistant Professor of Psychology
School of Humanities and Social SOSS, IGNOU, New Delhi
Sciences, IIT, New Delhi
Dr. Smita Gupta (Convener)
Prof. Anuradha Sovani Sr. Assistant Professor of Psychology
Professor, SNDT University SOSS, IGNOU, New Delhi
Mumbai
COURSE COORDINATOR
Dr. Smita Gupta General Editor
Discipline of Psychology
SOSS, IGNOU Dr. Smita Gupta
SOSS, IGNOU
COURSE PREPARATION TEAM
Unit Writer Editor
BLOCK 1 INTRODUCTION TO (Content, format
SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY Language)
Unit 1 Introduction to Social Psychology Dr. Ari Sudan Tiwari Dr.Smita Gupta
Scientist ‘E’Defence Institute and
of Psychological Research Dr. Mohsin Uddin
Ministry of Defence, Lucknow SOSS, IGNOU
Road, Timarpur, Delhi
Unit 2 Theories of Social Psychology Dr. Ari Sudan Tiwari Dr.Smita Gupta
Scientist ‘E’Defence Institute and
of Psychological Research Dr. Mohsin Uddin
Ministry of Defence, Lucknow SOSS, IGNOU
(Also adapted few paragraphs
from BPC-006, Unit 3)
BLOCK 2 SELF IN SOCIAL CONTEXT SELF Dr.Smita Gupta
Unit 3 Self and Its Processes Adapted from BPC-006, and
Block 1, Unit 4 Dr. Mohsin Uddin
Unit 4 Self in Social Context Dr. Ari Sudan Tiwari
Scientist ‘E’Defence Institute
of Psychological Research
Ministry of Defence, Lucknow
BLOCK 3 SOCIAL COGNITION
Unit 5 Social Cognition: Understanding Dr. Ari Sudan Tiwari
Social Behaviour- I Scientist ‘E’Defence Institute
Unit 6 Social Cognition: Understanding Dr. Ari Sudan Tiwari
Social Behaviour- II Scientist ‘E’Defence Institute
Road, Timarpur Delhi-110054
Unit 7 Attitude And Attitude Change Dr. Ari Sudan Tiwari
BLOCK 4 SOCIAL INFLUENCE Dr. Smita Gupta
Unit 8 Social Influence Dr. Ari Sudan Tiwari and
Scientist ‘E’Defence Institute Dr. Mohsin Uddin
of Psychological Research SOSS, IGNOU
Unit 9 Aggression and Social Influence Dr. Ari Sudan Tiwari
Unit 10 Interpersonal Attraction and Dr. Ari Sudan Tiwari
Pro-Social Behaviour Scientist ‘E’Defence Institute
BLOCK 5 GROUP DYNAMICS Dr. Smita Gupta
Unit 11 Group Processes Dr. Ari Sudan Tiwari and
Scientist ‘E’Defence Institute Dr. Mohsin Uddin
of Psychological Research SOSS, IGNOU
Unit 12 Leader and Leadership Dr. Mohsin Uddin
Consultant
IGNOU, Delhi
PRINT PRODUCTION
Mr. Rajiv Girdhar Mr. Hemant Preeda Mr. Suresh Kumar
Assistant Registrar (Publication) Section Officer (Publication) School of Social Science
MPDD, IGNOU, New Delhi MPDD, IGNOU, New Delhi IGNOU, New Delhi
January, 2021
© Indira Gandhi National Open University, 2021
ISBN:
All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced in any form, by mimeography or any other
means, without permission in writing from the Indira Gandhi National Open University.
Further information on the Indira Gandhi National Open University courses may be
obtained from the University’s Office at Maidan Garhi, New Delhi-110 068 or visit our website: http://
www.ignou.ac.in
Printed and published on behalf of the Indira Gandhi National Open University, New Delhi, by Director,
School of Social Sciences.
Laser Typeset by : Tessa Media & Computers, C-206, Shaheen Bagh, New Delhi
Printed at :
Contents
Page No.
BLOCK 1 INTRODUCTION TO SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 7

Unit 1 Introduction to Social Psychology 9
Unit 2 Theories of Social Psychology 21
BLOCK 2 SELF IN SOCIAL CONTEXT 39

Unit 3 Self and Its Processes 41
Unit 4 Self in Social Context 53
BLOCK 3 SOCIAL COGNITION 85

Unit 5 Social Cognition: Understanding Social Behaviour- I 87
Unit 6 Social Cognition: Understanding Social Behaviour- II 100
Unit 7 Attitude and Attitude Change 115
BLOCK 4 SOCIAL INFLUENCE 147

Unit 8 Social Influence 149
Unit 9 Aggression and Social Influence 165
Unit 10 Interpersonal Attraction and Pro-Social Behaviour 183
BLOCK 5 GROUP DYNAMICS 203

Unit 11 Group Processes 205
Unit 12 Leader and Leadership 227
BLOCK 1
INTRODUCTION TO SOCIAL
PSYCHOLOGY
Introduction to Social
Psychology BLOCK 1 INTRODUCTION TO SOCIAL
PSYCHOLOGY
Introduction
This block comprises of two units.Thefirst unit deals with definition, nature and
scope of Social Psychology. It also deals with the assumptions of social
psychology and tries to explain the context of social psychology in India.
The second unit highlights the relationship of social psychology with other
disciplines. The unit also describes the historical background of social psychology.
It discusses the levels of analysis of social behaviour and various theoretical
approaches of social psychology.
8
UNIT 1 INTRODUCTION TO SOCIAL Psychology
PSYCHOLOGY*
Structure
1.0 Objectives
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Definition, Nature and Scope of Social Psychology
1.2.1 Definition of Social Psychology
1.2.2 Nature of Social Psychology
1.2.2.1 Social Psychology Applies Scientific Methods of Study
1.2.2.2 Social Psychology Studies Individuals’ Thought, Feeling and
Behaviour
1.2.2.3 Social Psychology Studies Individuals’ Behaviour in Social Contexts
1.2.3 Scope of Social Psychology
1.3 Historical Development of Social Psychology
1.3.1 Early Years of Social Psychology
1.3.2 Formational Years of Social Psychology
1.3.3 Expansion of Social Psychology
1.3.4 Social Psychology in 21st Century
1.3.5 Social Psychology in India
1.4 Let Us Sum Up
1.5 Unit End Questions
1.6 Glossary
1.7 Answers to Self Assessment Questions
1.8 Suggested Readings and References
1.0 OBJECTIVES
After reading this unit, you will be able to:
Define social psychology;
Explain the nature and scope of social psychology;
Describe the historical background of social psychology; and
Illustrate the development of social psychology with reference to India.
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Let us ponder upon some situations, events, issues and people. While going for a
job interview we dress up individually; but when we reach the interview venue
we find that all the candidates are dressed up in almost similar fashion. In another
situation, after the Nirbhaya incidence in Delhi on 16 December 2012, thousands
of people flooded on the roads of Delhi and other parts of the country protesting
against the incidence. Leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, Abraham Lincoln, Nelson
Mandela, Dalai Lama and many others like them influenced thoughts, feelings
and behaviours of the masses in a great manner and led the people’s thought
toward remarkable social, religious, political and ethical revolutions.
* Dr. Ari Sudan Tiwari, Scientist ‘E’Defence Institute of Psychological Research, Ministry of Defence,
Lucknow Road, Timarpur, Delhi
9
Introduction to Social These are few examples from the history of human being where either we are
Psychology
influenced by other people or we influence other people’s behaviours. Social
psychology is the branch of psychology which studies human behaviour in an
array of social situations. The present unit will help you to understand the
definition, scope and nature of psychology. Further, in this unit, you will be
acquainted with the historical background and social psychology with reference
to Indian context.
1.2 DEFINITION, NATURE AND SCOPE OF

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
Social psychology is an important branch of psychology which studies human
interaction, its manifestations, causes, consequences and the various
psychological processes involved in it.
1.2.1 Definition of Social Psychology

Social psychology is defined as the scientific study of “how we feel about, think
about and behave toward the people around us and how our feelings, thoughts,
and behaviours are influenced by those people in the social context” (Kassin,
Fein, & Markus, 2017). In a slightly different expression social psychology is
defined asa discipline that uses scientific methods in an attempt to understand
and explain how the thought, feeling and behaviour of individuals are influenced
by the actual, imagined or implied presence of others (Gordon Allport, 1985, p.
3).
1.2.2 Nature of Social Psychology

Careful explanation of definitions given above reveals that it has three major
components that characterise the nature of social psychology. These characteristics
have been further elaborated below:
1.2.2.1 Social Psychology Applies Scientific Methods of Study

Social psychology is scientific in nature. It applies the scientific method of
systematic observation, description and measure mentto the study of the human
behaviour in social context. Social psychological studies refer to the data being
collected through direct observation or experiment. Such experiments and
observation are carried out carefully and reported in detail so that other
investigators can repeat and verify the work.
The scientific social psychology carries out three major activities: description,
explanation and prediction of social behaviours. Social psychology provides a
scientific account of social behaviour based on direct observation rather than on
common beliefs. Social psychology also attempts to explain why people behave
in a particular way in a particular social situation. Such interconnected
explanations of social behaviours lead to formation of theories which help in
predicting social behaviours and managing them in a desirable direction.
10
1.2.2.2 Social Psychology Studies Individuals’ Thought, Feeling Introduction to Social
Psychology
and Behaviour
The varied issues of the field of social psychology include– individuals’ thought,
feeling and behaviour. Cognition is referred as the manner in which people process
information. Social psychology studies cognition that relates to social activities
and that helps us in understanding and predictingour social behaviours. Social
psychology also studies the feelings we experience as an individual in our social
lives. What we think or feel in the social context is finally expressed through our
behaviours in social interactions. Social psychology studies these behaviours in
the forms of cooperation, helping behaviour, conflict, aggression, etc.
1.2.2.3 Social Psychology Studies Individuals’ Behaviour in Social

Contexts
Social psychology studies individuals’ thoughts, feelings and behaviours in the
social contexts. This component of social psychology refers that our behaviour
is influenced by the presence of other people and we also influence other people’s
behaviour. The social context referred to in the definition of social psychology
does not have to be real or present. Even the implied or imagined presence of
others can have important effects on individuals (Gordon Allport, 1985). However,
in order to establish general principles of human social behaviour, social
psychologists sometimes examine non-social factors also. Kurt Lewin (1936),
one of the important early figures in social psychology proposed a model for
understanding social behaviour, which says that social behaviour is a function of
the interaction of the situation and the individual’s characteristics (see box for
detail).
BOX 1.1: KURT LEWIN’S CONTRIBUTION TO SOCIAL

PSYCHOLOGY: A MODEL FOR UNDERSTANDING SOCIAL
BEHAVIOUR
Kurt Lewin (9th September, 1890-12th February, 1947) was a German-

American psychologist and is often recognized as the “founder of social
psychology”. Social psychologists are interested in the forces that operate
on individuals and cause them to engage in specific examples of social
behaviour. But social behaviour is typically complex and has many
contributing causes. Consequently, explaining social behaviour is a difficult
task. To simplify this task, we can assign the multiple causes of social
behaviour to one of two broad categories: the situation and the individual.
According to a formula first proposed by Kurt Lewin (1936), social behaviour
is a function of the interaction of the situation and the individual’s
characteristics, or B = f (P,E)
This suggest that the behaviour is the product of an individual and her/his
enviroment.
1.2.3 Scope of Social Psychology

Social psychology concentrates on the individual behaviour in the social context,
so the subject matter of social psychology is the interactions of the individual
with other individuals and society as well. It is the social world, based upon the
relations of human to their fellow beings which furnishes the subject matter of
11
Introduction to Social social psychology. The scope of social psychology can be broadly outlined in
Psychology
the following ways:
People generally express feelings of approval and disapproval, favourability

and unfavourability, or likes and dislikes towards different persons, objects
or issues that further influence their thought and actions. This phenomenon
is termed as attitudes and social psychologists have been emphasizing upon
various aspects of attitude, such as formation of attitude, attitude structure,
attitude change, function of attitudes and relationship between attitudes and
behaviour.
One of the emerging areas of social psychology is social cognition, which

studies the ways people perceive, ponder and remember information related
to social stimuli. Various phenomena studied under social cognition are
person perception, attribution process, schema, stereotypes, etc.
Social influence is a traditional, core area of study in social psychology

which refers to the way people affect the thoughts, feelings, and behaviours
of others.
Social psychologists are also interested in the question of why people

sometimes act in a pro-social way (helping, liking or loving others), but at
other times act in an antisocial way (hostility, aggression or prejudice against
others).
Social psychologists have vastly studied various phenomena related to social

groups and group dynamics. Groups may be understood in terms of group
composition, group structures, group process and the effect this has on
individual change and group development, as well as on task performance.
Thus, a social psychologist studies almost everything that we do every day
in the social context (see box below for detail).
Box 1.2: CONTRIBUTIONS OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGISTS
WHAT DO SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGISTS STUDY?
Social psychologists study why we are often helpful to other people and
why we may be unfriendly or aggressive at other times.
Social psychologists study both the benefits of having good relationships

with other people and the costs of being lonely.
Social psychologists study what factors lead people to purchase one product
rather than another.
Social psychologists study how men and women behave differently in social
settings.
Social psychologists study what makes some people more likely to engage
in environmentally friendly behaviours than others.
Social psychologists study how someone might choose to risk their life to
save that of a complete stranger.
12
Self Assessment Questions I Introduction to Social
Psychology
1) Define social psychology.
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
2) How can you say that social psychology is a science?

.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
3) Describe the nature of social psychology.

.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
4) Give an account of scope of social psychology.

.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
1.3 HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL

PSYCHOLOGY
Although philosophical analysis of human behaviour in society has always been
a major issue of interest for the social thinkers, a systematic empirical approach
to the study of social psychology did not appear until the latter part of the
nineteenth century. History of social psychology can be outlined in following
developmental stages:
13
Psychology
1.3.1 Early Years of Social Psychology
The earliest roots of social psychology are thought to be a group of German
scholars who were influenced by the philosopher Hegel. In 1860, Steinthal and
Lazarus founded a journal devoted to this Völkerpsychologie that published
theoretical and factual articles on the study of the collective mind. This concept
of collective mind was interpreted in conflicting ways: on the one hand a societal
way of thinking within the individual and on the other a form of trans-individual
mentality that could encompass a whole group of people.
The two earliest textbooks on social psychology were written by the psychologist-
William McDougall (1908) in Britain and the sociologist- Ross (1908) in America.
However, none of these textbooks were like a modern social psychology textbook
and their main topics were principal instincts, primary emotions, nature of
sentiments, moral conduct, volition, religious conceptions and structure of
character.
At the end of 19th century and the beginning of 20th century social psychology
started to systematically measure the thoughts, feelings and behaviours of human
beings. A number of laboratories were set up in Europe and United States which
started with a psychological laboratory at Leipzig in 1879 set up by Willem
Wundt to provide an experimental basis for psychology in Germany. Meantime,
the behaviourist John Watson published his classic scientific manifesto for
psychology in 1913.
In 1924, inspired byWatson, Floyd Allport published an agenda for social
psychology. Building on Watson, Allport argued that social psychology would
flourish only if it became an experimental science. Shortly after, Gardner Murphy
and Lois Murphy (1931/1937) felt justified in producing a book actually entitled
Experimental Social Psychology. First experiment in social psychology is often
identified as Norman Triplett’s (1898) study of how people can put more effort
into a task when other people are present as observers or competitors.
1.3.2 Formational Years of Social Psychology

During the 1940s and 1950s, Kurt Lewin and Leon Festinger argued for a
scientifically rigorous social psychology. Lewin, known as “the father of social
psychology”, developed many of the important ideas of the discipline, including
a focus on the dynamic interactions among people. In 1954, Festinger edited a
book called Research Methods in the Behavioral Sciences, which stressed the
need of scientific measurement and to use laboratory experiments to
systematically test research hypotheses about social behaviour. He also noted
that for factual results in these experiments the participants may be kept blind
about the purpose of the research.
During the time of World War II,the studies on conformity were conducted by
Muzafir Sherif (1936) and Solomon Asch (1952). Studies on obedience were
conducted by Stanley Milgram (1974) and Philip Zimbardo (Haney, Banks, &
Zimbardo, 1973).
1.3.3 Expansion of Social Psychology

Social psychology further expanded on other topics. John Darley and BibbLatané
(1968) developed a model to explain the context when people do and do not help
14 others in need. Leonard Berkowitz (1962) started the study of human aggression.
Many other social psychologists focused on the process of decision making in Introduction to Social
Psychology
group (Janis, 1972). Still other social psychologists, including Gordon Allport
and Muzafir Sherif, focused on intergroup relations with the goal of understanding
and potentially reducing the occurrence of stereotypes, prejudice and
discrimination.
In late 20th century social psychology expanded into the field of attitudes and
significance of cognitive processes in attitudes. Social psychologists also started
studying the process of persuasion by which advertisers and other people could
present their messages to make them most effective and persuasive (Eagly &
Chaiken, 1993; Hovland, Janis, & Kelley, 1963). They focused on the cognitive
processes that people use when evaluating messages. Relationship between
attitudes and behaviour was also an important aspect which was extensively
studied during this period. Leon Festinger’simportant cognitive dissonance theory
was developed during this time and became a model for later researches (Festinger,
1957).
In late 20th century, due to advances in information technology focus of social
psychology on cognitive process was further substantiated (Fiske & Taylor, 2008).
The social cognition approach has been focused on understanding of how our
knowledge about our social worlds develops and how it influences our social
thinking and behaviours. Further more, the extent to which humans’ decision
making could be flawed due to both cognitive and motivational processes that
were documented (Kahneman, Slovic, & Tversky, 1982).
1.3.4 Social Psychology in 21st Century

Social psychology has been still expanding into varied areas of social behaviour.
Social psychologists have studied impact of social situations on our health and
happiness, important roles of evolutionary experiences and cultures on our
behaviour.The field of social neuroscience has also emerged, which studies that
how our social behaviour, both influences and is influenced by the activities of
our brain (Lieberman, 2010). Social psychologists are consistently searching
new methods to measure and understand social behaviour and the field continues
to evolve.
1.3.5 Social Psychology in India

In 1928, first book on social psychologyinIndia,entitled– Introduction to Social
Psychology was written by Narendra Nath Sengupta, the first chairman of first
department of psychology at the Calcutta University, in association with an
eminent sociologist Radhakamal Mukherjee. However, this initial association
between social psychology and sociology could not continue and Indian social
psychologists, in effect of western research orientations, put out all efforts to
establish the identity of psychology as a scientific discipline. Jamuna Prasad,
inspired by Bartlett’s (1932) reconstructive memory of events, studied the famous
earthquake in Bihar in 1934 and collected and analyzed more than 35 thousand
rumours and published this work in the British Journal of Psychology in 1935.
This, and the later work of Durganand Sinha (1952) on similar lines, was reported
by Festinger as the basis of formulating his theory of cognitive dissonance.
In the later years, Indian social psychologists continued working in the areas of
prejudice, stereotypes and social attitudes. Large scale surveys were conducted
taking various attitude measures. Adinarayan conducted studies on racial and
15
Introduction to Social communal attitudes (1953) and on caste attitudes (1958). With increasing
Psychology
emphasis on public awareness programmes for health, family planning,
agricultural innovations, attitude change became a major topic of research. During
these years social psychology was growing in popularity in India as evident
from surveys conducted from time to time.
Social psychologists further explored the areas of intergroup relations (Singh,

1981), relative deprivation (Misra, 1982), ingratiation (Pandey, 1986) and
leadership (J.B.P. Sinha, 1980) in which influence of social groups on individual
behaviour was investigated. More recently, the interest is shifting to study ethnic
identities, the rise of depressed classes and related topics. In much of this research,
efforts are being made to establish causal linkages between macro-level variables
(demographic, social or cultural) and micro-level variables (attitudes, feeling of
deprivation, etc.). The approach and methodology remained consistent with
individual social psychology of the American variety. Another area which
persisted in popularity for long was achievement motivation. A large number of
scales were constructed to measure achievement motivation of school and college
students. In recent years the work of Ashish Nandy on self, science, nationality
and Sudhir Kakar’s work on identity and relationships have been somehow
indigenous and not directly influenced by what and how of social psychology in
America and Europe (see Dalal & Mishra, 2001).
Self Assessment Question II

State whether the following are ‘True’ or ‘False’:
1) The earliest textbooks on social psychology was written by the psychologist
Willian Mc Dougal in Britain. ..............................
2) The behaviorist John Watson published his classic scientific manifesto for
psychology in 1913. ..............................
3) Lewin, Known as the father of social psychology...............................
4) Narendra Nath sengupta was the first chairman of the first department of
psychology at the mumbai University. ..............................
1.4 LET US SUM UP

It can be summed up from the above discussion that social psychology is a field
which analyses our thoughts, feelings and behaviour toward the people around
us. It also explains how others have an influence on our behaviour in the social
context. Thus, social psychology concentrates on studying the interactions of
individuals with other individuals and society. Foundation of social psychology
as specific branch of psychology can be traced back to early 20th century. However,
the major expansion in the scope of social psychology took place in later half of
20th century. Indigenous studies in social psychology in India have been majorly
focused on self and culture, nationality and identity, etc. Although social
psychology is closely related with other discipline of social sciences, as well as
other branches of psychology; it differs from them in approach.
Social psychologists investigate human social behaviour at various levels.

Primarily, these levels are intrapersonal social behaviours, interactions between
individuals, interactions between individual and group and interactions between
group and group.
16
1.5 UNIT END QUESTIONS Psychology
1) Define social psychology and explain the nature and scope of social
psychology.
2) Present an account of historical development of social psychology.
1.6 GLOSSARY
Social Psychology: Social psychology is defined as the scientific study of how
we feel about, think about and behave toward the people around us and how our
feelings, thoughts, and behaviours are influenced by those people in the social
context.
Social Neuroscience:Social neuroscience is the study of how our socialbehaviour
both influences and is influenced by the activities of our brain.
Classical Conditioning: Classical conditioning presumes that when a neutral
stimulus (conditioned stimulus, CS) is paired with a natural stimulus
(unconditioned stimulus, UCS), neutral stimulus alone acquires the ability to
elicit the response (conditioned response, CR) which naturally occurs
(unconditioned response, UCR) after natural stimulus.
Reinforcement: Reinforcement is the mechanism by which people learn to
perform a particular behaviour because it is followed by something that is
pleasurable or that satisfies a need (or they learn to avoid behaviour that is followed
by unpleasant consequences).
Observational Learning: Observational learning presumes thatpeople often learn
social attitudes and behaviours simply by watching other people, known
technically as “models”.
Social Exchange Theory: Social exchange theory uses the concept of
reinforcement to explain stability and change in social interactions and relations
between individuals.
Social Cognitive Theories: Social cognitive theoriesemphasise that a person’s
behaviour depends on the way he or she perceives the social situation.
Schema: Schema is a mental representation capturing the general characteristics
of a particular class of episodes, events or individuals.
Principle of Cognitive Consistency:Principle of cognitive consistency maintains
that individuals strive to hold ideas that are consistent or congruous with one
another, rather than ideas that are inconsistent or incongruous.
1.7 ANSWERS TO SELF ASSESSMENT

QUESTIONS (SAQ)
Self Assement Question I
1) Social psychology is defined as the scientific study of “how we feel about,
think about and behave toward the people around us and how our feelings,
thoughts, and behaviours are influenced by those people in the social
context” (Kassin, Fein, & Markus, 2017).
17
Introduction to Social 2) Social psychology is scientific in nature. It applies the scientific method of
Psychology
systematic observation, description and measurementto the study of the
human behaviour in social context. Social psychological studies refer to the
data being collected through direct observation or experiment. Such
experiments and observation are carried out carefully and reported in detail
so that other investigators can repeat and verify the work.
3) The following three major components characterise the nature of social

psychology:
Social psychology applies scientific methods of study.
Social psychology studies individuals’ thought, feeling and behaviour.
Social psychology studies individuals’ behaviour in social contexts.
4) The scope of social psychology can be broadly outlined in the following
ways:
Social psychologists emphasize upon various aspects of attitude
Social psychology also deals with social cognition.
Social influence is a traditional, core area of study in social psychology.
Social psychologists are also interested in the question of why people
sometimes act in a pro-social way but at other times act in an antisocial
way.
Self Assement Question II
1) True
2) True
3) True
4) False
1.8 SUGGESTED READINGS AND REFERENCES

Kassin, S., Fein, S., & Markus, H. R. (2017). Social Psychology (10th ed.).
Cengage Learning.
Baron, R. A., &Branscombe, N. R. (2016). Social Psychology (14th ed.). Boston:

Pearson/Allyn& Bacon.
References
Adinarayan, S. P. (1953). Before and after Independence–A study of racial and
communal attitudes in India. British Journal of Psychology, 44, 108-115.
Adinarayan, S.P. (1957). A study of racial attitudes in India. Journal of Social

Psychology, 45, 211-216.
Allport, F. H. (1924). Social Psychology. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Allport, G. W. (1985). The historical background of social psychology. In G.
Lindzey& E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology (3rd ed., Vol. I,
pp. 1-46). New York: Random House.
Asch, S. E. (1952). Social Psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
18
B. F. Skinner (1938). The Behavior of Organisms: An Experimental Analysis. Introduction to Social
Psychology
Cambridge, Massachusetts: B. F. Skinner Foundation.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliff s, NJ: Prentice-

Hall.
Bartlett, F. C. (1932). Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social

Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Berkowitz, L. (1962). Aggression: A Social Psychological Analysis. New York,

NY: McGraw-Hill.
Dalal, A. K., & Mishra, G. (2001). Social Psychology in India: Evolution and
emerging trends. In In A. K. Dalal& G. Misra (Eds.), New Directions in Indian
Psychology (vol. 1: Social Psychology), New Delhi: Sage.
Darley, J. M., &Latané, B. (1968). Bystander intervention in emergencies:

Diffusion of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8,
377-383.
Eagly, A. H., &Chaiken, S. (1993). The Psychology of Attitudes. Fort Worth, TX:
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations,

7, 117-140.
Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row,

Peterson.
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (2008). Social Cognition: From Brains to Culture.
Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
Haney, C., Banks, C., & Zimbardo, P. (1973). Interpersonal dynamics in a

simulated prison. International Journal of Criminology and Penology, 1, 69-97.
Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1963). Communication and

Persuasion. Oxford, England: Yale University Press.
Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of Groupthink: A Psychological Study of Foreign

Policy Decisions and Fiascos. Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.
Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1982). Judgment under Uncertainty:
Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Cengage Learning.
Kelley, H. H., & Thibaut, J. W. (1978). Interpersonal Relations: A Theory of

Interdependence. New York: Wiley.
LeBon, G. (1908). The crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind. London: Unwin
(original work published 1896). Online: http://cupid.ecom.unimelb.edu.au/het/
lebon/crowds.pdf
Lewin, K.(1936). A Dynamic Theory of Personality. New York: McGraw-Hill.
19
Introduction to Social Lieberman, M. D. (2010). Social cognitive neuroscience. In S. T. Fiske, D. T.
Psychology
Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology (5th ed., Vol. 1,
pp. 143–193). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
McDougall, W. (1908). An Introduction to Social Psychology. London: Methuen.
McDougall, W. (1920). The Group Mind. London: Cambridge University Press.
Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to Authority. London: Tavistock.
Misra, G. (1982). Deprivation and development : A review of Indian studies.
Indian Educational Review, 18, 12-33.
Murphy, G., & Murphy, L. B. (1931). Experimental Social Psychology. New

York: Harper (rev. ed published with T. M. Newcomb in 1937).
Pandey, J. (1986). Social-cultural perspectives on ingratiation. In B.A. Mahar &

W.B. Mahar (Ed.), Progress in Experimental Personality Research (Vol. 14).
New York: Academic Press.
Pavlov, I.P. (1927). Conditioned Reflexes: An Investigation of the Physiological

Activity of the Cerebral Cortex (translated by G.V. Anrep). London: Oxford
University Press.
Ross, E. A. (1908). Social Psychology. New York: Macmillan.
Sherif, M. (1936). The Psychology of social norms. New York: Harper.
Singh, A. K. (1981). Development of religious identity and prejudice in Indian
children. In D. Sinha (Ed.), Socialization of the Indian Child (pp.87-100). New
Delhi: Concept.
Sinha, D. (1952). Behaviour in a catastrophic situation: A psychological study of

reports and rumours. British Journal of Psychology, 43, 200-209.
Sinha, J. B. P. (1980). Nurturant Task Leader. New Delhi: Concept.
Triplett, N. (1898). The dynamogenic factors in pacemaking and competition.
American Journal of Psychology, 9, 507-533.
20
UNIT 2 THEORIES OF SOCIAL Psychology
PSYCHOLOGY*
Structure
2.0 Objectives
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Social Psychology and Other Disciplines
2.2.1 Social Psychology and Other Social Sciences
2.2.2 Social Psychology and Other Branches in Psychology
2.3 Levels of Analysis of Social Behaviour
2.3.1 Individual-Intrapersonal Level Analysis
2.3.2 Interpersonal Interactions
2.3.3 Interaction between Individual and Group
2.3.4 Interaction between Groups
2.4 Theoretical Approaches to Social Psychology
2.4.1 Learning Theories
2.4.2 Cognitive Theories
2.5 Research Methods in Social Psychology
2.5.1 Observational Method
2.5.2 Experimental Method
2.5.2.1 Quasi-experimental Method
2.5.2.2 Experimental Method
2.5.3 Ethical Issues in Research
2.6 Let Us Sum Up
2.8 Glossary
2.0 OBJECTIVES
Illustrate the levels of analysis of social behaviour;
Explain the relationship of social psychology with other disciplines;
Delineate various theoretical approaches of social psychology;
Discuss the different types of research methods in social psychology; and
Elucidate the various ethical issues of research methods.
2.1 INTRODUCTION
It must be clear to you from the previous unit that, social psychology is the
branch of psychology which studies human behaviour in an array of social
situations. In this unit, you will be explained about the Social psychology as
branch of psychology, its nature, scope and relationship with other disciplines.
You will also be acquainted with the historical background and various theoretical
Lucknow Road, Timarpur, Delhi, (Also adapted few paragraphs from BPC-006, Unit 3) 21
Introduction to Social approaches to social psychology. The unit will also discuss the levels of analysis
Psychology
of social behaviour.
2.2 SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY AND OTHER

DISCIPLINES
Social psychology is related to other social sciences and to other branches of
psychology. It also differs from them in important ways.
Social psychology is related to other disciplines in the family of social sciences

and to other branches of psychology in many ways. It also differs from them in
important ways.
2.2.1 Social Psychology and Other Social Sciences

Social scientists study people and the societies in which people live. They are
interested in how people relate to one another. The various social sciences focus
on different aspects of social life.
Social Psychology and Anthropology

Anthropologyis the study of human culture. The filed of anthropology and social
psychology are inter related. Human culture consists of the shared values, beliefs,
and practices of a group of people. These values, beliefs, and practices are passed
down from one generation to another. Human beings arenot only social animals,
they are also cultural animals. In order to understand human behaviour,social
psychology requiresto understand the cultural context in which that behaviour
occurs.
Social Psychology and Economics

You might know that the field of Economicsdeals with the trends of production,
distribution, and consumption of goods and services of a particular society. This
equally diverts the interest of social psychologists. In fact, some social
psychological theories are based on economic principles. For example, social
exchange theory predicts commitment to relationships by considering factors
such as the costs, rewards, investments, and the number of alternatives available.
Economics also calls our attention to large social systems (such as the labour
market or money system) and to how these systems shape behaviour. Again, a
full understanding of human behaviour requires appreciating not just what goes
on inside one person’s head and what is happening in his or her immediate
environment at the time, but also how the person’s behaviour fits into the larger
social system.
Social Psychology and Political Science

Political science is the study of political organizations and institutions, especially
governments. Social psychologists conduct research on political behaviour. They
study political issues such as voting, party identification, liberal versus
conservative views, and political advertising. They are also interested in what
makes some people better leaders than others.
22
Social Psychology and Sociology Theories of Social Psychology
Sociology is the study of human societies and the groups that form those societies.
Although both sociologists and social psychologists are interested in how people
behave in societies and groups, they differ in what they focus on. Sociologists
focus on the group as a single unit, whereas social psychologists focus on the
individual members that make up the group. Some sociologists call themselves
social psychologists and the exchange of ideas and findings between the two
fields that have sometimes been quite fruitful because they bring different
perspectives to the same problems.
2.2.2 Social Psychology and Other Branches in Psychology

Psychology is the study of human behaviour. Psychology is like a big tree that
contains many branches. Social psychology is just one of those branches, but it
is closely related with some of the other branches.
Social Psychology and Biological Psychology

Everything that people think, do or feel involves some bodily processes such as
brain activity or hormones. Biological or physiological psychologyand more
recently neurosciencehave focused on learning about what happens in the brain,
nervous system and other aspects of the body. Until recently, this work had little
contact with social psychology, but during the 1990s many social psychologists
began looking into the biological aspects of social behaviour and that interest
has continued into the 21 st century. Social neuroscience and social
psychophysiology are now the thriving fields.
Social Psychology and Clinical Psychology

Clinical psychology focuses on abnormal behaviour, whereas social psychology
focuses on normal behaviour. Social psychological theory can shed a great deal
of light on so called normal behaviour. Both the branches, social and clinical
psychology, have had a long tradition of exchanging ideas and stimulating insights
into each other’s fields. In particular, clinical psychologists have made good use
of social psychological theories.
Social Psychology and Cognitive Psychology

Cognitive psychology is the basic study of thought processes, such as how memory
works and what events people notice. In recent decades, social psychology has
borrowed heavily from cognitive psychology, especially by using their methods
for measuring cognitive processes. Social psychologists study that how people
think about their social lives, how they think about other people or solve the
problems in their social world.
Social Psychology and Developmental Psychology

Developmental psychology is the study of how people change across their lives,
from conception and birth to old age and death. In practice, most developmental
psychologists study children. Developmental psychology has been studying that
at what age children begin to show various patterns of social behaviour. Social
psychologists interested in self-regulation, emotion, gender differences, helping
behaviour and antisocial behaviour sometimes look to the research on child
development to see how these patterns get started.
23
Introduction to Social Social Psychology and Personality Psychology
Psychology
Personality psychology focuses on important differences between individuals,
as well as inner processes. For example, some people are introverted and avoid
social contact, whereas other people are extraverted and look for social contact.
Social and personality psychology have had a long and close relationship. This
relationship has been sometimes complementary (personality psychologists look
inside the person, whereas social psychologists lookoutside at the situation) and
sometimes competitive (is it more important to understand the person or the
situation?). In recent years, the line between these two fields has become
overlapping, as social psychologists have come to recognize the importance of
inner processes and personality psychologists have come to recognize the
importance of circumstances and situations.
Self Assessment Questions I

1) Social psychologists study that how people think about their social lives.
..............................
2) The social cognition approach do not focus upon understanding of

ourknowledgetowards social world, thinking and behaviours.
....................................
3) None of the social psychological theories are based on economic principles.

.............................
4) Both sociologists and social psychologists are interested in how people

behave in societies and groups, they differ in what they focus on.
..................................
2.3 LEVELS OF ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL

BEHAVIOUR
Social psychologists investigate human behaviour but their primary concern is
human behaviour in a social context. Further, social psychology analyses human
social behaviour at various levels, presented below:
2.3.1 Individual-Intrapersonal Level Analysis

Individuals involved are fundamental constituents in any social interaction. As
conceptualised in psychology, every individual is unique in his or her biological
inheritance, thought process, affect and behaviour. Therefore, the basic level
analysis of social behaviour is individual-intrapersonalwhere the aspects like
social cognition, values and attitudes, social deviance and violent behaviours
are studies.
2.3.2 Interpersonal Interactions

Individuals are affected by others in many ways. In everyday life, communication
from others may significantly influence a person’s understanding of the social
world. Attempts by others at persuasion may change an individual’s beliefs about
the world and his or her attitudes toward persons, groups or other objects. Social
24
psychologists also study many other interpersonal activities like cooperation and Theories of Social Psychology
competition, altruism and aggression, prejudice and discrimination, etc.
2.3.3 Interaction between Individual and Group

Social psychology further analyses the impact of a group on the behaviours of its
individual members. Every individual belongs to many different groups and these
groups influence and regulate the behaviours of their members, typically by
establishing norms or rules. One result of this is conformity, the process by which
a group member adjusts his or her behaviour to bring it into line with group
norms. Groups also exert substantial longterm influence on their members through
socialization, a process that enables groups to regulate what their members learn.
Socialization assumes that the members will be adequately trained to play roles
in the group and in the larger society. Significant outcomes of socialization are
acquiring language skills,forming political and religious beliefs and attitudes
and our conception of self.
Just as any group influences the behaviour of its members, these members, in
turn, may influence the group itself. For instance, individuals contribute to group
productivity and group decision making. Moreover, some members may provide
leadership, performing functions such as planning, organizing, and controlling,
necessary for successful group performance. Without effective leadership,
coordination among members will falter and the group will drift or fail.
2.3.4 Interaction between Groups

Another concern of social psychology is the impact of one group on the activities
and structure of another group. Relations between two groups may be friendly or
hostile, cooperative or competitive. These relationships, which are based in part
on members’ identities and may entail group stereotypes, can affect the structure
and activities of each group. Intergroup conflict, with its accompanying tension
and hostility, has been a core area of study in social psychology. Conflicts of this
type affect the interpersonal relations between groups and within each group.
Social psychologists have long studied the emergence, persistence and resolution
of intergroup conflict.
2.4 THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO SOCIAL

PSYCHOLOGY
Theory is a set of interrelated propositions that organizes and explains a set of
observed phenomena. In social psychology, no single theory explains all
phenomena of interest; rather, it includes many different theories. Various
theoretical perspectives of social psychology offer general explanations for a
wide array of social behaviours in a variety of situations. The fundamental value
of any theoretical perspective lies in its applicability across many situations. It
provides a frame of reference for interpreting and comparing a wide range of
social situation and behaviour. There are two major theoretical approaches in
social psychology: learning theories and cognitive theories.
2.4.1 Learning Theories

The central idea in learning theory is that a person’s current behaviour is
determined by his/her prior experience. In any given situation, a person learns 25
Introduction to Social certain behaviours that, over time, may become habits. When presented with a
Psychology
similar situation,the person tends to behave in the same habitual way. For example,
when a traffic light turns red, we typically stop, because that is how we have
learned to respond in the past. As applied to social behaviour by Albert Bandura
(1977) and others, this approach has been called social learning theory.
There are three general mechanisms by which learning occurs. One is association,
or classical conditioning. Classical Conditioning presumes that when a neutral
(unconditioned response, UCR) after natural stimulus. Pavlov’s dogs learned to
salivate at the sound of a bell because they were presented with food every time.
After a while, they would salivate to the sound of the bell even in the absence of
the meat because they associated the bell with meat. Humans sometimes learn
emotions by association(Pavlov, 1927). After a particularly painful visit to a
particular place, the mere mention of the place may arouse anxiety.
A second learning mechanism is reinforcement, a principle studied by B. F.

Skinner (1938) and others. People learn to perform a particular behaviour because
it is followed by something that is pleasurable or that satisfies a need (or they
learn to avoid behaviour that is followed by unpleasant consequences). A child
may learn to help other people because his or her parents praise for sharing toys
and smile approvingly when he or she offers to help. Or a student may learn not
to contradict his teacher in class because each time he does so, the teacher frowns,
looks angry and scolds him.
A third mechanism is observational learning. People often learn social attitudes

and behaviours simply by watching other people, known technically as “models”.
Children learn regional and ethnic speech patterns by listening to the speakers
around them. Adolescents may acquire their political attitudes by listening to
their parents’ conversations during election campaigns. In observational learning,
otherpeople are an important source of information. Observational learning can
occur without any external reinforcement. However, whether people actually
perform a behaviour that is learned through observation is influenced by the
consequences of the action. For example, a little boy may learn a lot about baby
dolls from watching his sisters but may be discouraged from playing with them
himself because his traditional parents say, “Dolls aren’t for boys”. Imitation or
modelling occurs when a person not only observes but actually copies the
behaviour of a model.The learning approach seeks the causes of behaviour in the
past learning history of the individual.
Another important process based on the principle of reinforcement is social

exchange. Social exchange theory (Kelley & Thibaut, 1978) uses the concept of
reinforcement to explain stability and change in relations between individuals.
This theory assumes that individuals have freedom of choice and often face social
situations in which they must choose among alternative actions. Any action
provides some rewards and entails some costs. There are many kinds of socially
mediated rewards, such as money, goods, services, prestige or status, approval
by others, etc. The theory presumes that individuals are hedonistic and they try
to maximize rewards and minimize costs. Consequently, they choose actions
that produce good profits and avoid actions that produce poor profits. Thus, social
26 exchange theory primarily views social interactions as exchanges of goods and
services among persons. If they find that a particular interaction is providing Theories of Social Psychology
profitable outcomes, they happily participate in the relationship. Furthermore,
the attractiveness of a relationship is compared on the basis of the profits it
provides against the profits available in other alternative relationships. If a person
is participating in a social relationship and receiving certain outcomes, the level
of outcomes available in the best alternative relationship is termed that person’s
comparison level for alternatives. Concepts of this type apply not only to work
relations but also to personal relations. People are more likely to stay with a
social relationship when the rewards are high, the costs are low, and the
alternatives are unpromising.
Despite its usefulness in illuminating why relationships change and how people
learn, learning theories have been criticized on various grounds. One criticism is
that learning theories portrays individuals primarily as reacting to or imitating
environmental stimuli. The theory does not account easily for creativity,
innovation, orinvention. A second criticism is that reinforcement theory largely
ignores or downplays other motivations. It characterizes social behaviour as
hedonistic, with individuals striving to maximize profits from outcomes. Thus,
it cannot easily explain selfless behaviour such as altruism and martyrdom. Despite
its limitations, reinforcement theory has enjoyed substantial success in explaining
why individuals persist in emitting certain behaviours, how they learn new
behaviours and how they influence the behaviour of others through exchange.
2.4.2 Cognitive Theories

Another theoretical perspective in social psychology is cognitive theory. Cognitive
theory presumes that the mental activities of the individual are important
determinants of social behaviour. These mental activities are called cognitive
processes which include perception, memory, judgment, problem solving and
decision making. Cognitive theory does not deny the importance of external
stimuli, but it maintains that the link between stimulus and response is not
mechanical or automatic. Rather, the individual’s cognitive processesintervene
between external stimuli and behavioural responses. Individuals not only actively
interpret the meaning of stimuli but also select the actions to be made in response.
Historically, the cognitive approach to social psychology has been influenced by

the ideas of Koffka, Kohler and other theorists in the Gestalt movement of
psychology. Central to Gestalt psychology is the principle that people respond to
configurations of stimuli rather than to a single, discrete stimulus. In other words,
people understand the meaning of a stimulus only by viewing it in the context of
an entire system of elements (the gestalt) in which it is embedded. To comprehend
the meaning of any element, we must look at the whole of which it is a part.
Modern cognitive theorists depict humans as active in selecting and interpreting

stimuli. According to this view, people do more than merely reacting to their
environment; they actively structure their world cognitively. Firstly, because they
cannot possibly attend to all the complex stimuli that surround them, they select
only those stimuli that are important or useful to them and ignore the others.
Second, they actively control which categories or concepts they use to interpret
the stimuli in the environment.
Central to the cognitive perspective is the concept of cognitive structure, which

refers broadly to any form of organization among cognitions, concepts and beliefs.
27
Introduction to Social Because a person’s cognitions are interrelated, cognitive theory gives special
Psychology
emphasis to exactly how they are structured and organized in memory and to
how they affect a person’s judgments.
Social psychologists have proposed that individuals use specific cognitive

structures called schemasto make sense of complex information about other
persons, groups and situations. The term schema refers to the form or basic sketch
of what we know about people and things. Whenever we encounter a person for
the first time, we usually form an impression of what he or she is like. In doing
this, we not only observe the person’s behaviour but also rely on our knowledge
of similar persons we have met in the past; that is, we use our schema regarding
this type of person. Schemas help us process information by enabling us to
recognize which personal characteristics are important in the interaction and
which are not. They structure and organize information about the person, and
they help us remember information better and process it more quickly. Sometimes
they fill gaps in knowledge and enable us to make inferences and judgments
about others.
One way to study cognitive structure is to observe changes that occur in a person’s
cognitions when he or she is under challenge or attack. The changes will reveal
facts about the underlying structure or organization of his or her cognitions. An
important idea emerging from this approach is the principle of cognitive
consistencywhich maintains that individuals strive to hold ideas that are consistent
or congruous with one another, rather than ideas that are inconsistent or
incongruous. If a person holds several ideas that are incongruous or inconsistent,
he or she will experience internal conflict. In reaction, he or she will likely change
one or more ideas, thereby making them consistent and resolving this conflict.
Cognitive theory has made many important contributions to social psychology.

It treats such diverse phenomena as self-concept, perception of persons and
attribution of causes, attitude change, impression management, and group
stereotypes. In these contexts, cognitive theory has produced many insights and
striking predictions regarding individual and social behaviour.One limitation of
cognitive theory is that it simplifies, and sometimes oversimplifies, the way in
which people process information, an inherently complex phenomenon. Another
limitation is that cognitive phenomena are not directly observable; they must be
inferred from what people say and do. This means that compelling and definitive
tests of theoretical predictions from cognitive theory are sometimes difficult to
conduct. However, the cognitive perspective is among the more popular and
productive approaches in social psychology.
2.5 RESEARCH METHODS IN SOCIAL

PSYCHOLOGY
Every scientific investigation begins with a question. The question can be dictated
by a practical problem or grow out of theoretical interest. The difference between
theoretical and applied research in not a qualitative one but rather a matter of
degree (Feldman, 1985: 21). Pure theoretical work in social psychology is aimed
at the building of a basic body of knowledge and facts about the social world.
While applied research is meant to provide immediate solutions to immediate
problems. But both researches have relevance for each other. Results of even the
most applied studies are invariably used not only for them immediate applications
28
to the problem at hand but also for their implication for theory. On the other Theories of Social Psychology
hand, theories are able to suggest new approaches and strategies for dealing with
the problems of society. But there is a difference of methods in theoretical and
applied research. Theoretical studies are mostly conducted in laboratories using
experiment and applied researches are based on natural field settings. But the
goal for both of them is same, “building knowledge, a concern regarding the
quality of life and an interest in how knowledge of social psychology is ultimately
utilised” (Feldman).
While the paths to these goals may differ, depending on the orientation of a
particular social psychologist, the interaction between theory and research is
well recognised today. “Many psychologists working in an applied field are keenly
aware of the need for close cooperation between theoretical and applied
psychology. This can be accomplished in psychology…..if the theorist does not
look toward applied problems with high brow aversion or with a fear of social
problems, and if the applied psychologist realizes that there is nothing so practical
as a good theory” (Lewin, 1951: 169).
Our discussion will be limited to following research methods:
2.5.1 Observational Method

Observation is the old method of social psychology. Many writers have used
different terms and categories for this method like method of systematic
observation (Morgan and King), direct observation (Hilgard and Atkinson) and
Feldman has included it in field study. Observation is to simply observe the
phenomena under study as it occur naturally (Hilgard and Atkinson, 2003: 21)
This method plays a very important role in the collection of data on overt
behaviour and the actions of individuals. The main problem involved in the
application of this method include, what to observe? How to fixate the
observations? How to structure observation? What should be the units of
observation in social psychological research, and the definite interval of time for
observation? This method proceeds in following two stages:
Describing behaviour:This methods starts with the observation of behaviours

in natural setting that is relevant for the research. The observation may be
based on the questions like what do people do? Can various behaviours be
classified in systematic ways? How do people differ in their behaviours?
From description to causes: The method of systematic observation tells us

what do people do and how they differ in their behaviours. It may also be
used to find out what caused the observed behaviours. But one should to be
cautious in inferring causes from observation as;
A behaviour may have many causes:
The fact that an event comes before another event do not show that the first
event is the cause of the latter one.
To establish likely causes of even simple behaviour, a number of observations

would be required.
For more complex behaviours, establishing likely cause is much more difficult.
Thus to find out the course of a particular behaviours, we must look carefully at
the result of many observations, noting the effects of a particular factor. 29
Introduction to Social Observational method can be relatively informal and unstructured or it can be
Psychology
formal and structured. But the object in each case in the same, “to abstract
information from the complex flux of social behaviours that are of potential
significance to the research questions; and to record each instance of such actions
over some period” (Manstead A.S. R. Semin G.R., 2001: 97). The nature of
research setting or topic dictates that observation is conducted in a relatively
informal and unstructured manner with the researcher posing as a member of the
group being observed. A Classical example of research employing this method
is Festinger, Riecken and Schachter’s (1956) study of the consequences of blatant
disconfirmation of strongly held beliefs. The investigators identified a religious
sect which predicted that the northern hemisphere would be destroyed by flood
on a certain date. By joining that sect, members of the research team were able to
observe what happened when the predicted events failed to materialise?
This is called participant observation. In such observation researcher participate

in the ongoing activities of the people being observed. Formal methods of
observation can be used when it is possible to record actions relevant to the
research question without disturbing the occurrence of behaviour. In non-
participant observation observers record people’s behaviour but do not actually
participates in their activities. The most formal type of observational methods is
one in which the researcher uses a predetermined category system for scoring
social behaviours.
Observational methods of data collection have two main advantages over the
self report methods. They can often be made without disturbing the naturally
occurring behaviours. Even where people know that they are being observed,
enacting behaviour may be quite engrossing.
Nevertheless, there are some types of behaviours that are either impossible to
observe directly (because they took place in the past) or difficult to observe
directly (because they are normally enacted in private). Moreover, social
psychologists are often interested in measuring people’s perceptions, cognitions
or evaluations, none of which can be directly assessed simply through observation.
For these self-report measures or other techniques are often used.
2.5.2 Experimental Method

Experimentation has been the dominant research method in social psychology,
mainly because it is without equal as a method for testing theories that predict
causal relationships between variables. The goal of an experiment is to see what
happens to a phenomenon, such as obedience, when the researcher deliberately
modifies some features of the environment in which the phenomenon occurs
(that is, if variable A is changed, will there be resulting changes in B). We can
see the meanings of some basic concepts
Methods of Social Psychology of the experimental research in the table given

below:
30
Theories of Social Psychology
Table: Terminology in Experimental Research
Experiment A well controlled test of hypothesis about cause and

effect.
Hypothesis A statement about cause and effect that can be tested.
Variable Something that can occur with different values and

can be measured.
Independent Variable A variable that represents the hypothesised cause

that is precisely controlled by the experimenter and
independent of what the participant does.
Dependent Variable A variable that represents the hypothesised effect

whose values ultimately depend on the value of the
independent variable.
Experimental Group A group in which the hypothesised cause is present.
Control Group A group in which the hypothesised effect is present.
Statistics Mathematical techniques for determining the

certainty with which a sample of data can be used
to draw generalisations or inferences
Measurement A system for assigning numbers to different values

of variables.
Random Assignment A system for assigning participants to experimental

and control groups so that each participant has as
equal chance of being assigned to any group.
Source: Atkinson & Hilgard et al (2003) Introduction to Psychology 14th edition. Wadsworth
Asia Pvt. Ltd.
There are two basic types of experiments in social psychology laboratory and
natural laboratory and natural experiments have their particular rules. The
laboratory experiment is of particular interest in social psychological discussions.
Social psychologists use some variations. Two of the most common of these
variations are the quasi-experiments and the true randomized experiments. These
two methods differ with respect to realism of the setting in which data are
collected, and the degree of control that the researcher has over that setting.
2.5.2.1 Quasi-experimental Method

Quasi-experiment is conducted in a natural, everyday life setting, over which
the researcher has less than complete control. The lack of control over the setting
arises from the very fact that it is an everyday life setting. Here the realism of the
setting is relatively high, the control relatively low. The true randomized
experiment by contrast is one in which the researcher has complete control over
key features of the setting. However, this degree of control often involves a loss
31
Introduction to Social of realism. It is sometimes possible to conduct a true randomized experiment in
Psychology
an everyday setting; this is called a field experiment.
2.5.2.2 Experimental Designs

In an experiment, it is important that (1) the experimenter keep all theoretically
irrelevant features of the experimental setting constant, manipulating just the
key independent variable; and (2) that participants are allocated randomly to the
different conditions of an experiment. A true experimental design is known as
Post test only control group design. In this type of design participants are allocated
randomly to one of the two groups. One group is exposed to the independent
variable (experimental group) and the other is not (control group). Both groups
are assessed on the independent variable and the comparison of the two groups
on this measure indicates whether or not the independent variable had an effect.
There are many types of experimental designs used in social psychology, more
sophisticated and complex than the above. Each design represents a more complete
attempt to rule out the possibility that observed difference between conditions
result from something other than the manipulation of independent variable. A
common design in social psychological experiment is the factorial experiment,
in which two or more independent variables are manipulated within the same
study. The main benefit of a factorial design is that it allows the researcher to
examine the separate and combined effects of two or more independent variables.
The separate effects of each of the independent variable are known as main effects.
Interaction effect is a term used when combined effects of two (or more)
independent variables in a factorial experiment yield a pattern that differs from
the sum of the main effects.
2.5.3 Ethical Issues in Research Methods

There are certain ethics which a researcher needs to take care while conducting
research. Few of them can be pointed out as follows:
Informed Consent: It is the duty of the researcher to inform the participants

about whatever experiment or test will be administered upon them and they
can carry upon the research only if the participants give their consent after
getting the detailed information.
Debrief: It is a process which is done after the experiment or research has

been conducted upon participants. The researcher conducts a structured or
semi structured interview and discusses the details of the research as well as
gives the participants an opportunity to ask questions from them.
Protection of Participants: The security and safety are the prior concern
of a researcher. No personal harm or violation of the rights of the participants
should take place.
Deception: The researcher should clearly specify the method, investigation,

analysis and interpretation of research. No information or method can be
deceived from the participants.
Confidentiality: The personal information and other details of the

participants should be kept completely confidential and can not be disclosed,
32 unless it involves any legal issues.
Self Assessment Questions II Theories of Social Psychology

1) The primary concern of social psychologists is to study human behaviour in
a social context. .............................
2) Social psychology does not examines the impact of a group on the behaviours
of its individual members. ......................
3) Cognitive theory presumes that the mental activities of the individual are
not important determinants of social behaviour. .......................
4) The central idea in learning theory is that a person’s current behaviour is

determined by his/her prior experience. ..............................
2.6 LET US SUM UP

It can be summed up from the above discussion that social psychology is a field
which analyses our thoughts, feelings and behaviour toward the people around
us. It also explains how others have an influence on our behaviour in the social
context.
Social psychologists investigate human social behaviour at various levels.

Primarily, these levels are intrapersonal social behaviours, interactions between
individuals, interactions between individual and group and interactions between
group and group. The two major theoretical approaches in social psychology are
learning theories and cognitive theories. Learning theories believe that social
behaviour is governed by external events. Its central proposition is that people
will be more likely to perform a specific behaviour if it is followed by something
pleasurable. Likewise, people will more likely refrain from performing a particular
behaviour if it is followed by something aversive. The cognitive approach
emphasizes that a person’s behaviour depends on the way he or she perceives the
social situation. Cognitive theoriesargue that the mental activities called cognitive
processes,of the individual are important determinants of social behaviour. These
mental activities include perception, memory, judgment, problem solving and
decision making.
2.7 UNIT END QUESTIONS

1) Explain that how social psychology is related with other disciplines of social
sciences and other branches of psychology.
2) Elucidate the levels of analysis of social behaviour in social psychology.
3) Discuss learning theories as an approach to study social behaviour.
4) Discuss cognitive theories as an approach to study social behaviour.
2.8 GLOSSARY
Social Psychology: Social psychology is defined as the scientific study of how
we feel about, think about and behave toward the people around us and how our
33
Introduction to Social feelings, thoughts, and behaviours are influenced by those people in the social
Psychology
context.
Social Neuroscience: Social neuroscience is the study of how our social behaviour
both influences and is influenced by the activities of our brain.
Classical Conditioning: Classical conditioning presumes that when a neutral

(unconditioned response, UCR) after natural stimulus.
Reinforcement: Reinforcement is the mechanism by whichpeople learn to

perform a particular behaviour because it is followed by something that is
pleasurable or that satisfies a need (or they learn to avoid behaviour that is followed
by unpleasant consequences).
Observational Learning: Observational learning presumes thatpeople often learn

social attitudes and behaviours simply by watching other people, known
technically as “models”.
Social Exchange Theory: Social exchange theory uses the concept of

reinforcement to explain stability and change in social interactions and relations
between individuals.
Social Cognitive Theories: Social cognitive theoriesemphasise that a person’s

behaviour depends on the way he or she perceives the social situation.
Schema: Schema is a mental representation capturing the general characteristics

of a particular class of episodes, events or individuals.
Principle of Cognitive Consistency: Principle of cognitive consistency maintains

that individuals strive to hold ideas that are consistent or congruous with one
another, rather than ideas that are inconsistent or incongruous.

QUESTIONS
1) True
2) False
3) False
4) True
1) True
2) False
3) False
4) True
34
Theories of Social Psychology
Kassin, S., Fein, S., & Markus, H. R. (2017). Social Psychology (10thed.).
Cengage Learning.

References
Adinarayan, S. P. (1953). Before and after Independence-A study of racial and
communal attitudes in India. British Journal of Psychology, 44, 108-115.
Adinarayan, S.P. (1957). A study of racial attitudes in India. Journal of Social

Allport, F. H. (1924). Social Psychology. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Allport, G. W. (1985). The historical background of social psychology. In G.
Lindzey& E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology (3rd ed., Vol. I,
pp. 1-46). New York: Random House.
Asch, S. E. (1952). Social Psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

B. F. Skinner (1938). The Behavior of Organisms: An Experimental Analysis.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliff s, NJ: Prentice-

Hall.
Bartlett, F. C. (1932). Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social

Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Berkowitz, L. (1962). Aggression: A Social Psychological Analysis. New York,

NY: McGraw-Hill.
Dalal, A. K., & Mishra, G. (2001). Social psychology in India: Evolution and
emerging trends. In In A. K. Dalal& G. Misra (Eds.), New Directions in Indian
Psychology (vol. 1: Social Psychology), New Delhi: Sage.
Darley, J. M., &Latané, B. (1968). Bystander intervention in emergencies:

377-383.
Eagly, A. H., &Chaiken, S. (1993). The Psychology of Attitudes. Fort Worth, TX:
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

7, 117-140.
Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row,

Peterson.
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (2008). Social Cognition: From Brains to Culture.
Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
35
Introduction to Social Haney, C., Banks, C., & Zimbardo, P. (1973). Interpersonal dynamics in a
Psychology
simulated prison. International Journal of Criminology and Penology, 1, 69-97.
Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1963). Communication and

Persuasion. Oxford, England: Yale University Press.
Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of Groupthink: A Psychological Study of foreign policy

Decisions and Fiascos. Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.
Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1982). Judgment Under Uncertainty:
Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Cengage Learning.
Kelley, H. H., & Thibaut, J. W. (1978). Interpersonal Relations: A Theory of

Interdependence. New York: Wiley.
LeBon, G. (1908). The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind. London: Unwin
(original work published 1896). Online: http://cupid.ecom.unimelb.edu.au/het/
lebon/crowds.pdf
Lewin, K.(1936). A Dynamic Theory of Personality. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lieberman, M. D. (2010). Social cognitive neuroscience. In S. T. Fiske, D. T.

Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology (5th ed., Vol. 1,
pp. 143–193). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
McDougall, W. (1908). An Introduction to Social Psychology. London: Methuen.
McDougall, W. (1920). The Group Mind. London: Cambridge University Press.
Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to Authority. London: Tavistock.
Misra, G. (1982). Deprivation and development : A review of Indian studies.
Indian Educational Review, 18, 12-33.
Murphy, G., & Murphy, L. B. (1931). Experimental Social Psychology. New

York: Harper (rev. ed published with T. M. Newcomb in 1937).
Pandey, J. (1986). Social-cultural perspectives on ingratiation. In B.A. Mahar &

W.B. Mahar (Ed.), Progress in Experimental Personality Research (Vol. 14).
New York: Academic Press.
Pavlov, I.P. (1927). Conditioned Reflexes: An Investigation of the Physiological

Activity of the Cerebral Cortex (translated by G.V. Anrep). London: Oxford
University Press.
Ross, E. A. (1908). Social Psychology. New York: Macmillan.
Sherif, M. (1936). The Psychology of Social Norms. New York: Harper.
Singh, A. K. (1981). Development of religious identity and prejudice in Indian
children. In D. Sinha (Ed.), Socialization of the Indian Child (pp.87-100). New
Delhi: Concept.
36
Sinha, D. (1952). Behaviour in a catastrophic situation: A psychological study of Theories of Social Psychology
reports and rumours. British Journal of Psychology, 43, 200-209.
Sinha, J. B. P. (1980). Nurturant Task Leader. New Delhi: Concept.
Triplett, N. (1898). The dynamogenic factors in pacemaking and competition.
American Journal of Psychology, 9, 507-533.
37
BLOCK 2
SELF IN SOCIAL CONTEXT
Self In Social Context
INTRODUCTION
This block consists of two units. The first unit deals with self and its processes. It
also discusses the formation and management of impression. Interestingly, it
also discusses the tactics with the help of which you can enhance self presentation.
In this unit we will move ahead continuing our description from the previous
units. But here we are going to explore the cognitive and dynamics of these
processes and would be studying the most pertinent question – to what extent
our social perceptions and person perceptions are accurate? Do these processes
have errors, bias and misinterpretation which affect our real understanding of
social world? In layman’s language, can we trust the information which we have
gathered from impression formation, attributions and social categorisation? If
not what do we about it.
The second unit deals with the concept of society as well as society and their
influences on individual’s behaviour. Society and culture are important
determinant of how our perceptions, attitudes, and behaviours are shaped and
moderated throughout our lives.The type and nature of bonds and relationships
people form in their societies and families are also unique to them. We often
attribute such differences in the societies to the differences in their cultures. In
this unit, you will come to know about the concept of culture, process of
enculturation and acculturation as well as individualistic and collectivistic
societies. By the end of the unit, you will also come to know about the cultural
influences on individuals’ perception and actions.
40
Self and its Processes
UNIT 3 SELF AND ITS PROCESSES*
Structure
3.0 Objectives
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Self Concept
3.2.1 Formation of Self Concept
3.2.2 Self Esteem
3.2.3 Self Efficacy
3.3 Cognitive and Motivational Basis of Social and Person Perception
3.3.1 Impression Formation and Management
3.3.2 Impression Management
3.3.3 Theories of Self Presentation
3.3.4 Self Presentation Tactics
3.3.4.1 Ingratiation
3.3.4.2 Intimidation
3.3.4.3 Self Promotion
3.3.4.4 Exemplification
3.3.4.5 Supplication
3.3.5 Individual Differences in Self Presentation
3.4 Let Us Sum Up
3.6 Glossary
3.0 OBJECTIVES
Describe the concept of self and self- esteem;
Identify the different features of self- efficacy;
Analyse the dynamics of impression formation; and
Explain the theories and tactics of self- presentation.
3.1 INTRODUCTION
In the previous unit we have studied social cognition – a process of knowing,
understanding and predicting the behaviour of others. Social cognition involves
two basic processes i.e. social perception and person perception. Under social
perception, we had studied various mechanisms of social perception – non-verbal
communications, attributions, impression formation, and implicit personality
theory. In person perception, the mechanisms we studied were physical cues,
schemas, heuristics, construct and social categorisation. Here we concentrated
on the structural and functional aspects of social and person perception. In this
* Adapted from BPC-006, Block 1, Unit 4 41

Self In Social Context unit we will move ahead continuing our description from the previous unit. But
here we are going to explore the cognitive and dynamics of these processes and
would be studying the most pertinent question – to what extent our social
perceptions and person perceptions are accurate? Do these processes have errors,
bias and misinterpretation which affect our real understanding of social world?
In layman’s language, can we trust the information which we have gathered
from impression formation, attributions and social categorisation? If not what
do we about it.
3.2 SELF-CONCEPT
It refers to our understanding about us. It provides a clue to what he or she thinks
about them. Each individual has a self concept of themselves which consists of
those characteristics which they feel are important and related to them self and is
their identity. It is related to our capabilities, nature, personality and other personal
characteristics which help us to define who we are. Further, our self concept is
also dependent on situation, that is, we react differently in different situation.
For example, you might consider as fun loving, adventurous, sports person, good
leader or traditional, less confident and so on. Our identity with any organization,
membership, culture or family also is a part of our self concept.
3.2.1 Formation of Self-Concept

Our definition of selfconcept is developed through our experiences and interaction
with others. Some of the theorists have given certain explanation towards the
process of development self-concept, few of them can be explained as follows:
Looking Glass Self

The looking glass self theory says that we try to form our self image and concept
on basis of what others believe about us. So self-concept is developed through
other people’s reactions towards us and how we believe other people see us. For
example, if your friend says–"you are too benevolent” and there have been similar
occasions when others have come to you to discuss their problems. These
collective thoughts evoke emotional responses and the characteristics of
benevolence is added to your self-concept.
Social Comparison Theory

According to this theory comparison of self with others leads to development of
self-concept. We compare and evaluate ourself with others on basis of two
dimensions: superiority/ inferiority and similarity/ difference. The characteristics
like level of intelligence, attractiveness, creativity and so on, which are used for
comparison falls under the dimension of superiority and inferiority. For Example,
you might judge yourself to be more attractive than your friend or less creative
than your sister, then all these judgements are become a part of your self-concept.
The groups with which we compare ourselves is called as reference groups.
Comparing and evaluating of self with others is not harmful but the reference
group with which we compare should be reasonable, appropriate and adequate.
For example, if you have started attending painting classes and you judge yourself
as inferior whenever you compare your paintings with famous painters, then that
42
may have a negative effect on your self-concept. In such case, you need to compare Self and its Processes
yourself with those who are new learners in the field of painting.
Social comparison is also done on basis of similarities and differences with

others.There may be situations when our similarity with reference group is more
desirable while at certain circumstances difference with others is more desirable.
It depends upon whether we want to fit in or we want to stand out (e.g. on basis
of age, personality) differently from the reference group. Yet, it is to be understood
that, there can positive and negative consequences of social comparison.
3.2.2 Self Esteem

Self-esteem refers to the judgments and evaluations we make of our concept of
self. It is an evaluation of our self, e.g. Are you honest…dishonest; good….bad?
or Who are you? Like our self-concept, self-esteem also differs from situation to
situation and across our lifetime. Self-esteem is one of the contributing factors
toward our self-concept while self-perceptionalso plays a significant role in
developing our sense of self.
3.2.3 Self-Efficacy
Self-efficacy refers to the evaluations that people make about their ability to
perform a task within a specific context. The feedback of our potent and abilities
that we get from others reinforces our self-perception and self-efficacy. So, if the
perception of self is positive, more is the confidence level and more will be the
self-efficacy. Therefore, self-perception affects our behaviour and responses.
While some of this process is under our control, much of it is also shaped by the
people in our lives. Positive feedback increases our self-efficacy while negative
feedback of ourselves decreases our self-efficacy. If there is a contradiction on
how others opine for us and what we think about us, then it has a significant
impact on our self-concept as well as self-esteem.
3.3 COGNITIVE AND MOTIVATIONAL BASIS OF

SOCIAL AND PERSON PERCEPTION
The cognitive basis of social and person perception involves the processes through
which we collect the information, process and select it and later interpret this
information. But what is more important in this information processing, is the
role played by our emotions, motives in distorting this information so as to suit
our needs, goals and aspirations. So, the truthfulness and accuracy of the
information collected about others gets distorted. The information turns out the
way in which it protects one’s self esteem, leading to various bias in our attribution
process, in our managing impression’s and influencing the self presentation tactics.
Most importantly our basic emotional states, motives, our goal of accurate
information gathering shadows our social and person perception. We will now
deal with the various biases in attributions, impression formation, categorisations
which are result of these cognitive and dynamic factors.
43
Self In Social Context 3.3.1 Impression Formation and Management
In forming impression about others, there are six simple and general principles:
People form impressions of others quickly and on the basis of minimal

information and go on to infer about general traits about them.
People pay attention to most salient features of a person we notice the

qualities that make a person distinctive or unusual, rather than to everything.
In processing information about people involves some coherent meaning in

their behaviour and use context of a persons behaviour to infer its meaning,
rather than interpret the behaviour in isolation.
We organise our perceptions by categorising or grouping stimuli i.e. rather

than to see each person as a separate individual, we tend to see people as
members of a group – for example: people wearing while coat are doctors.
We use cognitive structure to make sense of people’s behaviour. If we come

across woman doctor, we use our information about doctor more generally
to infer her attributes and meaning of her behaviour.
A perceivers’ own needs and personal goals influences how he or she

perceives others.
Why are our impressions of others sometimes wrong? Our impressions are
sometimes wrong because of the mental shortcuts. We use when forming social
judgment people are too ready to attribute other’s actions to their personalities
rather than to the situation.
Another reason our impression can go wrong concerns our use of schemas. People
use implicit personality theories to fill in the gaps in their knowledge about other
people and use schemas or theories to decide why other people what they do.
Why does it seem like our impression are accurate when as we have seen that
‘our impressions can go wrong’? There are three reasons behind it:
First – we often see people in a limited number of situations and thus never have
the opportunity to see that our impressions are wrong.
Second – we will not realise that our impressions are wrong if we make them
come true, this is the case with self-fulfilling prophecies even if an initial
impression is incorrect, we often make it come true.
Third – we might not realise we are wrong if a lot of people agree on what
someone’s is like – even when everyone is wrong.
3.3.2 Impression Management (Impression Management - The

Fine Art of Looking Good)
The desire to make a favorable impression on others is a strong one so most of us
do our best to look good to others when we meet them for the first time. Social
psychologists use the term impression management (or self-presentation) to
describe these effort to make a good impression on others and the results of their
research on such efforts suggest that they are worthwhile.
44
The different techniques for boosting their image fall into two categories: self Self and its Processes
enhancement – effort to increase their appeal to others and other enhancement –
effort to make the target person feel good in various ways. With respect to self-
enhancement, the strategies include effort to boost one’s physical appearance
through style of dress, personal grooming and the use of various props. (example:
eye glasses).
Additional tactics of self enhancement involves efforts to describe oneself in

positive terms. Turning to other enhancement, individuals use many different
tactics to induce positive moods and reaction in others example: flattery.
According to William James observation, people often shows different sides of
themselves to different groups of people. Youngsters who are demure and obedient
before their parents and teachers and may swear and swagger in the company of
their friends. Most parents do not show their actual self to their children as they
do to their colleagues or intimate friends.
We usually talk as if there is a single self which is stable and well defined. But
social psychologists believe it is more appropriate to think of self as multiple
selves because people display different aspects of themselves in
differentsituations. Schlenker (1980) has termed this as ‘impression management’
and defined it as the conscious or unconscious attempt to control images that are
projected in real or imagined social interactions. When there images deal with
some aspects of self we call the process as self presentation.
Self Assesment Questions I

Fill in the blanks:
1) ....................... is developed through our experiences and interaction with
others.
2) People form .................... of others quickly and on the basis of minimal

information.
3) The different techniques for boosting their image fall into two categories
........................ and ........................ .
4) A perceivers’ own needs and ................................... influences how he or

she perceives others.
3.3.3 Theories of Self Presentation

Cooley (1902/1922) and Mead (1934) have put forth a theory known as:
A symbolic interactionism: They have stressed that participants in social
interactions try to take the role of the others and see themselves as others
see them. This process helps them to know how they appear to others and
also guide their social behaviour so that it has the desired effect. By taking
the role of others, a person can choose the right clothes and the right speech
patterns to communicate with others. For example: politicians, and leaders
like Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi would wear the traditional dresses
of the places which they visited and also spoke few words of local language.
45
Self In Social Context Theory of self presentation: Erving Goffman has drawn parallels of this
behaviour to the world of theater and formulated a theory of ‘self presentation
in everyday life’. Goffman (1959/1967) has described social interaction as
a theoretical performance in which each individual acts out “live” – a set of
carefully choosen verbal and non-verbal acts that expresses one’s self. In
self presentation, one of the fundamental rules of social interaction is mutual
commitment i.e. all the members of the interaction use certain face-saving
devices, so as to maintain a face. Through maintaining face is not the goal
of the social interaction it is rather necessary for social interaction to continue.
Incidents that threaten the face of participant also threaten the survival of
the relationship. Therefore we somehow try to avert the embarrassment that
might occur and threaten the relationship by overlooking by helping others
apologise for the social blindness that they commit. Thus for Goffman social
interaction requires its participants to be able to regulate their self presentation
and that it will be perceived and evaluated appropriately by others.
Situated identities theory: C.N. Alexander has put forth another theory
called the ‘situated identities’ theory. There is a pattern of social behaviour
for each social setting and Alexander claimed that people strive to create
the most favourable situated identities for themselves in their social
encounters. For example a college professor might aim for a highly academic
identity when presenting a paper at a seminar, a somewhat more relaxed
identity during lectures and a causal and informal situated identities at a
social gathering and with friends. This is simply a role a person is performing
in different situations.
However a situated identity is tied much more to a specific situational context

than a role is. Where role focuses on behaviours that are expected, situated
identities deal more with the images one choose to project in a particular
social interaction. Each of the three theories of self presentation agrees that
other people are forming impressions of us and are using these impressions
to guide their interactions with us. Further each theory also points to variety
of tactics that individuals use to manage and control the image they present
to other.
3.3.4 Self Presentation Tactics

There are a variety of tactics that people use in presenting themselves to others.
Jones and Pittman (1982) have identified five major tactics of self representation
which differ according to the particular attribute the person is trying to gain.
They are:
3.3.4.1 Ingratiation
This is the most common of presentation techniques and is defined as a class of
strategic behaviour illicitly designed to influence a particular other person
concerning the attractiveness of one’s personal qualities. In other words, the
main goal of the ingratiator is to be seen to be likeable. There are number of
ways in accomplishing this and one of the most common tactics is to give
compliment to another person.
46
However a successful ingratiatory knows when to compliment people and also Self and its Processes
has certain amount of credibility and sincerity. He uses his discrimination properly.
Another tactics is to confirm to other person’s opinions and behaviours. We tend
to like people whose beliefs, attitudes and behaviours are similar to our own.
But, there is a danger here, i.e. if the other person (target) suspects ingratiation
this factor does not work.
3.3.4.2 Intimidation
Is to arouse fear in other people. This is in contrast to ingratiation. In intimidation
by creating the image of dangerous person, the intimidator seeks to control and
interaction by the exercise of power. Intimidation is mostly used in relationships
that are non voluntary in which escape is not easily accomplished. Example a
street robber with a threat to kill if money or jewelry is not handed over. Some
times parents do it with their children and also teachers with their pupils.
3.3.4.3 Self Promotion

If a person wants to show himself as competent person at some activity this is
the tactics mostly used. He does this by accepting or acknowledging some of the
minor flows or weaknesses he has to target person and then go and emphasis the
positive traits that the target person was not aware of him. However, there is one
danger in using self promotion. i.e. the mismatch between the self promoted
claims of competencies and the reality. For example if a person claims to the
target person that he is very good at some things and of that skill come upto be
tested and he does not show any competencies then he looses his credibility.
3.3.4.4 Exemplification
Here the goal is to influence the impressions that others are not conscientious
workers. The person here wants to prove that he has more integrity and moral
worthiness compared to others, and wants to arouse guilty in the target person.
He wants to create an impression of a sufferer.
3.3.4.5 Supplication
Here the person advertises his/ her weakness and dependent on other person. He
is seeking sympathy. This is usually a last resort i.e. what a person is unable to
use any other strategies, he resorts to gaining sympathy. The person is presenting
an image of helplessness hoping to elicit a sense obligation from the target. The
person may use all five self presentation tactics on different occasions. So people
may specialise in one or other tactic and may use it on more than one occasions.
What ever choice or combination, the person’s aim is to create the desired
impressions someone else, there by increasing the chances of obtaining the desired
effect.
3.3.5 Individual Difference in Self Presentation

People strive to influence the images that others form of them during social
interaction has been found to be true even through research on self presentation.
Though everyone engages in such actions from time to time, there are important
47
Self In Social Context differences in the extent to which they control their self presentation. Some people
engage in such actions from time to time, there are important differences in the
extent to which they control their self presentation and some people engages in
this tactics more often and with greater skill. People differ in exercising control
over their verbal and non-verbal cues of self presentation and this is termed as
self monitoring of expressive behaviour (Synder 1979).
High self monitoring persons are particularly sensitivite to the expressions and
the self presentations of others in social situation and they use these as cues in
monitoring, their own self presentation for purpose of impression management.
High self monitoring persons are good at learning what is socially appropriate in
new situations, have good control of their emotional expression and effectively
use these abilities to create the impression they want to display.
In fact they can adapt themselves to any social situation, for example: they can
adopt the mannerism of a reserved, withdrawn and introverted person and then
they can abruptly do about face and portray themselves as equally convincing,
friendly, outgoing and extroverted person. In self-presentation situations, high
selfmonitoring persons are quite likely to seek out social comparisons and
information about the appropriate patterns of behaviour. They put in considerable
effort in attempting to read and understand others and behave accordingly and
guide their self presentation so as to gain approval or power of an interaction.
However self presentation on impression management is not for deceptive
purposes but is an adaptive skill in environments where there is a complex mixture
of people and policies.
Self-presentation and Human Nature: Self presentation is a basic fact of
social life. People influence the images of their ‘selves’ that are projected to
others but where is the ‘real’ self in all this? As already known, each of us
have multiple selves which we present to different people in different ways
but all of them are many aspects of only one ‘true self’ self presentation
factors is selecting certain characteristics and omitting other. Therefore,
presentation of self is an integral part of everyday social interaction.
Self Assessment Questions II
1) Discuss any two tactics of self-presentation.

.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
48
3.4 LET US SUM UP
In this unit we have tried to cover the cognitive and motivational basis of social Self and its Processes
and person perception. We tried to show how neural mechanisms do affect
perception etc. We also studied about the impression formation and the processes
involved thereof. A discussion in detail about the processes involved in impression
management was taken up. Following this a detailed analysis of how one presents
oneself was taken up. In these theories of self presentation was discussed and the
many tactics that are used in presenting oneself in the correct light were
considered.

1) Explain the meaning and process of development of self-concept.
2) Elaborate upon the formation and management of impression.
3) Discuss the theories of self-presentation.
4) Describe the tactics of self-presentation.
3.6 GLOSSARY
Self Concept: It refers to our understanding about us.
Self-Esteem: Refers to the judgments and evaluations we make of our concept
of self.
Self-Efficacy: The evaluations that people make about their ability to perform a
task within a specific context.
Self-Presentation Tactics: Variety of tactics that people use in presenting

themselves to others.
Ingratiation: A class of strategic behaviour illicitly designed to influence a

particular other person concerning the attractiveness of one’s personal qualities.
Intimidation: In intimidation by creating the image of dangerous person, the

intimidator seeks to control and interaction by the exercise of power.
Self promotion:This tactics is used if a person wants to show himself as competent

person at some activity.
Exemplification: The person here wants to prove that he has more integrity and
moral worthiness compared to others, and wants to arouse guilty in the target
person.
Supplication: Here the person advertises his/ her weakness and dependent on
other person.
3.7 ANSWERS TO SELF-ASSESSMENT

QUESTIONS
1) Self concept
49
Self In Social Context 2) Impressions
3) self enhancement andother enhancement.
4) personal goals
1) A) Ingratiation: This is the most common of presentation techniques and

is defined as a class of strategic behaviour illicitly designed to influence
a particular other person concerning the attractiveness of one’s personal
qualities. In other words, the main goal of the ingratiator is to be seen to
be likeable. There are number of ways in accomplishing this and one of
the most common tactics is to give compliment to another person.
However a successful ingratiatory knows when to compliment people

and also has certain amount of credibility and sincerity. He uses his
discrimination properly. Another tactics is to confirm to other person’s
opinions and behaviours. We tend to like people whose beliefs, attitudes
and behaviours are similar to our own. But, there is a danger here, i.e. if
the other person (target) suspects ingratiation this factor does not work.
B) Intimidation: Is to arouse fear in other people. This is in contrast to

ingratiation. In intimidation by creating the image of dangerous person,
the intimidator seeks to control and interaction by the exercise of power.
Intimidation is mostly used in relationships that are non voluntary in
which escape is not easily accomplished. Example a street robber with a
threat to kill if money or jewelry is not handed over. Some times parents
do it with their children and also teachers with their pupils.

Adorno and Colleagues quoted in Crisp, R.J, Rhianomon N Turner (2007)
Essential Social Psychology, Sage Publications, New Delhi.
Aronson E, Wilson T.D,and Akert R.M (1998) Social Psychology (third edition),
Longman Inc.
References
Aarts and Dijksterhuis 2003 quoted in Taylor, E.S, Letitia Anne Peplau, David
O.Sears (2006), “Social Psychology (12th edition.), Pearson Education, India.
Ajzen 1996 quoted in Crisp, R.J, Rhianomon N Turner (2007) Essential Social
Psychology, Sage Publications, New Delhi.
Albert Bandura, Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control (New York, NY: W. H.
Freeman, 1997).
Anderson 1968 quoted in Crisp, R.J, Rhianomon N Turner (2007) Essential Social
Barbara M. Byrne, Measuring Self-Concept across the Life Span: Issues and
Instrumentation (Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 1996),
5.
50
Baron.R, Byrne D (2003), Social Psychology, Prentice Hall of India Pvt Ltd., Self and its Processes
New Delhi.
Bond and Atoum 2000 quoted in Baron, R.A Donn Byrne (2006) Social
Psychology (10th edition.) Prentice Hall of India, New Delhi.
Carner and Glass 1978, quoted in Crisp, R.J, Rhianomon N Turner (2007)
Caroll 1996 quoted in Baron, R.A Donn Byrne (2006) Social Psychology (10th
edition.) Prentice Hall of India, New Delhi.
Charles Cooley, Human Nature and the Social Order (New York, NY: Scribner,
1902).
Chaube S.P, Social Psychology (1986), Lakshmi Navayan Agarwal, Educational

Publishers, Agra. Pg-21-24.
Coffman, (1967) quoted in Crisp, R.J, Rhianomon N Turner (2007) Essential

Social Psychology, Sage Publications, New Delhi.
Cooley, (1922) quoted in Crisp, R.J, Rhianomon N Turner (2007) Essential Social
Cross and John (2003) quoted in Taylor, E.S, Letitia Anne Peplau, David O.Sears
(2006) Social Psychology (12th edition), Pearson Education, India.
Depaulo (1992) quoted in Baron, R.A Donn Byrne (2006) Social Psychology
(10th edition) Prentice Hall of India, New Delhi. Ekman and Friesen (1975)
quoted in Baron, R.A Donn Byrne (2006) Social Psychology (10th edition)
Prentice Hall of India, New Delhi.
Foriester and Liberman (2001) quoted in Taylor, E.S, Letitia Anne Peplau, David
O.Sears (2006), Social Psychology (12th edition), Pearson Education, India.
Gray (2009) quoted in Taylor, E.S, Letitia Anne Peplau, David O.Sears (2006),
Social Psychology (12th edition), Pearson Education, India.
Gross and Miller quoted in Crisp, R.J, Rhianomon N Turner (2007) Essential
Social Psychology, Sage Publications, New Delhi.
Harding, Kunter, Proshanky & Chein 1954, quoted in Crisp, R.J, Rhianomon N
Turner (2007) Essential Social Psychology, Sage Publications, New Delhi.
Heider 1958 quoted in Crisp, R.J, Rhianomon N Turner (2007) Essential Social
John Bargh & Assou 1996 quoted in Taylor, E.S, Letitia Anne Peplau, David O.
Sears (2006), Social Psychology (12th edition), Pearson Education, India.
Joel Brockner, Self-Esteem at Work (Lexington, MA: Lexington Books,
1988), 11.
Joel Brockner, Self-Esteem at Work (Lexington, MA: Lexington Books,
1988), 2.
51
Self In Social Context Jones and Davis (1965) quoted in Crisp, R.J, Rhianomon N Turner (2007)
Jones and Pillman (1982) quoted in Crisp, R.J, Rhianomon N Turner (2007)
Milgram (1963) quoted in Taylor, E.S, Letitia Anne Peplau, David O.Sears (2006),
Social Psychology (12th edition), Pearson Education, India.
Owen Hargie, Skilled Interpersonal Interaction: Research, Theory, and Practice

(London: Routledge, 2011), 261.
Owen Hargie, Skilled Interpersonal Interaction: Research, Theory, and Practice

(London: Routledge, 2011), 99.
Turner R.N and Richard J.Crisp (2007) Essential Social Psychology,Sage

Publications, New Delhi Pg-39-71.
Zalenski and Larsen 2002 quoted in Taylor, E.S, Letitia Anne Peplau, David
O.Sears (2006), Social Psychology (12th edition.), Pearson Education, India.
52
Self and its Processes
UNIT 4 SELF IN SOCIAL CONTEXT*
Structure
4.0 Objectives
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Culture: Meaning and Definition
4.3 Enculturation and Acculturation
4.3.1 Difference in Enculturation and Acculturation
4.3.2 Agents of Enculturation
4.3.2.1 Parents and Siblings
4.3.2.2 Extended Family
4.3.2.3 Peer Relations
4.3.2.4 Education
4.3.2.5 Religion
4.4 Self Across Cultures
4.4.1 Outcomes of Different Self Construals Across Cultures
4.4.2 The Case of Multicultural Identities
4.4.2.1 At Intrapersonal Level
4.4.2.2 At Interpersonal Level
4.4.2.3 At Collective Level
4.5 Social Behaviour Across Cultures
4.5.1 Cross-Cultural Differences in Dynamics of Group Membership
4.5.2 In-group Identification versus In-group Bias
4.5.3 Attribution
4.5.4 Aggression
4.5.5 Person Perception, Attraction and Relationships
4.6 Let Us Sum Up
4.8 Glossary
4.0 OBJECTIVES
Define and describe culture;
Explain the difference between enculturation and acculturation;
Explain the agents that influence enculturation of an individual to their
society;
Differentiate between individualist and collectivist societies;
Comprehend in-group identification, multicultural identities and intergroup
bias;
Explain how the dynamics of group membership varies across cultures; and
Discuss the cultural influence on aggression, attribution, attraction, person
perception and relationships.
Lucknow Road, Timarpur, Delhi 53
4.1 INTRODUCTION
Whenever we visit a foreign country, we find a number of differences between
the lives and lifestyles of the people of that country and that of our own. The
people of that country speak language that is different from ours. They eat foods
that we generally do not eat. They express happiness and grief in ways that are
not similar to ours. The type and nature of bonds and relationships they form in
their societies and families are also unique to them. We often attribute such
differences in the societies to the differences in their cultures. In this unit, you
will come to know about the concept of culture, process of enculturation and
acculturation as well as individualistic and collectivistic societies. By the end of
the unit, you will also come to know about the cultural influences on individuals’
perception and actions.
4.2 CULTURE: MEANING AND DEFINITION

The word culture is often used in common everyday language interchangeably
with race, nationality, ethnicity, etc. The word culture is also used to indicate
music, dance, art, food, clothing, rituals, traditions and larger heritage of a
particular geographical area. Culture has also been a very essential area of study
in many disciplines, such as sociology, anthropology, political science, education,
marketing and, certainly, psychology. All these disciplines view culture with
different perspectives. After reviewing all these perspectives, Berry, Poortinga,
Segall, and Dasen (1992) suggested six broader perspectives in which culture is
understood. Descriptive perspective of culture emphasises the spectrum of
activities or behaviours associated with a culture. Historical perspective helps in
understanding the heritage and traditions associated with a group of people.
Normative perspective describes the culture specific rules and norms.
Psychological explanation of culture lays emphasis on learning, problem solving
and other behavioural approaches associated with the culture. Structural
perspective highlights the societal or organisational elements of a culture. And
finally, genetic perspective discusses the genesis of a culture.
Thus, the word culture is a complex conceptualisation that helps us in

understanding various activities, behaviours, events, structures, etc. in our lives.
Reflecting its complexity, different researchers have defined culture in different
ways. Some of these representative definitions are as given below:
Rohner (1984): Culture is the totality of equivalent and complementary learned

meanings maintained by a human population, or by identifiable segments of a
population, and transmitted from one generation to the next.
Triandis (1972): Culture includes some objective aspects, such as tools; and
some subjective aspects, such as words, shared beliefs, attitudes, norms, roles,
and values.
Jahoda (1984): Culture is a descriptive term that captures not only rules and
meanings but also behaviours.
Matsumoto and Juang (2008): Cultureisa dynamic system of rules, explicit and
implicit, established by groups in order to ensure their survival, involving
attitudes, values, beliefs, norms, and behaviours, shared by a group but harboured
54
differently by each specific unit within the group, communicated across Self in Social Context
generations, relatively stable but with the potential to change across time.
After viewing these definitions, it appears that Matsumoto and Juang (2008)
have explained culture in much broader sense by encompassing all essential
characteristics of other definitions. The definition describes the following
components of culture:
Dynamic nature: Culture is a dynamic system that describes the average,

mainstream and representative tendencies in a given population. Culture
cannot be taken as a definite guideline for the all behaviours of all persons
in a given culture. There is always a certain amount of divergence between
various behaviours of a single individual and also between behaviours of
different persons and culture. This inconsistency leads to a dynamic tension
within the culture and therefore, culture cannot be construed as static.
However, the degree of culture may vary across cultures resulting into some
cultures being exemplified as high on the degree of tension, whereas others
may have lesser degree of tension.
System of rules: Various behaviours, rules, attitudes, or values in a culture

do not exist in isolation. Rather, culture refers to a system that involves a
constellation of such apparently unrelated but functionally interrelated
psychological components.
Groups and units: There are different levels at which culture is reflected.
When we take it in the perspective of individuals within groups, the units
that reflect culture are specific individuals within the group. However, for a
large group that is comprised of multiple smaller groups, various sections
are the specific units reflecting the culture.
Ensuring survival of the group: The system of rules that exists in a culture
functions as a constraint on behaviour. Absence of the rules may lead to a
situation of chaos. These rules help the smaller units within the group to
coexist with one another by offering and promoting a structure for social
order. The rules also promote balance between the needs and desires of the
groups and units by taking the larger social context and the available
resources into account.
Psychological and behavioural components: Apart from the objective and

tangible components (music, dance, art, food, clothing, etc.), culture is also
constituted by the contents of the mind and psyche of the individuals living
in the culture. Such subjective and non-material components of culture
include attitudes, values, beliefs, ideas, norms, behaviours, etc. These
components are shared across the culture and are expressed in voluntary
behaviours, automatic responses and habits of the members, and overall,
rituals followed in the culture.
Individual differences: Different individuals in a particular culture vary in

the degree they carry and follow the cultural values, attitudes, beliefs, norms,
behaviours, etc. Therefore, in any culture there are individual differences in
observance of cultural values, attitudes, beliefs, norms and behaviours or
conformity to culture. However, some loose societies or cultures allow its
members a greater amount of disagreements with the culture, whereas there
55
Self In Social Context are some tight societies or cultures that largely disapprove or do not
recognition individual differences within in the culture (Pelto, 1968).
Transmitted from one generation to the next: Culture is not a fashion trend
which is temporarily followed and practised by some people for some time
and which gets vanished with time. Rather culture, comprising of the core
aspects of the system of rules, is transmitted from one generation to the next
and therefore, it is relatively stable over time.
Inevitable changes over time: Although culture is believed to be relatively

stable over time, it also undergoes some amount of inevitable changes. For
example, in past 30 years Indian culture has witnessed radical changes driven
by technological advancements. Culture is a complex system comprising of
its interrelated components and units, and change in any of its components
and units paves the way to change in the overall culture as a system.
4.3 ENCULTURATION AND ACCULTURATION

We witness numerous differences in the people of different cultures in terms of
their values, attitudes, beliefs, norms, behaviours, music, dance, art, food and
clothing. The reason for such differences lies in the process of socialisation they
undergo in their distinct cultures. There are number of agencies of the culture,
such as parents, peers, educational institutions, religious institutions, etc., that
play a very important role in learning of various aspects of our own culture. The
processes by which we learn, acquire and adopt various aspects of a culture are
called as enculturation and acculturation. Enculturation refers to the process by
which various aspects of our own culture are transmitted from one generation to
the next by different agencies of the culture.
4.3.1 Difference in Enculturation and Acculturation

Acculturation is slightly different from enculturation. Acculturation is the process
by which a person adapts to, and in many cases adopts, a culture different from
the one in which that person was originally enculturated. Thus, enculturation
occurs in the culture where we are born and the process of familiarisation to the
culture begins right after the birth. However, in the case of acculturation the
influence of the culture other than our own starts only when we migrate to the
other culture. Furthermore, enculturation is smooth and largely an involuntary,
automatic and inevitable process. But the process of acculturation often encounters
conflicts between the existing cultural learning and the new cultural practices
and manners the person is exposed to.
4.3.2 Agents of Enculturation

As construed, culture is transmitted from one generation to the next. This
transmission process of various components of culture is carried out and facilitated
by various agents of the culture, such as parents and basic family, peers,
educational institutions, religious institutions, etc.
4.3.2.1 Parents and Siblings

The earliest environmental impact on an infant’s personality and her other
psychological make-up comes from the parents. A hierarchy of three parental
56
goals was posited by LeVine (1977) that includes: Self in Social Context
i) The offspring’s physical survival

ii) Fostering of behaviours that promote self-sufficiency
iii) Fostering of other cultural values, including morality.
The economic standing (even in the same society) of parents is an important
determinant of the level of parental goal that they could pay attention to. A number
of cross-cultural studies have been conducted in the past few decades in order to
examine the similarities and differences in parenting behaviours across cultures.
Similarities have been found in terms of developmental expectations (Solis-
Camara & Fox, 1995), use of authority as a disciplinary measure (Papps, Walker,
Trimboli, &Trimboli, 1995) and emphasis on higher power (McEvoy, Lee,
O’Neill, Groisman, Roberts-Butelman, Dinghra, &Porder, 2005), among others.
Studies pertaining to cross-cultural differences in parenting indicate that these

differences pertain to the particularities of the essence of parental goals. These
studies have also examined that up to an extent various parenting styles lead to
cultural differences on various psychological constructs. One such study (Conroy,
Hess, Azuma, & Kashiwagi, 1980) examined the strategies employed by Japanese
and American mothers in order to obtain compliance from their young children.
Findings of the study indicated that in order to obtain compliance Japanese
mothers largely relied upon personal and interpersonal ties, whereas American
mothers were more oriented towards employing rewards and punishments. The
Japanese mothers were more inclined to be involved in emotional appeals and
exhibited greater flexibility as compared to the American mothers, who employed
strategies based on their authority as mothers. Such differences on parenting
clearly reflect broad cultural differences in patterns of enculturation and
socialisation.
Cultural differences could also influence the type of involvement a parent would
have as guided by the beliefs about their roles as parents and goals of parenting.
LeVine et. al. (1996) observed an emphasis on interaction and active participation
by American mothers (of Boston suburbs), and a focus on child-safety by Kenyan
mothers (of Gusii region). This difference is thought to be a result of the difference
in the perceived goals of parenting and enculturation.
The popular model introduced by Baumrind (1971) and added on by Maccoby

and Martin (1983) describes four parenting styles:
i) Authoritarian style (low in warmth, high in control)
ii) Permissive style (high in warmth, low in control)
iii) Authoritative style (high in warmth and control) and
iv) Negligent style (low in warmth and control)
Out of these, authoritative parenting has often been recognised as the best style
for optimal development of the child (Baumrind, 1967). However, the model
that is theorised on the basis of European American participants may not sustain
strongly across other cultures. The Chinese concept of chiao shun (or training) is
a distinctive style of parenting that applied particularly to the parent-child
relationship and children’s outcomes in the culture (Chao, 1994). Stewart and
colleagues (1999) distinguished Pakistani parenting from the traditional studies
57
Self In Social Context on low-warmth Asian parenting styles, suggesting that the former is generally
high on warmth. This could also be a result of different meanings that the parenting
style components have across cultures. On similar lines, control may have a
negative implication in one culture while children from another culture may
perceive it positively. Acculturation, however, could modify these meanings.
For examples, when Korean children migrate to countries such as Canada and
the US, perceive the parental control negatively (Kim, 1992), although those
living in Korea view the same positively (Rohner & Pettenfill, 1985).
Study on maternal expectations (Joshi & MacLean, 1997) of children revealed

that Indian mothers generally had lower expectations of their children’s
developmental domains (expect for environmental independence) as compared
to Japanese and British mothers. Japanese mothers demonstrated higher
educational, self-care and environmental independence expectations of their
children as compared to British mothers. Immigrant parents of Asian Indian origin
avoid involving their children in part-time jobs as they consider them distractions
from a good education, thus enforcing behaviours that they considered are required
for a better education of their children (Hickey, 2006).
The difference in sleeping arrangements also highlights the difference in parenting

behaviour across cultures. Matsumoto and Juang (2008) write about the negative
attitude of many American parents toward co-sleeping with children; it is a trend
for children to have separate rooms in families that are economically stable.
Indian parents, and those in similar cultures, are often appalled by this practice
as it appears to be neglectful. They prefer co-sleeping over “sleep training”,
especially during the infancy, so as to build a strong mother-child relationship
(Isaac, Annie & Prashanth, 2014). Interestingly, communal sleeping was once
common in pre-industrial Europe and America (Braun, 2017). Hence, perceived
goals of parenting and thoughts on how to achieve them may change over time
within a culture.
One’s immediate family responsible for enculturation and socialisation also

includes their siblings. A process of mutual socialisation between siblings is
emphasised in research (e.g. Ernst & Angst, 1983). Siblings often pass on their
set of beliefs and behaviours on to each other (Zukow-Goldring, 1995). In families
having a large number of children, older siblings may take on the responsibilities
of caregiving for their younger brothers and sisters (Matsumoto &Juang, 2008).
The impact of number of siblings in the growth of children manifested mixed

results (Salem, 2006). Increased number of siblings led to increased chances of
nutritional stunting. At the same time, older siblings act as protective factors
against stunting of their younger brothers and sisters. However, according to a
study by Desai (1995), smaller number of siblings did not provide any advantage
if their remote village did not have a school. This highlights the point that
enculturation agents do not work independently and sometimes only have an
enhancing effect on factors affecting socialisation. Socialisation literature on
street children of India (mostly Hindus and Muslims) indicates that their work
life starts at a much younger age than the more privileged ones – around the age
of 6 to 9 years (Mathur, 2009). Younger children in this category are often
accompanied by their older siblings, thus being important agents of enculturation.
58
4.3.2.2 Extended Family Self in Social Context
It takes a village to raise a child. Or in many non-European American cultures, it

at least takes a larger family consisting of more than parents and their children.
Karve (1965) describes a joint family as “a group of people who generally live
under one roof, who eat food cooked in one kitchen, who hold common property
and participate in common family worship and are related to one another as
some particular type of kinder” – ‘generally’being the key term in this
comprehensive definition. Many cultures view extended family as a source of
passing on the cultural heritage to the later generations (Matsumoto & Juang,
2008).
Most Western studies, particularly on parenting styles, focus on the nuclear family
and often on the child’s relationship with her mother. Joint families demonstrate
important relationship dynamics with grandparents, uncles, aunts and cousins
almost as much as it does with the parents and siblings. Even in the US,
grandmothers often get more connected into the family when their daughters are
single mothers or teenage mothers (Garcia Coll, 1990).
Even after a process of acculturation and family nuclearisation after immigrating

to Western countries such as the USA, Asian Indian Americans maintain the
joint family values and etiquette (Hickey, 2006). Growing up in joint family
produces a sense of belongingness in children; they tend to have abundant
playmates and be endowed with limitless supply of love and warmth (Ghosh,
1983). This, in turn, reinforces loyalty to the family and respect for authority in
Asian Indian children.
4.3.2.3 Peer Relations

A peer group consists of a small group of individuals who are passably close to
friends, are of similar age group, and collectively engage in similar activities
(Castrogiovanni, 2002). Since early childhood, children interact with others of
their age who could be their potential playmates. In orphanages, children mostly
interact with peers of several age groups, where the older children take
responsibilities of the younger ones. The extent of interaction with peers may
differ from culture to culture; Western and industrialised cultures seeing more
interaction within peers than their Eastern counterparts. This extent determines
the importance level of peer interaction for socialisation of individuals. Peer
groups allow the individual to learn autonomy without adult involvement, coping
strategies (Castrogiovanni, 2002), and identity construction/reconstruction (Black,
2002). According to Nicole M. Howard (2004), peers may reinforce family values
but may also supplement problematic behaviours.
Children often interact with peers their own gender, creating disconnect from
the other gender. This may carry forward later into adolescence and adulthood as
these individuals are better socialised to and develop skills in interacting with
members of their own sex and not enough skills for opposite sex interactions
(Hanish & Fabes, 2014). A subsystem of peer relations is friendship. Youniss
and Smollar (1989) theorised that close friendships serve functional benefits by
facilitating the acquisition of social competencies such as interpersonal sensitivity,
reciprocity, cooperation, and negotiation that are congruent to the culture.
59
Self In Social Context Salman Akhtar (2009) investigated friendships of immigrant children in Western
countries, providing important insights into the acculturation process. Homo-
ethnic friendships (having friends of one’s own ethnic group) serve maternal
function of pacifying the individual but, on the negative side, impede one’s
individuation. Hetero-ethnic friendships (having friends belonging to ethnic
groups other than one’s own) play paternal role by bolstering the process of
acculturation but tend to lack earnest affective connections. Having exclusively
hetero-ethnic friends, or homo-ethnic friends results into slower psychological
development of the person.
4.3.2.4 Education
Recall that we mentioned about the positive effects of siblings on child
development being conditional, depending on whether there was a school in the
locality. Formal education and informal education become pivotal in the
assimilation of individuals into the society by teaching culturally appropriate
skills and values. John Dewey (1899, 1916) delineated the following roles of
education relevant to the society:
i) Culture Transmission
ii) Minimising inequality
iii) Social adaptability and social change
iv) Acquisition of new knowledge
v) Personal development
Cross-national studies of mathematics achievement and abilities show significant
differences in the same. Geary (1996) assert that secondary, not primary,
mathematical abilities manifest these differences. This would imply that the causal
factors for such difference are cultural and social, not biological. American
students tend to make more miscalculations as compared to East Asian students
(Miura, Okamoto, Kim, Steere, & Fayol, 1993). This may be due to the language
differences in numbers, in Japanese 1 to 10 have unique labels while all numbers
henceforth are combination of these numbers (e.g. 11 is “ten-one”) while in
English, numbers 1 to 19 and decade numbers have unique labels.
Cultural differences in teaching style could also account for the differences in
mathematical and other educational abilities. It was noted that as compared to
the United States, Chinese and Japanese teachers spent greater time with students
and the students spent greater time in the school in terms of days per day and
hours per year. Some cultures majorly opt for a didactic teaching style, where
teachers provide information to the students verbally and students acquire it as
per their level of understanding and memorisation. Alternatively, other cultures
majorly have more dynamic teachers who are actively involved with students,
providing them with a platform where the students can themselves uncover
concepts and theories of the workings of the world. American teaching system
believes in praising the students on correct answers while Indian, Japanese and
Taiwanese culture focus on correcting mistakes of the students.
Finally, of course, cultural differences are reflected in course content of an

education system across nations and within nations as well. The structure, content
and intent of a course could capably shape and modify the culture as well as
60 political current in a society. A negative example of this is the study by Jamatia
and Gundimeda (2019) on the curriculum of schools in Tripura that encouraged Self in Social Context
marginalisation of multiple cultures, particularly tribal groups, in the state. They
find that although Tripura is a state with people of multiple identities, the education
system fails to represent them and, instead, perpetuates a monolithic identity,
majorly representing Bengali Hindus by using Bengali as the administrative
language and idealising the Hindu religion. Hence, education has a major role in
shaping, fostering as well as transforming a culture and the society. However,
this quality also calls for caution while designing and implementing course
structure at different levels.
4.3.2.5 Religion
For long, religion and education as entities were not separate. Religious advocates
would impart values as well as education to children and educational institutes
encouraged religiosity. The religious text of Judaism in ancient Israel, Torah,
instructed and encouraged learning and literacy (Compayreì & Payne, 1899).
The schools, however, only allowed boys. In 622 AD, schools were opened in
the Islamic mosques in Medina (now in Saudi Arabia; Al-Hassani, 2011). Much
earlier, between 1500 and 600 BC, Veda and other Hindu scriptures were the
sources of education in ancient Indian that focused on teaching grammar,
composition, verses, logic and other occupational skills (Gupta, 2007). Gurukulas
were important institutions where Brahmin students studied under a Brahmin
teacher for around twelve years before returning home. While they taught many
life sustaining values, religion and its history dominated the system.
In modern time as well, depending on the level of religiosity in the culture and/
or family, religion plays a major role in socialisation. For Punjabi parents settled
in England, religious practices are important carriers of language and principles
for the next generation (Dosanjh &Ghuman, 1997). Some religions celebrate the
transition to adulthood of individuals by ceremonies such as the Bar Mitzvah in
Judaism and to adolescence by Ramadan fasting participation in Islam. Religious
belief has a strong link in moral development in Africa (Okonkwo, 1997) and
suicide attitudes for Hindus and Muslims in England (Kamal & Lowenthal, 2002),
among other linkages.
Fonerand Alba (2008) find that individuals that convert to Christianity in the
United States have positive outcomes in the acculturation process. Already
belonging to a religion of the majority where one migrates to also helped social
mobility (Cadge & Ecklund, 2007). Stronger religiosity, however, negatively
impacts assimilation in a new culture as they tend to prioritise their own cultures
(Borup & Ahlin, 2011).
Fill in the blanks:
1) A peer group consists of a ……………………………………… who are

passably close to friends, are of similar age group, and collectively engage
in similar activities.
2) Acculturation is the process by which a person ............................... .
3) ……………….. occurs in the culture where we are born and the process of
familiarisation to the culture begins right after the birth. 61
Self In Social Context 4) ……………….. is a dynamic system that describes the average, mainstream
and representative tendencies in a given population.
5) The earliest environmental impact on an infant’s personality and her other

psychological make-up comes from the ………………...
4.4 SELF ACROSS CULTURES

One of the episodes of NPR’s Invisibilia podcast starts with a story of a woman
named Karen Byrne whose left hand hits her without her volition or cognitive
efforts, in a way that does not resemble an impulse or a tic. She suffers from a
syndrome known as the Alien Hand Syndrome that emerged after the surgical
removal of her corpus callosum (a collection of nerve fibres that connect the left
cerebral hemisphere to the right) to control her epileptic seizures. This means
that both her hemispheres work independently. According to her observations,
the left hand hits her every time she does something normatively wrong – like
using explicit language. It feels as if her left hand has a “mind of its own”. The
episode that aired this story was aptly named “The Culture Inside”.
Culture does not just exist and stay limited to the society and the country we live
in, but we become carriers of it, often perceiving and internalising events and
concepts in context of our personal cultures. Our personal cultures are a part of
our self-concepts. Wehrle and Fasbender (2019) defined self-concept as an
integration of “complex, organised, and yet dynamic system of learned attitudes,
beliefs, evaluative judgments that people hold about themselves.” Sense of self
could be broadly categorised into (Markus & Kitayama, 1991):
i) Sense of Self in Individualist societies: Generally prevalent in the Western

societies, such as in the United States, an independent sense of self is an
outcome of internalising independence values, where individuals are more
self-focused in life. Individualist cultures encourage personal goals over
group or collective goals, self-actualisation and “standing-out” over blending
in. They promote individualistic or independent sense of selves in the
members of its society. Individuals credit their own qualities, attributes and
decisions for achievements. People in an individualist society have been
found to have a broader radius of trust extending to who could be considered
outgroup members (Hoorn, 2015).
ii) Sense of Self in Collectivist societies: Eastern and other non-European

cultures are generally thought to encourage a more interdependent lifestyle
and goals, i.e. an interdependent sense of self. They value conformity and
loyalty to the group. Members of the group are expected to maintain group
cohesiveness and prioritise group interests over self interests (Hofstede,
2001). Hoorn (2015) found that in a collectivist society, individuals have a
narrower trust radius and tend to be more discriminatory towards out-groups.
They tend to withhold their trust for individuals of the in-group.
62
Self in Social Context
Individualist culture Independent self
Type of culture Sense of self promoted by the culture
Collectivist culture Interdependent self
Fig .4.1.: Types of culture and the sense of self they promote
The boundaries of these categories, however, are not well-defined. A society

does not have to be classified as one or the other. India has been majorly considered
to be a collectivist society; however, further studies have found that it is highly
situation-based (Tripathi, 1988). For example, in a 2001 study, students had a
collectivist orientation when conversing with friends, bonding with family, and
engaging with seniors. However, when personal issues and matters were made
salient, they had an individualistic orientation (Sinha, Sinha, Verma, & Sinha
2001). Gender differences were found where Indian females had a higher
collectivist orientation (Jha & Singh, 2011). This convoluted individualist-
collectivist coexistence is possible in India because the Indian psyche has a high
capacity to endure contradictions and discrepancies, thus, it becomes an
individualist collective society (Sinha, 1988). Hence, an integration of both
traditionally collectivist and western individualistic has been observed in the
Indian population.
4.4.1 Outcomes of Different Self-construals Across Cultures

Matsumoto and Juang (2008) delineated cognitive, emotional, and motivational
outcomes for the two different self construals that have been summarised in the
table below (Table 8.1). They focused on 7 areas to draw comparisons between
individualistic and collectivistic societies. These areas are self perception, social
explanation, motivation to achieve, self-enhancement, social implication of
emotion, Social implication and indigenous emotions, and happiness.
Table 4.1: Summary of outcomes for individualistic and collectivistic self

construals as described by Matsumoto and Juang (2008)
Areas Outcomes for individualism Outcomes for collectivism
Self perception Perceive selves in terms of Perceive selves in context of

internal characteristics: skills their social relations.
and personality traits.
Social Assume individualism of others Explain others’ behaviours

explanation and attribute behaviours to in context specific terms
dispositional factors, largely and tend to attribute them to
ignoring situational control. situational factors.
63
Motivation to Desire to achieve connected to Achievement orientation
achieve personal goals of striving for related to affiliation
success. Achievement orientation, having
orientation unrelated to social goals - others’
affiliation orientation. expectations and
obligations.
Self-enhancement Explicit self-enhancement. In explicit setting,

Attribute personal successes to display the opposite of
internal factors and failures to self-serving bias.
external factors (self-serving Implicit self-
bias). enhancement is found.
Social implication Socially disengaged emotions: Socially engaged

of emotion pride & supremacy (positive) emotions: positive -
caused by successes, and anger affection and respect;
& frustration (negative) from negative - indebtedness
shortcomings. and guilt.
Social implication More personal/private facets of Certain unique,

and indigenous emotions are salient and indigenous emotions
emotions fostered, although social related social and public
undertone is present. facets of emotion are
observed.
Happiness Happiness or general “good Happiness associated

feelings” associated more with majorly with socially
socially disengaged emotions. engaged emotions.
How one perceives oneself (self perception) is an important product of the culture
they grow up in. Members of individualistic societies are able to view themselves
consistently in different contexts on the basis of their perceived skills and
personality traits. This becomes a more difficult task in Eastern societies, where
self perception varies with context. Cross-cultural research on self concept reflects
that Americans focused on more self-evaluative statements while Indians largely
emphasised their social identity (Dhawan, Roseman, Naidu, Komilla, & Rettek,
1995).
Social explanation refers to one’s understanding and attribution of others’

behaviours. Heider (1958) postulated that people can attribute behaviours to either
dispositional factors (actor’s internal characteristics such as personality) or
situational factors (external or environmental factors out of the actor’s control).
Members of individualist society tend to assume individualism of others and
attribute behaviours to dispositional factors while collectivists have the opposite
tendencies. For example, Indians are often unable to think in terms of abstract
motives and tend to provide situational explanation for others’ behaviours, while
Americans tend to ignore these causes and focus on dispositional reasons (Miller,
1984).
Sagie, Elizur, and Yamauchi (1996) found that participants from collectivist
societies, such as Japan, displayed lower personal achievement orientation as
compared to those from individualistic societies, such as Hungary. Collective
64 achievement tendencies were found to be higher in the former. The motivation
to achieve is also related to one’s personal growth in individualist societies but Self in Social Context
in collective societies it tends to have social goals, such as obligatory feelings
and filial piety. In cultures such as that of Turkey, achievement motivation follows
both social and personal elements (Phalet & Claeys, 1993).
Aaker and Williams (1998) talk about ego-focused versus other-focused emotions.
They explained that members of individualist societies (say, in the US) feel ego-
focused emotions, such as pride and anger (also termed as socially disengaged
emotions; Kitayama, Markus, and Kurokawa, 1993) more intensely. Alternatively,
members of collectivist societies (say, in Japan) feel other-focused emotions,
such as respect, friendliness (socially engaged emotions) more intensely. General
and more universal emotions could be felt with different intensities, havedifferent
expressions, and vary in the context of social acceptance across cultures. For
example, a study by Ogarkova, Soriano, and Gladkova (2016) explored anger
metaphors in English, Spanish, Russian languages. English language displayed
more intense, expressive and unmonitored version of anger, while also
demonstrating higher tendency to experience and exhibit the same as compared
to the other two languages. The causation of anger was found to be internal (or
dispositional) as compared to situational, and more socially accepted in English.
Further, indigenous emotions that are unique to collectivist societies are also
related to public facets. Such as amae (Doi, 1973) is an indigenous Japanese
emotion that refers to the dependency on authority figures and yearning for their
acceptance, benevolence, and indulgence. It is noteworthy; however, that Aaker
and Williams found that other-focused emotional appeals worked much better in
persuading members of individualist societies as compared to the use of self-
focused emotional appeals, perhaps because of their novelty. The opposite was
found in collectivist societies because of similar reasons.
Interestingly, happiness levels were found to be significantly greater in highly

individualist societies as compared to collectivist societies (Suh & Oishi, 2002).
The possible causes of this are the dependence of collectivist members on
communal relationships for their subjective well-being (SWB), while there is a
direct relationship of SWB with individual endeavours among individualist
members (Ye, Ng, Lian; 2014; Suh & Oishi, 2002). In simple and redundant
terms, socially engaged emotions are associated with happiness in collectivist
societies, while socially disengaged emotions are associated with the latter in
individualist societies.
4.4.2 The Case of Multicultural Identities

Faster modes of transport and globalisation gave birth to an era where individuals
were not confined to their original societies. This provided a great opportunity
of direct intercultural exposure via tourism and migration. This exposure also
allows one to pick up new languages, habits, and social etiquette. Especially in
immigrants, a unicultural identity is not maintained as they take a leap into a
different culture but also have ingrained the values and habits of the societies
they were originally enculturated to. Children adopted into families of a different
race or religion could also have multiple cultural identities.
To study multicultural identities, Hong, Morris and Benet-Martínez (2016)

overviewed research at 3 levels: intrapersonal, interpersonal, and collective.
65
Self In Social Context 4.4.2.1 At Intrapersonal Level
Competent identification with multiple cultures was found to have positive
outcomes for adjustment in psychological as well as socio-cultural domains
(Morris, Chiu, & Liu, 2015). Hong et. al. speculated that positive acculturation
that would lead to such findings could be an outcome of internal factors (such as
bilingual proficiency and strong social support) and external factors (such as
state policies discouraging prejudice). Difference among bicultural individuals
is seen in terms of i) distance or the perceived dissociation between the two
cultures; ii) conflict (perceived) between the two cultures. Simply stated, low
distance and low conflict leads to reduced anxiety within the bicultural individuals
(Hirsh & Kang, 2015).
4.4.2.2 At Interpersonal Level

Interpersonal level influences broadly refer to the identity that others focus on
when encountering people of multicultural identities. Discrepancies in perceptions
of self and others about one’s identity would lead to difficulties (Wiley & Deaux,
2010; Sanchez, Shih & Wilton, 2014). People of multicultural identities often
face non-acceptance or hesitations from other individuals belonging to the sub-
ethnic groups they represent. This results in a lower self-esteem, sense of
belongingness (Sanchez, 2010; Townsend, Markus, & Bergsieker, 2009) and
poorer academic performance (Mistry, Contreras,& Pufall-Jones, 2014).
Individuals tackle discrimination due to their multicultural identities using identity
switching and/or identity redefinition:
Identity switching: switching to or accentuating the less vulnerable or more

positively viewed identity over others.
Identity redefinition: playing up positive attributes of the target identity so as to

create positive associations and feel better about the said identity.
4.4.2.3 At Collective Level

Two policies are discussed in the context of multicultural societies: multiculturalist
policies and interculturalist policies:
Multiculturalist policies emphasise the preservation of the multiple cultures in

their original essence pertaining to traditions and communities. Although it has
positive outcomes for the self-esteem of individuals that have high identity to an
ethnic minority (Verkuyten, 2009), it comes at a risk of reinforcing stereotypes
(Gutiérrez & Unzueta, 2010).
Interculturalist policies are a result of dissatisfaction from multiculturalist policies

as the latter could hamper national harmony (Reitz, Breton, Dion & Dion, 2009).
Interculturalism encourages intergroup contact and flexibility of one’s own
cultural identity as impacted by the intercultural exposure. They believe that
cultures have historically been fluid (Morris, Chiu & Liu, 2015), not rigid, as
they were exposed to various cultures, technologies or other novelties.
66
Self Assessment Questions II Self in Social Context
Fill in the following Blanks:

1) India has been majorly considered to be a ……………………… society.
2) ………………………… refers to one’s understanding and attribution of

others’ behaviours.
3) Our …………………..are a part of our self-concepts.
4) ………………….. encourages intergroup contact and flexibility of one’s

own cultural identity as impacted by the intercultural exposure.
5) Members of the group of ………………………. society are expected to

maintain group cohesiveness and prioritise group interests over self-interests.
4.5 SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR ACROSS CULTURES

Several newspaper articles (e.g., Outlook Web Bureau, 2018), blogs, and forums
debate and scrutinise littering behaviour of Indians – many believing that the
same people that litter the streets in India become more well-behaved and
conscientious about that behaviour when they visit another country. Consistencies
or inconsistencies in behaviour depend on several social variables, in this case,
perhaps, social acceptability of littering behaviour in India.
Culture has much control on how members of a society perceive, bond, or interact
with each other as well as how they interact with the out-group. It would be
functional to be familiar with the terms in-group and out-group at the onset of
this section, as they would be used frequently throughout. Maslow (1968), in his
hierarchical model of needs, mentions the need for belongingness as one of the
important needs, feeling a sense of acceptance in and affiliation to a social group.
In-groups: The groups we identify with or feel that we belong to. For example,
our religious community, nation, family, choir group, football team, etc.
Out-groups: The groups we do not identify with or feel some sense of

belongingness to.
One generally has multiple in-groups. Some group memberships are more
important to us than that of others (Bernstein, 2015). Also, some group
memberships are salient than others and/or become more salient at a particular
time as opposed to another time. For example, stereotypically, Asians are
considered good at mathematics, while women are considered incompetent at
the same. Being conscious of one’s group stereotypes may often reinforce those
stereotypes. Shih, Pittinsky, and Ambady (1999) wanted to find how Asian women
would perform on a mathematical task when their Asian identity was made salient
as compared to when they were reminded of their gender identity. The results
indicated that making the Asian identity (the more “competent” identity) more
salient enhanced the mathematical performance of the participants, while making
the female identity more pronounced, hampered their performance. Mathematical
performance, of course, is not a social behaviour, at least in this context. However,
the example serves the function of understanding how group salience and existing
perceptions about a group could affect our behaviour depending on the situation.
67
Self In Social Context This section will take a gander at how culture can affect behaviour in the social
milieu, exploring the topics of group interaction dynamics, person perceptions,
individualist-collectivist differences, attribution, aggression, and close
relationships.
4.5.1 Cross-cultural Differences in Dynamics of Group

Membership
Stability of group memberships varies according to the culture – North Americans
generally have more stable ingroup and outgroup memberships as compared to
members of Asian culture (Matsumoto & Juang, 2008).
As indicated earlier in the Unit, collectivist cultures drew starker contrasts between
their ingroup and outgroup members, and also experience greater intimacy with
ingroup members as compared to their individualist counterparts (Triandis, 1988).
The negative effect of this is reflected in the difficulties in communicating with
outgroup members or strangers in collectivist cultures, such as Japan and Korea,
and compared to that in individualist cultures, such as the United States
(Gudykunst, Yoon, & Nishida, 1987). Also, the personalisation of communication
with outgroups in collectivist cultures depends highly on situational factors, while
situational demands do not play as important a role in individualist cultures
pertaining to the same concern.
In relation to communication and interaction with their own members,

collectivists (students from Hong Kong China) had more prolonged interaction
with each other as compared to individualists (American students), however the
former had fewer interactions in numbers (Wheeler, Reis, & Bond, 1989). Since
collectivists belong to fewer ingroups than individualists, they compensate
through increased commitment to their existing ingroups and have a greater sense
of group identification/belongingness. Collectivists value cohesion and harmony
because of which they tend to be more susceptible to social conformity
(Matsumoto & Juang, 2008).
Attachment theory and styles by Ainsworth et. al. (1978) has been studied in
group context (e.g. Rom & Mikulincer, 2003; DeMarco & Newheiser, 2018). In
simple terms, group attachment anxiety is related to the insecurity of not being
accepted in the in-group, while group attachment avoidance is characterised by
trying to refraining from depending on their in-groups (in spite of feeling
belongingness to the group). Anxious group member, hence, tend to manifest
behaviours that would increase intimacy with their in-group, while avoidant group
members prefer to maintain their distance from the in-group (Smith et. al., 1999).
Behaviours that increase intimacy with the group may include (as defined in
Matsumoto & Juang, 2008):
Conformity: adhering to real or perceived social pressure.
Compliance: explicitly (in behaviours manifested publicly) adhering to social
pressure, although private beliefs may remain unchanged.
Obedience: complying following some direct instructions or commands from a

person of authority.
Cooperation: group members’ potential to work together to achieve a common

goal.
68
DeMarco and Newheiser (2018) investigated the relationship between group Self in Social Context
attachment styles and investment in group. Expectedly, it was found that avoidant
group attachment styles was related to lower group investment while anxious
group attachment styles were related to higher group investment.
4.5.2 In-group Identification versus In-group Bias

Social identity theory (Tajfel, 1978) is based on the supposition that building
identity in relation to social groups also strengthens and preserves one’s self
identity. The theory views intergroup conflict through the lens of and “as a function
of group-based self-definitions” (Islam, 2014). In-group bias refers to the
likelihood that one would favour their in-group and disfavour their out-group.
Tajfel et. al. (1971) demonstrated using a minimal group paradigm that simply
categorising people into abstract groups is enough for intergroup bias or in-group
favouritism to emerge. They divided participants into two groups based on their
accuracy/estimation level of number of dots flashed on a screen. When asked to
allocate money to people (even when told that this would not affect how much
money they would receive), the participants still chose to allocate more money
to in-group members in absence of any personal gain or loss.
While many previous studies suggest that recategorising small groups into larger
groups (for example, girls football team and boys football team into one school
football team) would reduce intergroup bias (e.g., Gaertner et al., 1990), newer
studies suggest the opposite effect (e.g., Hornsey & Hogg, 2000; Turner, & Crisp,
2010). Turner and Crisp confirmed that strong in-group identification would
predict intergroup bias after recategorisation into broader groups. They propose
that the reason for this phenomenon could be an individual’s need to distinguish
oneself and do so by belonging to a positively valued group or viewing the group
positively. If one’s group is merged which other groups that are equivalent on
some important factors, it would trigger the need for positive distinction further,
thus, aggravating the intergroup conflict (Brown & Wade, 1987). This might be
the reason why fascism is described a radical embodiment of nationalism, where
(extreme) nationalism facilitates racism and violence (Turner, 1975, Peters, 2018).
4.5.3 Attribution
Humans have a tendency to find reasons and explanations for their own and
others’ personalities/behaviours and events in their lives or in general. Such
explanations are referred to as attributions. This could explain people’s belief in
astrology and the pleasure we derive from buzz feed personality quizzes. You
could attribute your failure in examinations to the strict grading of the examiner
or to the fever you had that made you underperform. These attributions could be
true. You could attribute your car crashing into the vehicle in front to the other
driver’s sudden braking although it could be due to your own inability to maintain
a distance from the vehicle in front. It could be one of the reasons why we hesitate
to accept self-driving cars because in case of accidents, blaming someone gets
overly complicated – you cannot have a verbal road rage battle with a machine
as well as you can with an equally angry human driver.
69
Box 4.1: Errors of Attribution
People tend to attribute one’s own negative behaviours (or failures) to
external factors and positive behaviours (or successes) to internal factors,
i.e. self-serving bias (Bradley, 1978; “I was late to the office because the
traffic was unpredictable heavy”). On the other hand, they attribute most of
others’ behaviours to internal factors, i.e. Fundamental attribution error
(FAE; Jones & Nisbett, 1971; “he was late to the office because he is a lazy
person who does not take his career seriously”).
Another attribution error is defensive attribution, which is people’s propensity

to blame victims for their suffering, for example attributing the cause of
sexual assault of female survivors to everything other than the assaulter,
and viewing hate crimes against people of black ethnicity as a result of their
perceived aggression. According to Thornton (1984), this error serves a
purpose for the individual by making him/her feel less vulnerable to
becoming a victim of such transgressions. This is also explained by the just
world hypothesis – a cognitive fallacy the world is fair and “good” people
get rewarded, while only the “bad” people get punished so they deserve
their misfortune.
Cross cultural studies indicate that cultural differences emerge in attributional

styles throughout broad range of situations. While western researchers hypothesise
that individuals only attribute their successes to internal factors, in a study by
Moghaddam, Ditto and Taylor (1990), it was found that Indian females who
immigrated to Canada attributed both their successes and failures to internal
factors. Morris and Peng (1994) reviewed American and Chinese newspaper
articles about murders and found that American newspapers attributed the cause
of murder to the accused person’s internal characteristics, while Chinese
newspapers attributed it to situational factors (such as feeling isolated from the
community).
4.5.4 Aggression
Aggression is an overt expression of anger through behaviours that inflict physical
or psychological harm to another person. Besides genetic factors, environmental
and cultural factors have influence on the overall perception, experience, and
expression of aggression in a culture. In Finland, aggression is viewed as
something one does to gain pleasure and, hence, it is considered more deviant as
compared to Estonia, where aggression is considered a more normal means to
achieve a goal (Terav & Keltikangas, 1998). Further, aggression is more socially
acceptable and considered normal in Hong Kong (as compared to the United
States), when there is a difference in authority levels of two people (Bond, Wan,
Leong, & Giacalone, 1985).
Several factors are involved in determining this influence on aggression; some

of them are outlined below (Bond, 2004):
i) Collectivist versus Individualist societies.Individualism in culture has a

strong initial influence on violence reduction before economic factors come
in (Karstedt, 2001). Moreover, individualist societies do better economically,
thereby, further reducing patterns of aggression and violence. Due to the
social pressure of remaining loyal and committed to the in-group in
70
collectivist cultures, violence and aggression towards the out-group becomes Self in Social Context
more likely (Giddens, 1976; Inglehart, 1997). Further, aggression against
women is higher in collectivist societies as they feel more pressured to stay
in the abusive relationship (Vandello& Cohen, 2002).
ii) Economic situation. Wealthier societies tend to have lower rates of homicides
(Lim et al., 2005). More importantly, economic inequality, as compared to a
country’s wealth, is a better predictor of homicide rates (Kennedy, Kawachi,
& Prothrow-Stith, 1996; Lim et. al., 2005). Hence, equal distribution of
wealth and resources are important for controlling aggression and violence
in a society.
iii) War. Involvement in war and other violent political feuds creates and
environment of tension and aggression within a society. Countries that were
involved in World War II (combatant countries), had higher homicide rates
after the war was over, as compared to those that were not involved in the
war (combatant countries; Archer and Gartner; 1984). Hence, being involved
in an international conflict has a deep, negative impact on the internal
functioning of a country.
iv) Democratic versus nondemocratic society. Countries with stable democracies

are less inclined to participate in wars (Rummel, 1988). They are more likely
to honour freedom and human rights. This restricts the cause for homicides
and aggression within the culture.
4.5.5 Person Perception, Attraction, and Relationships

Individuals constantly evaluate others to form impressions of them, which are
shaped and modified according to new information and several other factors.
How we perceive people and their behaviours (person perception) is also heavily
shaped by our own assumptions about the perceived person’s inner state. Although
introduced in the context of memory, primacy effect is also used in person
perception to explain the tendency of individuals to overvalue first impressions
of others (in spite of meeting them several times later) when making overall
perception about them (Anderson, 1971). Noguchi, Kamada, and Shrira (2013)
find that American participants displayed primacy effect more strongly than
Japanese participants. The latter were more responsive to ensuing information
about information of people’s behaviours.
Facial recognition studies indicate that individuals can more accurately recognise
the face of people of their own ethnicities than others (e.g., Ng & Lindsay, 1994;
Bothwell, Brigham, &Malpass, 1989). One of the explanations for this could be
intergroup contact (or lack thereof), individuals tend to spend more time around
people of their own race than others, hence getting used to and better distinguishers
of facial features typical of that race.
Interpersonal attraction, love and relationships have been other interesting areas
of study in cross-cultural research. Croucher, Austin, Fang, and Holody (2011)
explored interpersonal attraction of Hindus and Muslims in India, and found that
both the groups displayed greater attraction (in the physical, social, and task
domains) towards their own religious group than for the other.
Attitudes about love were compared between the United States, Japan, and France
71
Self In Social Context by Ting-Toomey (1991). It was found that love commitment and disclosure
maintenance were rated much higher by American and French participants as
compared to Japanese participants; and the Americans rated relational
ambivalence higher than the Japanese. The domain of conflict expression was
rated higher by Japanese and American participants over French subjects.
Although people tend to be attracted to their in-groups, much of the recent work
demonstrates the benefits of developing close relationships with members of a
different culture. For example, Lu and colleagues (2017) conducted a series of
studies on the effect of intercultural relationships on creativity. Non-Americans
who had worked in the US under J-1 visas who stayed in touch with their American
friends were more innovative and had higher chances of becoming entrepreneurs.
More importantly, people with intercultural dating experience had significantly
higher levels of creativity than those with exclusive intracultural dating
experience. Thus, long-term intercultural friendships and a history of intercultural
romantic relationship have significant positive impact on people.
Self Assessment Questions III

1) Aggression is an overt expression of anger through behaviours that inflict
physical or psychological harm to another person. ( )
2) Self - serving bias is an attribution error in which people blame victims for
their suffering. ( )
3) Social identity theory (Tajfel, 1978) is based on the supposition that building
identity in relation to social groups also strengthens and preserves one’s
self identity. ( )
4) Conformity refers togroup members’ potential to work together to achieve a

common goal. ( )
5) The groups we identify with or feel that we belong to are called ‘out- groups’.
( )
4.6 LET US SUM UP

Culture is an important determinant of how our perceptions, attitudes, and
behaviours are shaped and moderated throughout our lives. Some agents that
play important role in our enculturation are immediate family, extended family,
friends, education, and religion. Their roles are different in individualist cultures
that focus on developing an individual construal of sense and standing out, and
in collectivist cultures, that focus on group harmony and fitting in. According to
the type of culture one is brought up in, they generally display behaviours that
are more valued and socially appropriate. One could have multiple cultural
identities, where one becomes salient over others depending on the situation.
The pitfall of in-group identification, however, could be intergroup bias which
could restrict us from expanding our worldview through intergroup contact and
also ingrain prejudices and discriminatory behaviour.While finding cultural
differences, it is important to stay mindful of the many similarities that we may
not talk about. Also, cultural differences are not hierarchical differences, i.e.,
72 they may not essentially make one culture better over the other.
1) Explain the nature and meaning of enculturation and contrast it with
acculturation.
2) Delineate and explain the major agents responsible for enculturating an
individual to a society.
3) Illustrate, with examples, the role of immediate and extended family as well
as peer relations in enculturation to different cultures.
4) What are the functions of education and religion? How do they influence
socialisation of individuals?
5) How does the sense of self vary across individualist and collectivist cultures?
Also describe the emotional, cognitive, and motivational outcomes for
individualist and collectivist construals of self.
6) What do you understand by multicultural identity? Explain its dynamics at
intrapersonal, interpersonal, and collective levels.
7) Describe the cross-cultural differences in dynamics of group membership.
8) Explain cultural differences in terms of attribution, aggression, person
perception, and close relationships.
4.8 GLOSSARY
Acculturation: adapting to and/or adopting a culture different from the one in
which that person was originally enculturated.
Aggression: overt expression of anger through behaviours that inflicts physical
or psychological harm to another person.
Attribution: evaluative judgment to ascribe the reason/explanation for a particular
event or behaviour as being caused or controlled by another person or situational
factors.
Co-sleeping: when young children and their parents sleep in the same room.
Collectivism: political or cultural ideology that focuses on interdependent self
and “fitting in” with the group.
Compliance: explicitly (in behaviours manifested publicly) adhering to social
pressure, although private beliefs may remain unchanged.
Conformity: adhering to real or perceived social pressure.
Cooperation:group members’ potential to work together to achieve a common
goal.
Culture: totality of equivalent and complementary learned meanings maintained
by a human population, or by identifiable segments of a population, and
transmitted from one generation to the next.
Defensive attribution: tendency to blame victims for their suffering.
Enculturation: transmission of aspects of our own culture from one generation
to the next by different agencies of the culture.
Fascism: an anti-democratic political ideology that encourages extreme
nationalism, denying fundamental rights to individuals of the out-group or that
are considered deviants. 73
Self In Social Context Fundamental attribution error: tendency to attribute others’ behaviours to
internal factors.
Group attachment anxiety: insecurity of not being accepted in the in-group.
Group attachment avoidance: refraining from depending on the in-group.
Hetero-ethnic friendships: Friendships with peers that belong to ethnic groups
different to one’s own.
Homo-ethnic friendships: Friendships with peers of one’s own ethnicity.
Identity redefinition: playing up positive attributes of the target identity so as
to create positive associations and feel better about the said identity.
Identity switching: switching to or accentuating the less vulnerable or more

positively viewed identity over others.
Individualism: political or cultural ideology that focuses on independent self

and “standing out” from a group.
In-group: the group we identify with or feel that we belong to.
In-group bias/Intergroup bias/In-group favouritism: the tendency to would
favour one’s in-group and disfavour the out-group.
In-group identification: identifying or feeling a sense of belongingness to one’s
in-group.
In-group investment: undertaking behaviours for group benefit over personal
benefit.
Interculturalist policies: policies that encourage intergroup contact and
flexibility of one’s own cultural identity as impacted by the intercultural exposure.
Just world hypothesis: a cognitive fallacy the world is fair and “good” people
get rewarded, while only the “bad” people get punished.
Multicultural identities: belonging to or identifying with more than one identity

or culture.
Multiculturalist policies: policies that stress on preservation of the multiple

cultures in their original essence pertaining to traditions and communities
Obedience:complying following some direct instructions or commands from a
person of authority.
Out-group: the group we do not identify with or feel some sense of belongingness
to.
Person perception: forming impressions of other and interacting with mental
representations about people and their behaviours.
Primacy effect: tendency of individuals to overvalue first impressions of when

making overall perception about them.
Recategorisation: redefining smaller in-groups by merging them into a larger

in-group.
74 Self-serving bias: tendency to attribute one’s own behaviour to external factors.

QUESTIONS
Self Assessment Question I
1) small group of individuals
2) adapts to, and in many cases adopts a different culture.
3) Enculturation
4) Culture
5) parents
1) Collectivist
2) Social explanation
3) personal cultures
4) Interculturalism
5) Collectivist
Self Assessment Question III
1) True
2) False
3) True
4) False
5) False

Branscombe, N. R., & Baron, R. A. (2016). Social Psychology (14th ed.). Boston:
Matsumoto, D. R., &Juang, L. P. (2008). Culture and Psychology. Belmont, CA:

Wadsworth/Thomson.
Myers, D. G. & Twenge, J. M. (2017). Social Psychology (12th ed.). New York,
NY : McGraw-Hill.
References
Aaker, J. L., & Williams, P. (1998). Empathy Versus Pride: the Influence of
Emotional Appeals Across Cultures. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(3), 241–
261. doi:10.1086/209537
Ainsworth, M., Blehar, M., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of Attachment:
A Psychological Study of the Strange Situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Akhtar, S. (2009). Friendship, socialization, and the immigrant experience.

Psychoanalysis, Culture & Society,14(3), 253-272. doi:10.1057/pcs.2009.14
Al-Hassani, S. T. S. (2011). 1001 inventions: Muslim heritage in our world.

75
Self In Social Context Foundation for Science, Technology and Civilisation Ltd.
Archer, D., & Gartner, R. (1984). Violence and Crime in Cross-national

Perspective. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Anderson, N. H. (1971). Integration Theory and Attitude Change.
Psychological Review, 78, 171–206.
Baumrind, D. (1967). Child care practices antecedingthreepatterns of preschool
behavior. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 75, 43–88.
Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. Developmental

Psychology Monograph, 4 (No. 1, Pt. 2).
Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., Segall, M. H., &Dasen, P. R.(1992). Cross- Cultural
Psychology: Research and Applications.New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bernstein, M. J. (2015). Ingroups and Outgroups. The Wiley Blackwell

Encyclopedia of Race, Ethnicity, and Nationalism, 1–3. doi:10.1002/
9781118663202.wberen482
Black, S. (2002). When students push past peer influence. The Education Digest,
68, 31-36.
Bond, M. H., Wan, K. C., Leong, K., & Giacalone, R. A.(1985). How are responses
to verbal insult related tocultural collectivism and power distance? Journal of
Cross-Cultural Psychology, 16(1), 111–127.
Bond, M. H. (2004). Culture and Aggression–From Context to Coercion.

Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(1), 62–78. doi:10.1207/
s15327957pspr0801_3
Borup, J., &Ahlin, L. (2011). Religion and Cultural Integration. Nordic Journal
of Migration Research,1(3). doi:10.2478/v10202-011-0015-z
Bothwell, R. K., Brigham, J. C., &Malpass, R. S. (1989).Cross-racial

identification. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 15(1), 19–25.
Bradley, G. W. (1978). Self-serving biases in the attributionprocess: A re-

examination of the fact or fiction question.Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 35,56–71.
Braun, A. (2017, June 26). The Once-Common Practice of Communal Sleeping.

Retrieved from https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/communal-sleeping-
history-sharing-bed
Brown, R. J., & Wade, G. (1987). Superordinate goals and intergroup behaviour-
the effect of role ambiguity and status on intergroup attitudes and task-
performance. European Journal of Social Psychology, 17, 131-142.
Cadge, W., & Howard Ecklund, E. (2007). Immigration and Religion. Annual
Review of Sociology, 33(1), 359-379.doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.33.040406.131707.
Castrogiovanni, D. (2002). Adolescence: Peer groups. Retrieved January 24, 2004,

from: http://inside.bard.edu/academic/specialproj/darling/adolesce.htm
76
Chao, R. K. (1994). Beyond parental control and authoritarianparenting style: Self in Social Context
Understanding Chinese parentingthrough the cultural notion of training. Child
Development,65, 1111-1119.
Compayreì, G., & Payne, W. H. (1899). The History of Pedagogy. Boston: D.C.
Heath & Co.
Conroy, M., Hess, D. R., Azuma, H., &Kashiwagi, K.(1980). Maternal strategies
for regulating children’s behavior. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 11(2),
153-172.
Croucher, S. M., Austin, M., Fang, L., &Holody, K. J. (2011). Interpersonal

attraction and religious identification: a comparative analysis of Muslims and
Hindus in India. Asian Journal of Communication, 21(6), 564–574. doi:10.1080/
01292986.2011.609600
Desai, S. (1995). When Are Children from Large Families Disadvantaged?

Evidence from Cross-National Analyses. Population Studies, 49(2), 195-
210.doi:10.1080/0032472031000148466
DeMarco, T. C., &Newheiser, A.-K. (2018). Attachment to groups: Relationships

with group esteem, self-esteem, and investment in ingroups. European Journal
of Social Psychology. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2500
Dewey, J. (1899). The School and Society: Being three lectures. Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the Philosophy

of education. New York: Macmillan.
Dhawan, N., Roseman, I. J., Naidu, R. K., Komilla, T., &Rettek, S. I. (1995).
Self-concepts across two cultures.Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 26(6),
606–621.
Doi, T. (1973). The Anatomy of Dependence. Tokyo:Kodansha.
Dosanjh, J. S., &Ghuman, P. A. S. (1996). The cultural contextof child rearing: A
study of indigenous and BritishPunjabis. Early Child Development and Care,
126, 39–55.
Ernst, C, & Angst, J. (1983). Birth Order. New York: Springer-Verlag
Foner, N. and Alba, R. (2008), Immigrant Religion in the U.S. and Western Europe:
Bridge or Barrier to Inclusion? International Migration Review, 42: 360-392.
doi: 10.1111/j.1747-7379.2008.00128.x
Gaertner, S. L., Mann, J. A., Dovidio, J. F., Murrell, A. J., &Pomare, M. (1990).
How does cooperation reduce intergroup bias? Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 59, 692–704.
Ghosh, R. (1983). Sarees and the maple leaf: Indian women in Canada. In Kurian,
G., and Srivastava, R. P. (1983). Overseas Indians: A study in adaptation (pp.
90-99). New Delhi: Vikas.
Gupta, A. (2007). Going to School in South Asia. Westport, CT: Greenwood

Publishing Group.
77
Self In Social Context Gutiérrez, A. S., & Unzueta, M. M. (2010). The effect of interethnic ideologies
on the likability of stereotypic vs. counterstereotypic minority targets. Journal
of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(5), 775-784.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.jesp.2010.03.010
Heider. F (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York:

Wiley. ISBN 9780898592825.
Isaac, R., Annie, I. K., & Prashanth, H. R. (n.d.). Parenting in India. In H. Selin
(Ed.), Parenting Across Cultures (Vol. 7, pp. 39-45). Springer Netherlands.
doi:10.1007/978-94-007-7503-9.
Garcia Coll, C. T., Sepkoski, C., & Lester, B. M. (1981). Culturaland biomedical
correlates of neonatal behavior. Developmental Psychobiology, 14, 147–154.
Geary, D. C. (1996). International differences in mathematical achievement: Their

nature, causes, and consequences.Current Directions in Psychological
Science,5(5), 133–137.
Giddens, A. (1976). Classical sociological theory and the origins of modern

sociology. American Journal of Sociology, 81,703–729.
Gudykunst, W. B., Yoon, Y., & Nishida, T. (1987). The influence of individualism
collectivism on perceptions of communication in ingroup and outgroup
relationships. Communication Monographs, 54(3), 295-306. doi:10.1080/
03637758709390234.
Hanish L.D. &Fabes R.A. (2014) Peer socialization of gender in young boys and
girls. In: Tremblay R.E., Boivin M., & Peters R.DeV. (Eds). Martin C.L., (Section
Ed). Encyclopedia on Early Childhood Development. http://www.child-
encyclopedia.com/gender-early-socialization/according-experts/peer-
socialization-gender-young-boys-and-girls.
Hickey, M. G. (2006). Asian Indian family socialization patterns and implications

for American schooling. In C. C. Park, A. L. Goodwin, & S. J. Lee (Eds.), Asian
and Pacific American education: Learning, socialization, and identity (pp. 193–
219). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Hirsh, J. B., & Kang, S. K. (2016). Mechanisms of Identity Conflict: Uncertainty,

Anxiety, and the Behavioral Inhibition System. Personality and Social Psychology
Review, 20(3), 223–244. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868315589475
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors,

Institutions, and Organizations Across Nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Hong, Y., Zhan, S., Morris, M. W., & Benet-Martínez, V. (2016). Multicultural
identity processes. Current Opinion in Psychology, 8, 49–53. doi:10.1016/
j.copsyc.2015.09.020
Hoorn, A. V. (2014). Individualist–Collectivist Culture and Trust Radius. Journal

of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 46(2), 269-276. doi:10.1177/0022022114551053
78
Hornsey, M. J., & Hogg, M. A. (2000). Subgroup relations: A comparison of Self in Social Context
mutual intergroup differentiation and common ingroup identity models of
prejudice reduction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 242-256.
Howard, N. M. (2004). Peer Influence in Relation to Academic Performance and

Socialization among Adolescents: A Literature Review. 6.
Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and Post-modernization: Cultural, Economic

and Political Change in 43 Societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Islam, G. (2014). Social Identity Theory. In T. Teo (Ed.), Critical Psychology

and Business Ethics (pp. 1781-1783). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag. https://
doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5583-7_289
Jahoda, G. (1984). Do we need a concept of culture? Journalof Cross-Cultural

Psychology, 15(2), 139–151.
Jamatia, F., &Gundimeda, N. (2019). Ethnic identity and curriculum construction:

Critical reflection on school curriculum in Tripura. Asian Ethnicity,1-18.
doi:10.1080/14631369.2019.1568861
Jha, S. D., & Singh, K. (2011). An analysis of individualism-collectivism across

Northern India. Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology, 37(1),
149-156.
Jones, E. E., & Nisbett, R. E. (1971). The actor and the observer:Divergent
perceptions of the causes of behavior.In E. E. Jones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley,
R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceivingthe Causes
of Behavior (pp. 79–94) Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
Joshi, S. M., & MacLean, M. (1997). Maternal expectationsof child development

in India, Japan, and England. Journalof Cross-Cultural Psychology, 28(2), 219–
234.
Kamal, Z., & Lowenthal, K. M. (2002). Suicide beliefs andbehavior among young
Muslims and Indians in the UK. Mental Health, Religion and Culture, 5(2), 111–
118.
Karstedt, S. (2001). Die moralischestaerkeschwacherbindungen.Individualismus

und gewaltimkulturvergleich [The moralstrength of weak ties: A cross-cultural
analysis of individualismandviolence]. MonatsschriftfuerKriminologie und
Strafrechtsreform, 84, 226–243.
Karve, I. (1965). Kinship Organisation in India (2nd ed.). Bombay: Asia

Publishing House.
Kennedy, B. P., Kawachi, I., & Prothrow-Stith, D. (1996). Incomedistribution

and mortality: Cross-sectional ecological study ofthe Robin Hood index in the
United States. BritishMedicalJournal, 312,1004–1007
Kim, U. (1992). The Parent-Child relationship: The Core of Koreancollectivism.

Unpublished manuscript, Departmentof Psychology, University of Hawaii,
Honolulu.
79
Self In Social Context Kitayama, S., Markus, H. R., Kurokawa, M., &Negishi, K.(1993). Social
orientation of Emotions: Cross-cultural Evidenceand Implications. Unpublished
manuscript, Universityof Oregon.
LeVine, R. A. (1977). Child rearing as cultural adaptation. InP. H. Leiderman, S.

R. Tulkin, & A. Rosenfeld (Eds.),Culture and Infancy (pp. 15–27). New York:
AcademicPress.
LeVine, R. A., LeVine, S. E., Dixon, S., Richman, A.,Leiderman, P. H., & Keefer,
C. (1996). Child Care and Culture: Lessons from Africa. Cambridge, UK:
CambridgeUniversity Press.
Lim, F., Bond, M. H., & Bond, M. K. (2005). Linking Societal and Psychological
Factors to Homicide Rates Across Nations. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,
36(5), 515–536. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022105278540
Lu, J. G., Hafenbrack, A. C., Eastwick, P. W., Wang, D. J., Maddux, W. W., &
Galinsky, A. D. (2017). “Going out” of the box: Close intercultural friendships
and romantic relationships spark creativity, workplace innovation, and
entrepreneurship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(7), 1091–1108.
doi:10.1037/apl0000212
Maccoby, E. E., & Martin, J. A. (1983). Socialization in thecontext of the family:

Parent-child interaction. In E. M.Hetherington (Ed.), Handbook of Child
Psychology: Vol. 4.Socialization, Personality, and Social Development (4thed.,
pp. 1–101). New York: Wiley.
Markus, H. R., &Kitayama, S. (1991b). Culture and the self:Implications for

cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253.
Maslow, A. H. (1968). Toward a Psychology of Being. New York: Van Nostrand.
Mathur, M. (2009). Socialisation of Street Children in India: A Socio-economic

Profile. Psychology and Developing Societies, 21(2), 299–325. https://doi.org/
10.1177/097133360902100207
McEvoy, M., Lee, C., O’Neill, A., Groisman, A., Roberts-Butelman, K., Dinghra,
K., &Porder, K. (2005). Are there universal parenting concepts among culturally
diverse families in an inner-city pediatric clinic? Journal of Pediatric Health
Care, 19(3), 142–150.doi:10.1016/j.pedhc.2004.10.007
Miller, J. G. (1984). Culture and the development of everydaysocial explanation.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 961–978.
Mistry, J., Contreras, M. M., &Pufall-Jones, E. (2014). Childhood socialization

and academic performance of bicultural youth. In V. Benet-Martínez & Y.-Y.
Hong (Eds.), Oxford Library of Psychology. The Oxford Handbook of
Multicultural Identity (pp. 355-378). New York, NY, US: Oxford University Press.
Miura, I. T., Okamoto, Y., Kim, C. C., Steere, M., et al.(1993). First graders’
cognitive representation of numberand understanding of place value. Cross-
nationalcomparisons: France, Japan, Korea, Sweden, and theUnited States.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(1),24–30.
80
Moghaddam, F. M., Ditto, B., & Taylor, D. M. (1990). Attitudesand attributions Self in Social Context
related to psychological symptomatologyin Indian immigrant women. Journal
ofCross-Cultural Psychology, 21, 335–350.
Morris, M. W., & Peng, K. (1994). Culture and cause: Americanand Chinese
attributions for social and physicalevents. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology,67(6), 949–971.
Morris, M. W., Chiu, C., & Liu, Z. (2015). Polycultural Psychology. Annual
Review of Psychology, 66(1), 631–659. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-
010814-015001
Ng, W. G., & Lindsay, R. L. (1994). Cross-race facial recognition:Failure of the

contact hypothesis. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 25(2), 217–232.
Noguchi, K., Kamada, A., &Shrira, I. (2013). Cultural differences in the primacy
effect for person perception. International Journal of Psychology, n/a–n/a.
doi:10.1002/ijop.12019
Ogarkova, A., Soriano, C., &Gladkova, A. N. (2016). Methodological

triangulation in the study of emotion the case of ‘anger’ in three language groups.
Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 14(1), 73-101. https://doi.org/10.1075/
rcl.14.1.04oga
Okonkwo, R. (1997). Moral development and culture inKohlberg’s theory: A

Nigerian (Igbo) evidence. IFTPsychologia: An International Journal, 5(2), 117–
128.
Outlook Web Bureau. (2018, April 27). People Behave Themselves Abroad, But
Once In India They Spit On, Litter Public Places: New SDMC Mayor. Outlook.
Retrieved from https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/people-behave-
themselves-abroad-but-once-in-india-they-spit-on-litter-public-pla/311408
Papps, F., Walker, M., Trimboli, A., &Trimboli, C. (1995).Parental discipline in

Anglo, Greek, Lebanese, and Vietnamesecultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural
Psychology, 26(1), 49–64.
Pelto, P. J. (1968, April). The differences between “tight”and “loose” societies.

Trans-action, pp. 37–40.
Peters, M. A. (2018). The return of fascism: Youth, violence and nationalism.

Educational Philosophy and Theory, 1–5. doi:10.1080/00131857.2018.1519772
Phalet, K., & Claeys, W. (1993). A comparative study ofTurkish and Belgian
youth. Journal of Cross-CulturalPsychology, 24, 319–343.
Reitz, J. G. Breton, R., Dion, K.K., & Dion, K.L. (2009). Multiculturalism and
Social Cohesion: Potentials and Challenges of Diversity. London: Springer.
Rohner, R. P. (1984). Toward a conception of culture forcross-cultural psychology.

Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,15, 111–138.
Rohner, R. P., & Pettengill, S. M. (1985). Perceived parentalacceptance-rejection

and parental control among Koreanadolescents. Child Development, 56, 524–
528.
81
Self In Social Context Rom, E., &Mikulincer, M. (2003). Attachment theory and group processes: The
association between attachment style and group-related representations, goals,
memories, and functioning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(6),
1220–1235. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.6.1220
Rosin, H., & Spiegel, A. (2017, June 15). The Culture Inside [Audio Podcast].
Retrieved from https://www.npr.org/programs/invisibilia/532950995/the-culture-
inside
Rummel, R. J. (1988, June).Political systems, violence, and war.Paper presented

at the United States Institute of Peace Conference, Airlie House, Airlie, VA
Sagie, A., Elizur, D., & Yamauchi, H. (1996). The structure and strength of
achievement motivation: A cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 17(5), 431–444. doi:10.1002/(sici)1099-1379(199609)17:5<431::aid-
job771>3.0.co;2-x
Salem, R. (2006). Sibling Configuration: Impact on Education and Health

Outcomes of Adolescents in Egypt. Maadi, Egypt: Gender, Family and
Development Program, Population Council, Regional Office for West Asia and
North Africa.
Sanchez, D. T. (2010). How do forced-choice dilemmas affect multiracial people?

The role of identity autonomy and public regard in depressive symptoms. Journal
of Applied Social Psychology, 40(7), 1657-1677.http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-
1816.2010.00634.x
Sanchez, D. T., Shih, M. J., & Wilton, L. S. (2014). Exploring the identity
autonomy perspective (IAP): An integrative theoretical approach to multicultural
and multiracial identity. In V. Benet-Martínez & Y.-Y. Hong (Eds.), Oxford library
of psychology. The Oxford handbook of Multicultural Identity (pp. 139-159).
New York, NY, US: Oxford University Press.
Shih, M., Pittinsky, T. L., &Ambady, N. (1999). Stereotype Susceptibility: Identity

Salience and Shifts in Quantitative Performance. Psychological Science, 10, 80–
83.
Sinha, D. (1988). Basic Indian values and behavior dispositions in the context of
national development. In D. Sinha & H.S.R. Kao (Eds.), Social Values and
Development: Asian Perspective. New Delhi: Sage
Sinha, J. B. P., Sinha, T. N., Verma, J., & Sinha, R. B. N. (2001). Collectivism
coexisting with individualism: an Indian scenario. Asian Journal of Social
Psychology, 4(2), 133–145. doi:10.1111/j.1467-839x.2001.00081.x
Smith, E. R., Murphy, J., & Coats, S. (1999). Attachment to groups: Theory and
management. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 94-110.doi:
10.1037/0022-3514.77.1.94
Solis-Camara, P., & Fox, R. A. (1995). Parenting amongmothers with young

children in Mexico and the UnitedStates. Journal of Social Psychology, 135(5),
591–599.
82
Stewart, S. M., Bond, M. H., Zaman, R. M., McBride-Chang,C., Rao, N., Ho, L. Self in Social Context
M., & Fielding, R. (1999). Functionalparenting in Pakistan. International Journal
of BehavioralDevelopment, 23(3), 747–770.
Suh, E. M., & Oishi, S. (2002). Subjective Well-Being Across Cultures. Online
Readings in Psychology and Culture, 10(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.9707/2307-
0919.1076
Tajfel, H., Billig, M. G., Bundy, R. P., &Flament, C. (1971). Social categorization
and intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1(2), 149-
178. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420010202
Tajfel, H. (1978). The achievement of inter-group differ-entiation. In H. Tajfel

(Ed.), Differentiation between Social Groups (pp. 77–100). London: Academic
Press.
Terav, T., &Keltikangas, J. L. (1998). Social decision-makingstrategies among

Finnish and Estonian adolescents. Journal of Social Psychology, 138(3), 381–
391.
Ting-Toomey, S. (1991). Intimacy expressions in three cultures:France, Japan,

and the United States. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 15, 29–
46.
Thornton, B. (1984). Defensive attribution of responsibility:Evidence for an

arousal-based motivational bias. Journalof Personality and Social Psychology,
46, 721–734.
Townsend, S. S. M., Markus, H. R., &Bergsieker, H. B. (2009). My choice, your

categories: The denial of multiracial identities. Journal of Social Issues, 65(1),
185-204.http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2008.01594.x
Triandis, H. C. (1972). The Analysis of Subjective Culture. NewYork: Wiley.
Triandis, H. C., Bontempo, R., Villareal, M. J., Asai, M., & Lucca, N. (1988).
Individualism and collectivism: Cross-cultural perspectives on self-ingroup
relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(2), 323–338.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.54.2.323
Turner, R. N., & Crisp, R. J. (2010). Explaining the relationship between ingroup
identification and intergroup bias following recategorization: A self-regulation
theory analysis. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 13(2), 251–261.
doi:10.1177/1368430209351702
Tripathi, R. C. (1988). Aligning development to values in India. In D. Sinha &

H. S. R. Kao (Eds.), Social values and development: Asian Perspective. New
Delhi: Sage.
Turner, H. (1975). Reappraisals of Fascism. New York: New Viewpoints.
Vandello, J., & Cohen, D. (2002). Cultural Themes Associated with Domestic
Violence against Women: A cross-cultural Analysis. Manuscript submitted for
publication
83
Self In Social Context Verkuyten, M. (2009). Self-esteem and multiculturalism: An examination among
ethnic minority and majority groups in the Netherlands. Journal of Research in
Personality, 43(3), 419-427.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2009.01.013
Wehrle, K., &Fasbender, U. (2019). Self-concept. In V. Zeigler-Hill & T. K.

Shackelford (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences. AG:
Springer Nature Switzerland. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_2001-1
Wheeler, L., Reis, H. T., & Bond, M. H. (1989). Collectivismand individualism

in everyday social life: The middlekingdom and the melting pot. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 57(1), 79–86.
Wiley, S. & Deaux, K. (2010). The bicultural identity performance of immigrants.

In A. E. Azzi, X. Chryssochoou, B. Klandermans and B. Simon (Eds.), Identity
and Participation in Culturally Diverse Societies (pp. 49-68). Oxford: Wiley-
Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9781444328158.ch3
Ye, D., Ng, Y. K., & Lian, Y. (2014). Culture and Happiness. Social Indicators
Research, 123(2), 519-547.
Youniss, J., &Smollar, J. (1989). Adolescents’ interpersonalrelationships in social

context. In T. J. Berndt & G. W.Ladd (Eds.), Peer Relationships in Child
Development (pp.300–316). New York: Wiley.
Zukow-Goldring, P. (1995). Sibling Interaction Across Cultures.New York:

Springer-Verlag.
84
BLOCK 3
SOCIAL COGNITION
85
Social Cognition
BLOCK 3 INTRODUCTION
This block comprises of Four units which deals with the social cognition. It
should be mentioned here that social cognition is the way by which we process
social information.The first unit deals with the concepts of schema and heuristics
and the unit explains the modes of social thought. The unit also discusses about
the sources of errors that affects our social cognition. With the help of this unit
you will come to know about the role played by our cognitive processes in social
interaction with others.
The second unit discusses about the process of social perception and describes
the ways in which we perceive others in different social situations. It will also
deal with the theories of attribution, in order to know whether the behaviour of a
person originated from his or her internal dispositions or there were some external
situational factors that caused the particular behaviour. The unit will also explain
the process by which an overall impression of others interacting with us in social
situations is formed. Lastly, we will illustrate the errors we commit in attribution
process.
In the third unit of this block, we will discuss the meaning and definition of
attitude. We will further explain the components, types and functions of attitude.
We will also describe the process and theories of attitude formation and change.
We will also discuss the issue pertaining to relationship between attitude and
behaviour. Lastly, we will also try to understand the concept, process and relevance
of persuasion.
In the fourth and last unit of this block, we will discuss the relationship between
attitude and behaviour. We will also understand the concepts of stereotype,
prejudice and discrimination. By the end of this unit, you will also come to know
about the sources of prejudice and the disguised forms of discrimination. Lastly,
you will also be acquainted by the ways of reducing stereotype, prejudice and
discrimination.
86
Social Cognition:
UNIT 5 SOCIAL COGNITION: Understanding Social
Behaviour- I
UNDERSTANDING SOCIAL
BEHAVIOUR- I*
Structure
5.0 Objectives
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Schema
5.2.1 Types of Schema
5.2.1.1 Person Schemas
5.2.1.2 Self Schemas
5.2.1.3 Group Schemas
5.2.1.4 Role Schemas
5.2.1.5 Events Schemas
5.2.2 Impact of Schema
5.3 Modes of Social Thought Processing
5.3.1 The Continuum Model of Processing
5.3.2 Automatic vs. Controlled Processing
5.4 Heuristics: The Mental Shortcuts
5.4.1 Availability Heuristics
5.4.2 Representativeness Heuristics
5.4.3 Anchoring and Adjustment Heuristics
5.5 Sources of Errors in Social Cognition
5.5.1 Cognitive-Experiential Self Theory
5.5.2 Paying Attention to Inconsistent Information
5.5.3 Negativity Bias
5.5.4 Planning Fallacy
5.5.5 Potential Costs of Thinking Too Much
5.5.6 Counterfactual thinking
5.5.7 Magical Thinking
5.6 Let Us Sum Up
5.9 Glossary
5.0 OBJECTIVES
Understand the meaning of social cognition;
Describe meaning, types and impact of schema;
Explain the concept and relevance of heuristics; and
Discuss the sources of errors in social cognition.
Social Cognition
5.1 INTRODUCTION
Human beings are social animals. They think, feel and act by involving
themselves, others and larger collectives throughout every moment of the day.
The enormous yet seemingly natural tasks of social perception, social memory,
and social decision-making in which they engage; and the by-products of such
tasks constitute the study of social cognition. Social cognition is defined as the
process by which we interpret, analyze, remember and use information about
the social world. In the other words, social cognition is the way by which we
process social information. More specifically, while studying social cognition
social psychologists attempt to answer following important questions of social
lives of human being:
How do we register, encode, classify, store and utilise the overflow of

information in our social world?
What processes our cognitive system follows when we receive information
about others in order to form an overall impression of them?
What we do in order to understand the reasons behind and origins of
behaviours of people around us?
Is the processing of social information biased? What biases and errors
generally we commit in the process of social perception?
Social psychology has very vigorously attempted to answer these questions in
its branch of social cognition. In this unit we will understand the concepts of
schema and heuristics and the modes of social thought. We will also discuss
about the sources of errors that affects our social cognition. With the help of this
unit you will come to know about the role played by our cognitive processes in
social interaction with others.
5.2 SCHEMA
Our social interactions are largely guided by our expectations regarding the people
involved in the interactions, roles played by them in the specific situations, norms
guiding behaviours of people involved in the interaction and the likely events
and actions in the situation. Such expectations originate from our previous
experiences and knowledge of people, roles, norms and events of similar kinds.
Social psychologists refer it as schemas. Schemas are defined as cognitive
structures containing broader expectations and knowledge of the social world
that help us systematically organise social information.
Schemas contain not only some precise and explicit illustrations, they also include
our inferences and assumptions about of the persons, events, situations, etc.
Schemas help us to predict the likely behaviours of people occupying specific
roles in a social interaction and sequence of actions in a particular social event.
Further, schemas influence the process of encoding, storage and retrieval of social
information.They also guide us in making inferences about the information which
is not available to us in a particular social situation. By all its functions, a schema
significantly reduces the efforts weput forth in processing the social information.
88
5.2.1 Types of Schema Social Cognition:
Understanding Social
Behaviour- I
Social psychologists have categorised schemas into different types: person
schemas, self-schemas, group schemas, role schemas and event schemas.
5.2.1.1 Person Schemas

Cognitive structures that attempt to illustrate the personalities of others are called
as person schema. Person schemas try to explain personalities of either specific
persons (such as Mahatma Gandhi, Mahatma Buddha, J. R. D. Tata, etc.) or
explain personalities in terms of some universal types (such as extravert, introvert,
sober, sociable, depressive, submissive, etc.). Person schemas help us in
classifying and organising our understandingabout the personalities of people
around us and lead to make internal predictions about their behaviour. Person
schemas, often referred as person prototypes, generally consist of a composition
of personality traits that we use to classify people and to predict their behaviour
in particular situations. Generally dominant personality traits are utilised as criteria
for categorising people in our social world. Based on observations during our
interactions we may infer that ‘A’ is submissive or that ‘B’ is honest or ‘C’ is
dominant. This helps us in making expectations in our social interactions and
giving us a sense of control and predictability in the situation.
5.2.1.2 Self Schemas

Similar to the way we receive, encode, store and utilise the information about
other people, we develop schemas that describe our self-concept based on past
experiences. Self schemas are cognitive representations about us that organize
and process all related information (Markus, 1977). Self schema is developed
from the traits that we think as core of our self-concept. Self schemas describe
the components that uniquely characterise and define our self-concept. We have
different context specific self schemas that are activated in different social
situations. For example, self schema of A as commanding and dominant when he
is in his office may be opposite from his self schema as submissive and obedient
when he is with his father.
5.2.1.3 Group Schemas

Group schemas, often referred to as stereotypes, are the schemas regarding the
people representing a particular social group or category (Hamilton, 1981).
Stereotypes specify the traits, qualities, attributes and behaviours presumably
characterising the members of that social group or category. In our social
interactions we try to understand our social world with the help of number of
stereotypes about people of different castes, religious groups, specific
geographical regions, speaking different languages, ethnic groups, etc.
5.2.1.4 Role Schemas

Role schemas characterise traits, qualities, attributes and behaviours of persons
with a particular role in a group. Role schemas help us in understanding and
predicting the behaviours of persons who occupy specific roles in a social group.
Role schemas are categorised in various ways. For example, there are role schemas
associated with various occupational roles, such as teachers, scientists, doctors,
89
Social Cognition sales managers, HR managers, etc. Similarly, role schemas are also associated
with other kinds of roles in social groups, such as group leader, captain of a
sports team, etc. Our initial interactions with a person are broadly guided by the
cues that prominently visible to us. However, as our familiarity with the person
increases importance of such physical cues is reduced and trait-based person
schemas are given more importance in guiding our social interactions Fiske
(1998).
5.2.1.5 Event Schemas

Event schemas, also referred to as scripts, are cognitive structures that describe
the expected sequences of actions and behaviours of people participating in an
event in our everyday social activities. We explicate scripts by asking people to
describe that what actually happens in a particular social event, what is the
sequence of these actions and what types of behaviours people do during the
event. For example, if we are asked to explain the appropriate behavioural
sequence of an Indian classroom, we can very vividly describe the behavioural
sequences of teacher and students. The phenomenon of event schema or script
indicate that we store the behaviours that are appropriate in particular situation
for our broad understanding and whenever we are encountered to such situation
the script is automatically activated in order to facilitate our smooth interaction
in the situation.
5.2.2 Impact of Schema

Our social environment is flooded with information at any given time and it is
beyond our cognitive capacity to process all those information instantly. We cannot
respond to all those social stimuli in equally efficient manner and therefore, we
are required to focus on some of the most relevant and important information.
Schemas provide us a practical tool to make precise social judgements up to an
extent by helping us in registering, encoding, categorising, organising, storing,
comprehending and retrieving the social information and consequently, making
decision about the appropriate behaviour in a given situation.
Schemas are theory-driven: Being originated from our previously acquired

knowledge about the social surroundings, schemas function as ‘theory-driven’
structures that enable us to classify and organise our specific social interactions
and broader social experiences. This suggests that the information available in
the social environment is rarely used in social interactions, instead schematic
theories operate subconsciously in the background and therefore, we comprehend
and act in a novel social situation based our schema driven assumptions (Fiske
& Taylor, 1991).
Impact of schemas on memory: Human memory is mainly considered as

reconstructive in nature. In place of remembering all specific fine points of social
encounters and situations, we generally remember only prominent details
characterising and defining the situations which activate the schema when we
require and subsequently schema fills in other minute details. Such impact of
schema on memory suggests that schemas further determine that what details
will be remembered and which details will be forgotten. When we try to recall
about a social event, we are more likely to remember those details that are
consistent with our schemas than those that are inconsistent (Cohen, 1981).
90
Impact of schemas on inferences in social interactions: Most of our social Social Cognition:
interactions are facilitated by the schema driven assumptions and inferences we Behaviour- I
draw about various people in our social surroundings (Fiske & Taylor, 1991). At
number of occasions there are large gaps in our understanding of the social
situations which are filled up by the schema.When we are unaware of certain
information about someone, we draw some inferences consistent with our schema
in order to create a coherent and complete understanding of the person. For
example, if you know your roommate who is fitness crazy, you can infer that he
will love company of another friend of yours who is a sportsperson.
Impact of schemas on social judgements: Several schemas, particularly person

schemas represent the cognitive structures referring our evaluations, judgements
and affective orientations about people and events in our social environment.
Therefore, when a particular schema is activated it leadsus to view the associated
social stimulusin the categories of good-bad, normal-abnormal, positive-negative,
etc. and consequently, it strongly elicits feelings consistent with our evaluations.
Schemas are integrated and stable in nature: Schemas are developed and
strengthened with our experiences in particular social situations and further they
are stored in the form of integrated structures of associated components. During
our social interactions even a single accessed component of a schema is capable
of activating the whole schema, as strong associative links exist among the
components of the schema (Fiske & Dyer, 1985). Once schemas are developed
and are recurrently activated during our social encounters they become relatively
stable part of our social thought process and further they resist change even
when we are encountered with the evidences inconsistent with the existing
schemas.
Fill in the following blanks:
1) .......................... influence the process of encoding, storage and retrieval of

social information.
2) Most of our ........................ are facilitated by the schema driven assumptions

and inferences we draw about various people in our social surroundings.
3) ................... which are often referred to as stereotypes, are the schemas

regarding the people representing a particular social group or category.
4) Cognitive structures that attempt to illustrate the personalities of others are

called as.................... .
5) Self schema is developed from the traits that we think as core of

our................... .
5.3 MODES OF SOCIAL THOUGHT PROCESSING

5.3.1 The Continuum Model of Processing
Our presumptions and prejudices often result into distorted thoughts and biased
evaluations. However, our thought process is not always guided by presumptions
and prejudices in order to minimise cognitive efforts like cognitive misers. Instead, 91
Social Cognition we often analyse the social information in a very cautious, vigilant, systematic
and piecemeal (progressive) manner. Fiske and Neuberg (1990) suggested that
we process social information along a continuum starting from category driven
schematic processing to datadrivensystematic processing. Theyfurther suggested
that category driven schematic processing is employed in the when information
is explicit and less important to the person; whereas, data driven systematic
processing is employed when the informationis confusing and comparatively
more significant for the person. Data driven systematic processing is employed
also when we require very high accuracy in our social judgements. We encounter
with different people in our everyday social interactions. With their varying
importance to us we decide that that up to what extent information regarding
them is systematically processed and data regarding which people will be
superficially processed in order to form their impressions.
5.3.2 Automatic vs. Controlled Processing

We follow two distinct ways of approaches of information processing in our
social thought: an organized, logical, and highly purposeful approach known as
controlled processing, or a quick, relatively effortless and intuitive-spontaneous
approach known as automatic processing. Devine (1989) applied the difference
between the two ways of processing to explain the process by which stereotypes
are activated.
Devine proposed that we acquire a number of social stereotypes during our

childhood years through the process of socialization. Such stereotypes are further
strengthened by repeated exposure in our social encounters and consequently
they become an integral part of our social knowledge structure. In our subsequent
encounter with the social groups the corresponding knowledge structures are
activated automatically without our conscious and purposeful thinking. Devine
(1989) further argued that the stereotypes are automatically activated with almost
equal strength for those who are high prejudiced, as well as for those who are
low prejudiced. Devine also demonstrated that stereotypes are activated in both
high and low prejudiced people; even when cues for stereotypes were subliminally
presented and therefore, participants were not consciously aware of cues presented
to them.
5.4 HEURISTICS: THE MENTAL SHORTCUTS

In our everyday social interactions, we are flooded by information which generally
exceeds the capacity of our cognitive system. In such situations, we devise and
employ various strategies which help us to maximum utilisation of our cognitive
resources in minimum cognitive efforts; consequently leading to an automatic,
rapid, spontaneous and effortless social thought process. Using heuristics, a type
of mental shortcuts, is one of the most prominent such strategies in which we
make complex decisions in an automatic, rapid, spontaneous and effortless manner
by using simple rules. At a certain time, many schemas are available to us which
may guide our social interactions. We employ heuristics in order to select a
particular schema to guide our social interactions. Some of such heuristics are
discussed below.
92
5.4.1 Availability Heuristics Social Cognition:
Behaviour- I
Some schemas are more frequently used in our social interactions than others. A
schema which is most recently used is more readily available to us to guide our
social interactions. Schwarz et al. (1991) proposed a different explanation to
availability heuristics in terms of ease of retrieval. They argued that schemas
consistent with the examples which are easier to remember are more readily
available and therefore, used in our social thoughts. Thus they emphasised the
ease of remembering a particular example associated with certain schema than
the number of times the schema is used.
5.4.2 Representativeness Heuristics

Representativeness heuristic is often used when we are faced with situations
with high level of uncertainty. In such situations, we generally focus on very
essential properties of the social entities and match them with various schemas
held in our cognitive system. Furthermore, the schema which most closely
resembles with the characteristics of the particular social entity is selected. In
certain situations, representativeness heuristic becomes so strong that it is
employed even in the presence of contradictory evidences and statistical
information.
5.4.3 Anchoring and Adjustment Heuristics

In a situation where we are required to take a social decision or to express our
opinion on some social issue about which we do not have expertise, we usually
try to make a guess based on a somewhat workable cue. This cue functions as a
starting point or as an anchor and further we make modifications and adjustments
in the starting point in order to arrive at our final decision or opinion.
Suppose that you are asked in an exam to provide the population of Delhi. If you
do not know that population but you know the population of Haryana, you might
use the population of Haryana as an anchor and thinking that Delhi must be
somewhat smaller than Haryana, adjust the population of Haryana downward to
produce your guess. In most cases of social judgements, we generally use
ourselves as an anchor.
5.5 SOURCES OF ERRORS IN SOCIAL

COGNITION
As a human being, we consciously desire to think logically in order to make
somewhat error-free decisions, evaluations and judgements about people and
events in social surroundings. However, at various occasions our social thought
process ignores certain logical standards and we put in less cognitive effort to
comprehend our social world which subsequently leads to errors in our social
cognition.
5.5.1 Cognitive-Experiential Self Theory

Cognitive-experiential self theory argues that many times we prefer our intuitive
thoughts based on past experiences over logical thinking in order to evaluate a
social situation. For example, when a cricket player scores a century with a pair
93
Social Cognition of shoes he continues to wear the same pair of shoes in coming matches as well
despite the probable dangerous consequences of wearing an old pair of shoes.
Such intuitive thoughts originate from the past experience that the old shoes
were lucky for him.
5.5.2 Paying Attention to Inconsistent Information

When we encounter with a person in a social situation, information inconsistent
with his/her role draws our attention even at cost of some consistent and even
more relevant information. Social psychologists have provided evidence that
inconsistent information is better remembered than the consistent information
about gender roles. BardachandPark (1996) reported that the participants
remembered the qualities inconsistent with a gender (‘nuturant’ for males and
‘competitive’ for females) better than those that are usually inconsistent with a
gender (‘adventurous’ for males and ‘emotional’ for females). The findings
indicated that the inconsistent information may be preferred over important
consistent information leading to potential errors in social cognition.
5.5.3 Negativity Bias

The negativity bias refers to the notion that, even when of equal intensity, human
being has the tendency to give greater weight to negative social information and
entities (events, objects, personal traits, etc.) as compared to positive ones. When
traits differ in terms of their positivity and negativity, negative traits are
disproportionately impact the final impression.
5.5.4 Planning Fallacy

While deciding about the time we will take to complete a task, we often
underestimate the time needed and at the time of execution we generally overshoot
the time period that we had assigned to ourselves. This is known as planning
fallacy. The reason for this is that while initially taking the decision about the
time required, we generally focus on events or actions to occur in future rather
than focusing on the time we had taken to accomplish a task in the past. This
tendency disallows us to do a realistic estimate of time needed. Furthermore, at
the time of initial decision-making, even if one is reminded of the excessive time
incurred in the past, the delay is usually attributed to some external factors rather
than one’s own capabilities to the finish the work in time.
5.5.5 Potential Costs of Thinking Too Much

At number of occasions, we excessively do careful thinking resulting into
confusion, frustration and wrong judgement. Wilson and Schooler (1991) asked
half of their research participants to“simplyrate” the several strawberry jams
and the other half of them to “deeply analyse” the reasons for the ratingsthey
themselves gave to each jam. The researchers also took the opinion of experts
(who professionally compared various products) about the correctness of
judgement made of the two groups of participants. They found that, according to
the experts, the judgement of the secondhalf of the participants (consisting of
participants who deeply analysed their own rating) were not as accurate as that
of the first half (consisting of participants who simply rated the jams).
94
5.5.6 Counterfactual Thinking Social Cognition:
Behaviour- I
Counterfactual thinking is a tendency in which people think contrary to what
actually occurred. People think about the already occurred events by framing
some possible alternatives in terms of “What if?” and the “If I had only...” For
example, a cricketer thinks that “what could have happened if played in that
match!”
5.5.7 Magical Thinking

Magical thinking is the kind of thinking that involves irrational assumptions
often associated with law of similarity or law of contagion. Law of similarity
states our assumption that people similar to each other in appearance may be
having similar fundamental characteristics. For example, some children might
not like to eat a biscuit in the shape of a lizard. Law of contagion is the belief that
when two people or objects come in contact with each other, they pass on their
properties to one another and such an impact last long even after the contact is
over. For example, one might not like to wear the coat used by an HIV patient
even after it is dry-cleaned.

1) Magical thinking is a tendency in which people think contrary to what
actually occurred ………....
2) Cognitive-experiential self theory argues that many times we prefer our
intuitive thoughts based on past experiences over logical thinking in order
to evaluate a social situation ………….
3) Representativeness heuristic is often used when we are faced with situations
with high level of uncertainty ………………..
4) Our presumptions and prejudices neverresult into distorted thoughts and
biased evaluations ……………..
5) Heuristics are a type of mental shortcuts ………..
5.6 LET US SUM UP

Thus, it can be summed up that social cognition is a very relevant process at
individual level.This process is facilitated by cognitive representations of the
social world in our minds called schemas. Distinct types of schemas, person
schemas, self-schemas, group schemas, role schemas and event schemas; function
as organising structures influence the encoding, storing, recall of complex social
information and social judgements.To deal with the state of information overload
in the social situations where the demands on our cognitive system are greater
than its capacity, people adopt various heuristic strategies. In our everyday social
interactions, we are flooded by information which generally exceeds the capacity
of our cognitive system. The unit started with the explanation of concept and
meaning of social cognition, which was followed by the meaning, types and
impact of schema. The unit also explained the concept and relevance of heuristics.
Finally the various sources of errors in social cognition were also discussed in
the present unit.
95
Social Cognition
1) Define the concept of social cognition and schema?
2) Describe various types of schema and also evaluate its impact on social
thought process.
3) Present an account of modes of social thought processing as proposed by
psychologists and also explain various sources of errors in social cognition.
4) Discuss the various sources of error involved in social cognition.
5) What is the role of heuristics in social cognition? Describe various types of
heuristicsemployed in social cognition.

QUESTIONS
Self Assessment Question I
1) Schemas
2) Social interactions
3) Group schemas
4) Person schema
5) Self-concept
1) False
2) True
3) True
4) False
5) True
5.9 GLOSSARY
Social cognition: The process by which we interpret, analyze, remember and
use information about the social world.
Schemas: Cognitive structures and representations of social world in our minds

that help us organise social information and contain general expectations and
knowledge of the world.
Person schemas: Cognitive structures that organise our conceptions of others’

personalities and enable us to develop expectations about others’ behaviour.
Self schemas: Cognitive representations about us that organize and process all
related information.
Group schemas: Also called stereotypes, are schemas regarding the members
of a particular social group or social category and indicate that certain attributes
and behaviours are typical of members of that group or social category.
96
Role schemas: Indicate that certain attributes and behaviours are typical of Social Cognition:
persons occupying a particular role in a group and are often used to understand Behaviour- I
and to predict the behaviours of people who occupy roles.
Event schemas: Often referred to as cognitive scripts, describe behavioural and

event sequences in everyday activities; specifies the activities that constitute the
event, the predetermined order or sequence for these activities, and the persons
(or role occupants) participating in the event; provide the basis for anticipating
the future, setting goals and making plans.
Heuristics: Cognitive strategies to deal with the state of information overload in

the social situations where the demands on our cognitive system are greater than
its capacity.

Cengage Learning.
Asch, S. E. (1946). Forming impressions of personality. Journal of Abnormal

and Social Psychology, 41, 258-290.
Bardach, L., & Park, B. (1996). The effects of in-group/out-group status on

memory for consistent and inconsistent behavior of an individual. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 169-178.
Cohen, C. E. (1981). Person categories and social perception: Testing some

boundaries of the processing effects of prior knowledge. Journal of Personality
Devine, P. C. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled

components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 5-18.
Dreben, E. K., Fiske, S. T., & Hastie, R. (1979). The independence of evaluative
and item information: Impression and recall order effects in behavior-based
impression formation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1758-
1768.
Fiske, S. T. (1998). Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. In D. T. Gilbert,

S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology (4th ed.). New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Fiske, S. T., & Dyer, L. M. (1985). Structure and development of social schemata:
Evidence from positive and negative transfer effects. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 48, 839-852.
Fiske, S. T., &Neuberg, S. L. (1990). A continuum of impression formation,

from category-based to individuating processes: Influences of information and
motivation on attention and interpretation. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in
Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 23 (pp. 1-74). New York: Academic Press.
97
Social Cognition Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social Cognition (2nd ed.). New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Hamilton, D. L. (1981). Stereotyping and intergroup behavior: Some thoughts

on the cognitive approach. In D. L. Hamilton (Ed.), Cognitive Processes in
Stereotyping and Intergroup Behavior (pp. 333-353). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Heider, F. (1944). Social perception and phenomenal causality. Psychological

Review, 51, 258-374.
Heider, F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley.
Jones, E. E., & Davis, K. E. (1965). From acts to dispositions. In L. Berkowitz
(Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 2). New York: Academic
Press.
Jones, E. E., & Goethals, G. R. (1971). Order Effects in Impression Formation:

Attribution Context and the Nature of the Entity. Morristown, NJ: General
Learning Press.
Jones, E. E., & Nisbett, R. (1972). The actor and observer: Divergent perceptions
of the causes of behavior. In E. E. Jones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E.
Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. W. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the Causes of
Behavior. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
Jones, E. E., &Harris, V. A. (1967). The Attribution of Attitudes. Journal of

Experimental Social Psychology. 3, 1-24.
Kelley, H. H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. In D. Levine (Ed.),

Nebraska Symposium in Motivation, 1967. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska
Press.
Kelley, H. H. (1973). The process of causal attribution. American Psychologist,
28, 107-128.
Luchins, A. S. (1957). Experimental attempts to minimize the impact of first
impressions. In C. I. Hovland (Ed.), The Order of Presentation in Persuasion.
New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Markus, H. (1977). Self-schemas and processing information about the self.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 63-78.
Miller, D. T., & Ross, M. (1975). Self-Serving Biases in the Attribution of

Causality: Fact or Fiction? Psychological Bulletin, 82, 213-225.
Nisbett, R. E., Caputo, C., Legant, P., &Maracek, J. (1973). Behavior as seen by
the actor and as seen by the observer. Journal of Personality and Social
Pettigrew, T. F. (1979). The ultimate attribution error: Extending Allport’s

cognitive analysis of prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 5,
461-476.
Schwarz, N., Bless, H.,Strack, F.,Klumpp, G.,Rittenauer-Schatka, H., & Simons,

A. (1991). Ease of retrieval as information: Another look at the availability
heuristic. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 61, 195-202.
98
Taylor, S. E., & Fiske, S. T. (1978). Salience, attention, and attribution: Top of Social Cognition:
the head phenomena. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Behaviour- I
Psychology (Vol. 11). New York: Academic Press.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics

and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1131.
Weiner, B. (1986). An Attributional Theory of Motivation and Emotion. New

York: Springer Verlag.
Wilson, T. D., & Schooler, J. W. (1991). Thinking Too Much: Introspection Can
Reduce the Quality of Preferences and Decisions. Journal of Personality and
99
Social Cognition
UNIT 6 SOCIAL COGNITION:
UNDERSTANDING SOCIAL
BEHAVIOUR- II*
Structure
6.0 Objectives
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Person Perception
6.2.1 Impression Formation
6.2.1.1 Trait Centrality
6.2.1.2 First Impression
6.3 Theories of Attribution
6.3.1 Heider’s Naive Psychology
6.3.2 Correspondent Inference Theory
6.3.3 Covariation Model
6.3.4 Attribution of Success and Failure
6.4 Errors and Biases in Attribution
6.4.1 Fundamental Attribution Error
6.4.2 Actor-Observer Bias
6.4.3 Self-Serving Bias
6.4.4 Ultimate Attribution Error
6.5 Let Us Sum Up
6.8 Glossary
6.0 OBJECTIVES
Explain the concept of person perception and impression formation;
Discuss the various theories of attribution;
Illustrate the process of impression formation; and
Elucidate the ways in which people generally commit errors in person
perception.
6.1 INTRODUCTION
The present unit of the block will explain the process of social perception and
describe the ways in which we perceive others in different social situations. We
will also illustrate the theories of attribution in order to know whether the
behaviour of a person originated from his or her internal dispositions or there
were some external situational factors that caused the particular behaviour. We
will also understand the process by which an overall impression of others
100 Lucknow Road, Timarpur Delhi-110054
interacting with us in social situations is formed. Lastly, we will illustrate the Social Cognition:
errors we commit in attribution process. Behaviour- II
6.2 PERSON PERCEPTION

We perceive people with whom we interact in the social surroundings quite
differently from the way we perceive non-living things. We do soprimarily because
we evaluate and judge people based on assumptions and inferences regarding
the intentions behind their behaviours. Often we make assumptions about the
persons’ internal state which significantly influences the perceptions and
judgments we do regarding that person’s actions.Person perception is the area of
social psychology which studies the processby which we form impressions of
other people with whom we interact in ourreal or virtual social surroundings and
also that how we make inferences about them.Thearea of person perception also
analyses the cognitive process involved in making decision that which information
isattended, registered and encoded when we interact with other people, how we
evaluate these information and how this evaluationaffects our subsequent social
behaviour.
6.2.1 Impression Formation

We receive information regarding people around us from a variety of sources.
These sources may include the written facts about the person, something which
is told to us about the person by other people or behaviour of the person which
we directly observe. During our social interactions, we may form an impression
of a person on the basis of his or her obvious and visible features, such as look,
clothing, way of verbal communication, etc. We may further make assumptions
about the personality traits of the person on the basis of these physical
characteristics. Although we receive information regarding people around us
from a variety of sources, we are primarily concerned with organising and
assimilating such diverse information into a coherent picture. Impression
formation is the process by which we amalgamate diverse facts in order to form
an integrated impression of people around us.
Understanding people in a vacuum is a difficult task. Therefore, we explain others’

personality in terms of their traits. Traits function as building blocks of how we
construe others’ personality. In many cases, in order to form impression of others’
personality we combine whatever information, in terms of personality traits, we
find in a person possibly in a mathematical way. We assign some positive or
negative value to all the traits inferred in the person and then we may derive an
additive value or an average value of those traits.
6.2.1.1 Trait Centrality

When we try to form an impression of a person, we give greater importance to
some traits as compared to others. For example, this has been reported that when
we notice negative information regarding a person, we give more emphasis to it
than the positive information.
Asch (1946) presented empirical evidence to the view that when we form
impression of a person some traits play more important role than others. Asch
(1946) presented a list of traits of an imaginary person to one of his two research
101
Social Cognition groups. The list included seven traits: intelligent, skilful, industrious, warm,
determined, practical and cautious. The list which was presented to the second
research group differed in the manner that the trait “cold” replaced the trait
“warm”. After being presented with the list of traits, participants of both the
research groups were asked to write a short description of the impression they
formed of the imaginary person and also to rate the person on another list of
characteristics: generous, wise, happy, good-natured, humorous, sociable, popular,
humane, altruistic and imaginative.
The findings revealed that when the traits “warm” and “cold” shaped the overall
impression formed by the research participants to a great extent. In the “warm”
trait condition, the imaginary person was evaluated as happy, successful, popular
and humorous. While in “cold” trait condition, he was perceived as self-centred,
unsociable and unhappy. Furthermore, a considerable qualitative difference was
observed in the overall impression of the imaginary person as written in the
description of the person by both “warm” and “cold” trait groups. This evidence
was substantiated when the basic research procedure was replicated with a minor
innovative change that in the list of traits the trait of “warm-cold” was replaced
by “polite-blunt”. Results indicated that difference in the impression formed in
polite vs. blunt trait conditions was significantly lesser than that of warm vs.
cold. The findings suggested that different traits vary in their centrality value in
order to form impression of others. The trait which has greater influence on
overall impression is considered to have higher trait centrality value.
6.2.1.2 First Impression

As discussed earlier, individuals make conscious efforts to create a good
impression when entering into the interviewing room, joining a new group or
meeting with an important client. People generally do so because they think that
the first impression which we form on others is particularly significant and also
it has a considerably stable impact. This view originates from the researches on
primacy effect (Luchins, 1957) demonstrating that when we form an impression
of other people information received early is attached with greater value than the
information received later.
Social psychologists have proposed various explanations for primacy effect.

Firstly, once impression of a person is initially formed, it affects how we process
information received later regarding the person. When later on we receive
information about the person, it is registered, encoded and interpreted in such a
way that it is consistent with our first impression. For example, once we form
impression of a person as honest and later on we find that he or she is not returning
some money borrowed from a friend 2-3 months back. With the background that
we have initial impression of the person as honest, from the newly observed
behaviour we may infer that the person may have financial constraints or he or
she may have forgotten to return the money. Thus, the already formed impression
functions as a schema into which the information received later is assimilated
and the existing schema significantly influences the way of interpreting new
information. Secondly, the primacy effect assumes that we tend pay greater
attention to the information received early and the information received later is
somewhat ignored once we get the amount of information which we consider
sufficient to make a judgment. Thus, instead of interpreting the information
received later differently; we in fact tend to ignore it or use it less (Dreben,
102 Fiske, & Hastie, 1979).
Despite being an important phenomenon, primacy effect does not always occur. Social Cognition:
In some conditions, our impressions are most affected by the set of information Behaviour- II
which we receive most recently. This phenomenon, opposite to the primacy effect,
is known as the recency effect (Jones & Goethals, 1971). Recency effect is most
likely to occur when there is such a considerable time gap after the formation of
first impression that its trace has been lost. Recency effect is seen also when we
are primarily concerned with evaluating transient qualities, such as moods or
attitudes.

1) ........................ presented empirical evidence to the view that when we form
impression of a person some traits play more important role than others.
2) Person perception is the area of social psychology which studies the process
by which we form ......................... of other people with whom we interact
in ourreal or virtual social surroundings.
3) Theperson perception also analyses the .................... involved in making

decision that which information isattended, registered and encoded when
we interact with other people.
4) The already formed impression functions as a................ into which the

information received later is assimilated
5) .................... effect is most likely to occur when there is such a considerable

time gap after the formation of first impression that its trace has been lost.
6.3 THEORIES OF ATTRIBUTION

While interacting with people in our social surroundings, we largely focus on
their behaviours and their effects. However, we are also interested to the reasons
behind others’behaviours. It requires making inferences ahead of our general
observations of behaviours. For example, if we see someone being very aggressive
in public, we are interested to know that why is he doing so? Is the person
aggressive by nature? Or is he is using aggression as an instrument to achieve
some hidden goal? Is there something inherent in the environment which is
stimulating the person to be involved in the aggressive behaviour? We are
concerned to understand the reasons behind the behaviours primarily because it
helps us to predict future behaviour of people around us in order to act effectively
in the social environment. This process by which we try to infer causes behind
the other persons’ behaviours is referred to as attribution. We infer causes behind
others’ behaviours generally in terms of persons’ intentions, their abilities, traits,
motives and the situational factors that lead a person to some specific behaviour.
Various attribution theories discuss the process by which we interpret behaviours
in order to infer their causes.
6.3.1 Heider’s Naive Psychology

Although we are concerned about understanding and inferring the personality
traits of people with whom we deal with during our social interactions, their
behaviour may be caused by both their personality attributes; as well as by the 103
Social Cognition environment in which behaviour takes place. Thus, the actions of people do not
always originate from their personality; they may originate from the situation
also. Heider (1958) opined that causal attribution is the process by which we
infer the causes behind behaviour of other people. While doing causal attribution,
we try to deduce that the behaviour was originated from which of the two causes.
Fritz Heider (1944, 1958) proposed that in regular social interactions people try
to find out the causes behind the behaviour of other people by using commonsense
reasoning. The process and method of finding out the causes of behaviour is
performed as”naive scientists” and is similar to the scientific method.Therefore,
Heider argued that in order to understand the process by which people do causal
attribution social psychologists are required to focus on commonsense reasoning
employed by common people.
Heider proposed that while doing causal attribution, people are primarily focused
on understanding whether the behaviour is attributed to the person’s internal
state, referred to as dispositional attribution; or to the environmental factors,
referred to as situational attribution. For example, attributing a person’s aggressive
behaviour to his or her internal states or characteristics, such as irritability, bad
temper, hostility is an instance of dispositional attribution. On the other hand,
judging the aggressive behaviour originating from the situational factors, such
as being aggressive under provocation; refers to situational attribution. As a
perceiver, our decision to attribute behaviour to the personal dispositions or to
the situational factors is based on our evaluation of the strength of situational
pressures on the actor. Under strong situational pressure, we generally go with
situational attribution.
6.3.2 Correspondent Inference Theory

Correspondent inference theory (Jones & Davis, 1965) proposes that in order to
make inference that a person’s behaviour originated from personal dispositions,
we firstly focus on the intention behind the particular behaviour. Then we try to
infer whether such intentions were caused by personal dispositions or not.
However, making such inferences becomes difficult because any particular
behaviour may produce number of effects. Therefore, to be convinced by our
attributions we try to discern that which of the effects the person actually intended
and which were simply incidental. As a perceiver, our decision about which of
the several effects of the person’ behaviour was actually intended depends on the
factors that include the extent to which the effects were common, the extent to
which the effects were socially desirable and the extent to which the behaviour
complied with the normative perspective (Jones & Davis, 1965).
Firstly, the principle of non-common effects refers that we infer a person’s

behaviour corresponding to an underlying disposition when the behaviour has
an exceptional or non-common effect which could not be produced by any other
behaviour.
Secondly, we tend to infer a person’s behaviour corresponding to an underlying

disposition when the outcomesconsequent to the behaviour are socially
undesirable. Being engaged in socially desirable behaviours simply indicates
our tendency to appear normal and similar to other people and does not specify
any personal disposition. However, low socially desirable behaviours are inferred
as a consequence of a personal disposition.
104
Finally, the perceiver evaluates the normativeness of the behaviour in order to Social Cognition:
infer that the behaviour is resultant of the person’s personal disposition. Behaviour- II
Normativeness refers to the behaviour which is normally expected from a person
in given social situation. When behaviour does not conform to the social norms
in the situation the behaviour seems to have been freely chosen and not forced
on the person in question. Jones and Davis (1965) further argued that the
behaviours complying to the social norms generally do not reveal about the
individual dispositions. Alternately, the behaviours that contradict social norms
are attributed to the personal dispositions.
Correspondent Inference Theory: Jones & Davis (1965)
BEHAVIOUR THAT IS
Freely chosen Somehow forced

Non common in its effects Common in its effects
Low in social desirability High in social desirability
Behaviour originates from the Behaviour originates from the

person’s stable traits and situational effects
dispositional factors
Fig. 6.1: Correspondent Inference Theory
Thus, correspondent inference theory states that we are most likely to conclude
that others’ behaviour reflects their stable traits and dispositional factors (i.e.,
we are likely to reach correspondent inferences about them), when that behaviour
is freely chosen, yields distinctive, non-common effects and is low in social
desirability.
6.3.3 Covariation Model

The theories discussed in the preceding sections primarily focus on make
attribution of behaviour on a single instance. However, in real life situations we
make attributions of person’s behaviour based on information obtained from
several instances. Such multiple behavioural observations and comparisons do
not only facilitate the process of causal attribution, but also increases the accuracy
of attribution. Kelley (1967, 1973) proposed that we process and analyse the
information regarding a person’s behaviour obtained from several observations
in the same way a scientist does. Kelley argued that there may be various possible
factors or causes of behaviour. In order to identify these causes covariation
principle is applied. We attribute the behaviour to the factor that is both present
when the behaviour occurs and absent when the behaviour fails to occur; the
cause that co-varies with the behaviour.
105
Social Cognition Suppose, while going toward your office you notice a road accident. There may
be at least two potential causes to which the accident may be attributed: internal
causes (personal attributes of the person involved in the accident, such as rough
driving), external causes (abrupt driving by others, sudden exposure to damaged
road). Kelley (1967) proposed that while employing the principle of covariation
to determine whether the behaviour was caused by the internal causes or external
causes, people focus on three types of information: consensus, consistency and
distinctiveness.
Consensus is the extent to which people react to a given stimulus or event in the
same manner. It refers to whether all persons behave in the same way or only a
few people behave in that way. For example, whether all persons driving on that
side of road meet an accident (high consensus), or is that person only who has
encountered with an accident while driving on that side of road (low consensus)?
Fig. 6.2: Covariation Model (Kelley, 1967,73)
Consistency refers to the extent to which the person behaves in the same way at
different occasions and situations. If theperson meets an accident on many
different occasions, his/her behaviour is (similar) highin consistency. If s/he has
been never met a road accident earlier, his/her behaviour is low in consistency.
Distinctiveness refers to the extent to which the person behaves in a unique/

distinctive way to various stimuli or events. The individual will show low
distinctiveness if s/he behaves similarly in all situations while there exists a high
distinctiveness when the individual shows the behaviour in particular situations
only. If the person always gets involved in a road accident whenever s/he drives,
even when s/he drives on other roads, his/her behaviour (getting involved in the
accident) is low in distinctiveness. If the person does not get involved in an
accident on other roads, his behaviour is high in distinctiveness.
The causal attribution for the behaviour depends on the particular combination
of consensus, consistency and distinctiveness information that people associate
106
with that behaviour. People usually attribute a behaviour to the internal causes Social Cognition:
(personal characteristics of the person, the driver) when the behaviour is low in Behaviour- II
consensus, low in distinctiveness and high in consistency. In contrast, people
usually attribute a behaviour to the external causes (rough driving by other drivers,
the context/damaged road) when the behaviour is high in consensus, high in
distinctiveness and high in consistency.
6.3.4 Attribution of Success and Failure

In the age of tremendous competition in all spheres of our lives, people around
us evaluate our performances and make attributions regarding our successes and
failures. For example, success of a sports team in an important competition may
be attributed to several causes. The team’s success may be attributed to the intrinsic
ability of the team members, effort exerted by the team members, easy competition
due to weak opponents or even luck. Thus, there may be four factors of success
or failure: ability, effort, task difficulty and luck.
In order to decide that which of these four factors was the actual reason behind
the success or failure, perceivers firstly determine the locus of control of the
success or failure. That is, whether the reason of success or failure was within
the actor (internal or dispositional attribution) or it was caused by some
environmental factors (external or situational attribution). Secondly, the perceiver
determines the degree of stability of the success or failure. That is, whether the
reason behind the result was an enduring characteristic of the actor/environment
(stable) or it was varying (unstable). The perceiver can make a final attribution
of success or failure only after deciding the internality-externality and stability-
instability aspects of the causes.
Causal attribution of success and failure

Locus of Control
Degree of Stability
Internal External
Stable Ability Task Difficulty
Unstable Effort Luck
Fig. 6.3: Causal attribution of success and failure
Weiner (1986) proposed that the four factors of success or failure can be arranged
in the form of a matrix along the dimensions of internality-externality and stability-
instability of the causes. For example, ability is usually considered as an internal
and stable factor. Ability is primarily interpreted as an internalcharacteristic of
the individual and it is considered as a stable property which does not
variesquickly. On the contrary, effort is an internal and unstable property. Effort
is exerted by the individual (internal) and also, the same individual may exert
different amount of efforts at different occasions and at different tasks (unstable).
Task difficulty is an objective characteristic of the task (external) that remains
constant for a particular task (stable). Luck or chance is an external and unstable
factor.
Performance of a person is attributed to internal or external causes after comparing
his or her performance with that of others. Extraordinary performances, regardless
of good or bad, are generally attributed to internal causes. We are more likely to 107
Social Cognition evaluate a student as exceedingly able or extremely motivated who secures very
high grades in an extraordinarily tough examination. Likewise, a student with
unusually poor performance is perceived as weak in ability or very low in
motivational aspect. On the contrary, an average performance is generally
attributed to external causes. A mediocre performance of a student in an
examination is attributed either to the tough competition or to misfortune.
Whether observers attribute a performance to stable or unstable causes depends

on how Consistency in the individual’s performance over time plays a vital role
in attributing a performance to stable or unstable causes. Consistent performances
are usually attributed to the stable causes. A student’s consistent high grades in
different examinations over a period of time are more likely to be attributed
either to his or her intelligence (ability) or to the low level of the examination
(task difficulty). Inconsistent performances are usually attributed to the unstable
causes (varying efforts or luck/chance).
6.4 ERRORS AND BIASES IN ATTRIBUTION

As explained by various attribution theories, perceivers examine their social
surroundings, process information, form impressions and interpret behaviours
in a seemingly rational and logical manner. Nevertheless, perceivers often diverge
from the logical methods described by attribution theories and commit many
errors and biases in this process leading the perceivers to misinterpret the received
information and to make flawed attribution. We will now consider the biases and
errors that are most pervasive in the process of attribution.
6.4.1 Fundamental Attribution Error

Fundamental attribution error refers to a tendency in which we augment the impact
of situational or external factors and reduce the impact of dispositional or internal
factors while attributing behaviour. Jones and Harris (1967) presented an empirical
evidence for fundamental attribution error in an experiment in which he gave an
essay to read to American college students. The essay either supported or criticised
the Castro government in Cuba. However, the research participants were
differently informed regarding the choice of position taken by the essay writer.
The experimenters informed half of the participants that the essay writer was
free to choose his or her position, ‘pro’ or ‘anti’ Castro, while writing the essay
(choice condition).While the other half of the participants were informed that
the position, ‘pro’ or ‘anti’ Castro, taken by the essay writer was directly assigned
to them (no-choice condition).
While being asked to evaluate the true attitude of the essay writer towards the
Castro government in Cuba, the participants viewed the writer’s attitude consistent
with the opinions expressed in the essay, regardless of the condition that the
writer had choice to take his or her position in the essay (choice condition) or not
(no-choicecondition). Experimenters further reported that although the research
participants didnot completely ignored the fact that the writers of no-choice
condition were assigned the position to take, they attached less importanceto it
and overestimated the attitudinal disposition of the essay writer. Thus, the impact
of the no-choice condition (situational or external factor) was under estimated
and the choice component (dispositional or internal factor) was over
estimated.This error results from a failure by the observer to fully apply the
108 subtractive rule.
6.4.2 Actor-Observer Bias Social Cognition:
Behaviour- II
Actor-observer bias refers to the tendency to attribute other’s behaviour to internal/
dispositional factors, while attributing our own behaviour to situational/
environmental factors (Jones & Nisbett, 1972). For example, a student who fails
in an examination justifies his or her result to tough question paper, very strict
evaluation, not getting sufficient time for preparation, some sudden engagements
in family, etc. However, he or she explains similar results of other students by
lack of their ability, carelessness, indiscipline, etc. It has been observed that in
clinical settings the clinical practitioners tend to view their clients’ problem related
to their internal stable dispositions, while the clients justify their problems by
the situational factors.
Arguably, actors and observers view each others’ performances with distinct
perspectives. When we are actors, we are not able to see our own behaviours.
Rather the situational factors influencing our behaviour are more readily noticed.
However, when we are an observer the person’s behaviour is more prominent
than the environmental and contextual factors influencing the behaviour. Such
differential perspective of actors and observers lead to situational attributions
for actors and dispositional attributions for observers.
Furthermore, as an actor we are able to see our behaviours at different occasions

and at different places. Therefore, the information regarding the factors pertaining
to the situation and context are more readily available to us. However, as an
observer we are able to see the person’s behaviour only at one instance and in
one situation. Consequently, we tend to presume that unlike us, other people
behave in same way at other occasions as well. In the other words, we presume
higher level of consistency in other person’s behaviour as compared to our own
behaviour which leads to make dispositional attributions for others and situational
attributions for own behaviour (Nisbett et al., 1973).
6.4.3 Self-Serving Bias

Self-serving bias refers to a general tendency that we acclaim for our
achievements, but do not see ourselves responsible for our failures. We generally
claim that we succeeded at a task due to our sheer ability (internal factor).
However, we justify our failures with misfortune or task difficulty (external
factors). As an individual we have a strong need to enhance our self-esteem
when we achieve something significant, to protect the self-esteem while faced
withfailures. Millerand Ross (1975) referred internal attribution to the successes
as the self-enhancing bias, and external attribution to the failures as the self-
protection bias.
6.4.4 Ultimate Attribution Error

Ultimate attribution error refers to the self-serving bias operated at the group
level. It suggests that we have strong tendency to defend our own group while
making attributions. Pettigrew (1979) suggested that relations between two groups
largely affect the attribution members of each group make for the members of
other group for similar types of behaviours. Positive and socially desirable
behaviours of the members of our own group are attributed to internal qualities;
however, similar behaviours of the members of the other group are attributed to
external factors. On the other hand, negative behaviours of the members of our
109
Social Cognition own group are attributed to internal factors; while, similar behaviours of the
members of the other group are attributed to internal traits.

1) Actor- observer bias refers to a general tendency that we acclaim for our
achievements, but do not see ourselves responsible for our failures. ( )
2) Ability is primarily interpreted as an internal characteristic of the individual.
()
3) Consistency is the extent to which people react to a given stimulus or event
in the same manner. ()
4) Heider (1958) opined that causal attribution is the process by which we
infer the causes behind behaviour of other people.
()
5) We tend to infer a person’s behaviour corresponding to an underlying
disposition when the outcomes consequent to the behaviour are socially
undesirable. ()
6.5 LET US SUM UP

It can be concluded from the above discussion that, social cognition is the way
by which we process social information. During social interactions we organise
diverse information into a unified coherent manner to form an impression of the
other person. Also, by the process of attribution people try to infer the causes of
other persons’ behaviour. We observe another’s behaviour and infer backward to
its causes that explain why people act as they do. Various theories of attribution
focus on the methods we use to interpret another person’s behaviour and to infer
its sources. Although the process of social cognition is seemingly rational,
observers often deviate from the logical methods and commit many errors and
biases in this process leading to misinterpret events and to make erroneous
judgements.

1) Explain the theories of attribution.
2) Discuss the causal attribution of behaviour
3) Explain the process of impression formation and present empirical evidences
for trait centrality and first impression.
4) Explain various errors and biases committed in attribution.

QUESTIONS
1) Asch (1946)
2) impressions
110
3) cognitive process Social Cognition:
4) schema Behaviour- II
5) Recency
1) False
2) True
3) False
4) True
5) True
6.8 GLOSSARY
Impression Formation: The process by which we organise diverse information
into a unified coherent manner to form an impression of the other person.
Trait Centrality: Phenomenon that some traits of a person are weighted more
heavily and have large impact than others on the overall impression we form of
that person.
Primacy Effect: Phenomenon that observers forming an impression of a person

give more weight to information received early than to information received
later.
Recency Effect: The most recent information we receive exerts the strongest
influence on the impressions we form of others.
Attribution:The process that an observer follows to infer the causes of another’s

behaviour.
Correspondent Inference Theory: Others’ behaviour reflects their stable traits

and dispositional factors when that behaviour is freely chosen, yields distinctive,
non-common effects and is low in social desirability.
Principle of Covariation: We attribute the behaviour to the factor that is both

present when the behaviour occurs and absent when the behaviour fails to occur.
Consensus: The extent to which other people react to a given stimulus or event
in the same manner as the person we are considering.
Consistency: Whether the person behaves in the same way at different times
and in different settings.
Distinctiveness: The extent to which the person reacts in the same manner to
other, different stimuli or events.
Attribution of Success and Failure: The process to find out causes of success
and failure of ours and that of others.
Fundamental Attribution Error: The tendency to underestimate the role of

situational or external factors, and to overestimate the role of dispositional or
internal factors.
111
Social Cognition Actor-Observer Bias: Tendency to attribute other people’s behaviour to
dispositional factors and to attribute our own behaviour to situational factors.
Self-Serving Bias: Tendency to accept credit for success and deny responsibility
for failure.
Ultimate Attribution Error: Tendency to make attributions that protect the group
we belong to.

Cengage Learning.
Asch, S. E. (1946). Forming impressions of personality. Journal of Abnormal

Bardach, L., & Park, B. (1996). The effects of in-group/out-group status on

memory for consistent and inconsistent behavior of an individual. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 169-178.
Cohen, C. E. (1981). Person categories and social perception: Testing some

boundaries of the processing effects of prior knowledge. Journal of Personality
Devine, P. C. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled

components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 5-18.
Dreben, E. K., Fiske, S. T., & Hastie, R. (1979). The independence of evaluative
and item information: Impression and recall order effects in behavior-based
impression formation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1758-
1768.
Fiske, S. T. (1998). Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. In D. T. Gilbert,

S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology (4th ed.). New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Fiske, S. T., & Dyer, L. M. (1985). Structure and development of social schemata:
Evidence from positive and negative transfer effects. Journal of Personality and
Fiske, S. T., &Neuberg, S. L. (1990). A continuum of impression formation,

from category-based to individuating processes: Influences of information and
motivation on attention and interpretation. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in
experimental social psychology (Vol. 23 (pp. 1-74). New York: Academic Press.
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social Cognition (2nd ed.). New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Hamilton, D. L. (1981). Stereotyping and intergroup behavior: Some thoughts

on the cognitive approach. In D. L. Hamilton (Ed.), Cognitive Processes in
112
Stereotyping and Intergroup Behavior (pp. 333-353). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Social Cognition:
Behaviour- II
Heider, F. (1944). Social perception and phenomenal causality. Psychological
Review, 51, 258-374.
Jones, E. E., & Davis, K. E. (1965). From acts to dispositions. In L. Berkowitz

(Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 2). New York: Academic
Press.
Jones, E. E., & Goethals, G. R. (1971). Order Effects in Impression Formation:

Attribution Context and the Nature of the Entity. Morristown, NJ: General
Learning Press.
Jones, E. E., & Nisbett, R. (1972). The actor and observer: Divergent perceptions
of the causes of behavior. In E. E. Jones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E.
Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. W. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the Causes of
Behavior. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
Jones, E. E., &Harris, V. A. (1967). The Attribution of Attitudes. Journal of

Experimental Social Psychology. 3, 1-24.
Kelley, H. H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. In D. Levine (Ed.),

Nebraska Symposium in Motivation, 1967. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska
Press.
Kelley, H. H. (1973). The process of causal attribution. American Psychologist,

28, 107-128.
Luchins, A. S. (1957). Experimental attempts to minimize the impact of first

impressions. In C. I. Hovland (Ed.), The Order of Presentation in Persuasion.
New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Markus, H. (1977). Self-schemas and processing information about the self.

Miller, D. T., & Ross, M. (1975). Self-Serving Biases in the Attribution of

Causality: Fact or Fiction? Psychological Bulletin, 82, 213-225.
Nisbett, R. E., Caputo, C., Legant, P., &Maracek, J. (1973). Behavior as seen by
the actor and as seen by the observer. Journal of Personality and Social
Pettigrew, T. F. (1979). The ultimate attribution error: Extending Allport’s
cognitive analysis of prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 5,
461-476.
Schwarz, N., Bless, H., Strack, F.,Klumpp, G., Rittenauer-Schatka, H., & Simons,
A. (1991). Ease of retrieval as information: Another look at the availability
heuristic. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 61, 195-202.
Taylor, S. E., & Fiske, S. T. (1978). Salience, attention, and attribution: Top of
the head phenomena. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social
Psychology (Vol. 11). New York: Academic Press.
113
Social Cognition Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics
and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1131.
Weiner, B. (1986). An Attributional Theory of Motivation and Emotion. New

York: Springer Verlag.
Wilson, T. D., & Schooler, J. W. (1991). Thinking Too Much: Introspection Can
Reduce the Quality of Preferences and Decisions. Journal of Personality and
114
Social Cognition:
UNIT 7 ATTITUDE AND ATTITUDE Understanding Social
Behaviour- II
CHANGE*
Structure
7.0 Objectives
7.1 Introduction
7.2 Meaning and Definition of Attitudes
7.3 Structure of Attitudes
7.4 Types of Attitudes
7.5 Functions of Attitudes
7.6 Attitude Formation
7.6.1 Mere Exposure
7.6.2 Personal Experience
7.6.3 Classical Conditioning
7.6.4 Operant Conditioning
7.6.5 Observational Learning
7.6.6 Genetic Factors
7.7 Attitude Change
7.7.1 Balance Theory
7.7.2 Cognitive Dissonance Theory
7.7.2.1 Forced Compliance Behaviour
7.7.2.2 Decision Making and Cognitive Dissonance
7.7.2.3 Effort Justification
7.7.3 Persuasion
7.7.3.1 Dual Process Models of Persuasion
7.7.3.2 Factors Affecting Persuasion
7.7.3.3 Resistance to Persuasion
7.8 Relationship between Attitude and Behaviour
7.8.1 Attitude Specificity
7.8.2 Attitude Accessibility
7.8.3 Self Awareness
7.8.4 Attitude Certainty
7.8.5 Attitude Strenght
7.9 Stereotype, Prejudice and Discrimination
7.9.1 Stereotype
7.9.2 Prejudice
7.9.2.1 Sources of Prejudice
7.9.3 Discrimination
7.9.4 Reducing Stereotype, Prejudice and Discrimination
7.9.4.1 Social Learning Approach
7.9.4.2 Increased Intergroup Contact
7.9.4.3 Recategorisation: Developing Common Social Identity
7.9.4.4 Feeling of Guilt Originated from Prejudice
7.9.4.5 Learning to Negate Stereotypes
7.10 Social Distance
7.11 Measurement of Attitude
7.12 Let Us Sum Up
Social Cognition 7.13 Unit End Questions
7.14 Glossary
7.0 OBJECTIVES
Explain the meaning of attitude;
Describe components, types and functions of attitudes;
Elucidate the process of attitude formation; and
Discuss the process of attitude change.
7.1 INTRODUCTION
Attitude has been a core issue of study in social psychology since its inception.
Attitude is generally used to explain our feelings, thoughts and behaviours for
other people, issues, events, situations, etc. In our everyday life also, attitude has
been one of the most used word. Often we say that:
“I do/don’t like Rohan.”
“I have positive or negative feelings and ideas about dogs as a pet.”
“Anand, as a colleague, has an attitude problem.”
“I favour capital punishment for the sexual offences.”
“I favour atomic non-proliferation at the global level.”
All these statements refer to some or other aspects of attitude. In this unit we will
understand the meaning and definition of attitude. We will further explain the
components, types and functions of attitude. We will also describe the process
and theories of attitude formation and change. We will also discuss the issue
pertaining to relationship between attitude and behaviour. Lastly, we will also
understand the concept, process and relevance of persuasion.
7. 2 MEANING AND DEFINITION OF ATTITUDE

Although attitude is a common term which is very frequently used in our daily
conversations, social psychologists define attitudes in a specific way. One of the
pioneers of the field, Gordon Allport (1935) defined attitude as “mental and
neural state of readiness, organized through experience, exerting a directive or
dynamic influence upon the individual’s response to all objects and situations
with which it is related.” There have been a number of attempts to define attitude
in different expressions by different social psychologists, however the definition
given by Allport has been still regarded as a comprehensive definition of attitude.
The definition describes three different aspects of attitudes.
Firstly, Allport refers attitudes as mental and neural states of readiness. This
assumption implicitly asserts that attitudes are entirely personal affair and cannot
be observed or measured directly by other people. Only the person who holds an
attitude has access to it. Social psychological tools that claim to measure attitudes
are in fact indirect measures of attitudes.
116
Secondly, the definition states that attitudes are acquired and organized through Attitude And Attitude Change
experience. This indicates that the genesis of the attitudes we form about various
people, issues, events and situations lies in the experiences that we have in our
families, neighbourhood, peer groups, work place and larger society. However,
this assumption overemphasises the importance of social learning in attitude
formation and underestimates the role of genetic factors in this process.
Finally, the definition states that attitude exerts a directive or dynamic influence
upon the individual’s response to all objects and situations with which it is related.
Thus, attitudes are not merely feelings or beliefs that we have regarding people,
issues, events and situations but they also guide and predict our future responses
to those people, issues, events and situations.
7.3 STRUCTURE OF ATTITUDES

An attitude is comprised of three interrelated components:
Cognitive component of the attitude refers to the beliefs and thought processes
associated with the attitude object. The cognitive component of the attitude further
guides the way in which we process information regarding the attitude object. At
the initial stage of attitude formation we usually weigh the pros and cons of the
attributes of the attitude object and based on these ‘factual’ evaluations we form
either a favourable or unfavourable attitude for the object. Furthermore, once an
attitude is formed it steers the way we encode, register and utilise the information
received from the environment.
Affective component indicates that every attitude is associated with positive or
negative feelings towards the attitude object. This affective feeling further leads
to pleasant or unpleasant emotional responses to the attitude abject. Thus liking
or disliking for the attitude object originates.
Behavioural component indicates that a specific attitude toward an object leads
us to a specific behavioural tendency or readiness and thus we are inclined to
respond to the attitude object in particular manner consistent with the attitude.
Although these three components are distinct processes, they function in an
integrated and interrelated fashion to express the attitude. Since they all belong
to the same attitude, they function in a consistent manner. If a person has a negative
attitude toward polythene bags he or she will search for information supporting
his view that polythene bags are dangerous to the environment. He/she will dislike
the consumer goods that are packaged in the polythene bags. Furthermore, he/
she himself/herself will not use polythene bags. In this way the attitude structure
remains consistent. Each of these components influences the other two and
therefore, changes in one component attitude leads to the changes in other
components. This process makes the attitude itself dynamic.
7.4 TYPES OF ATTITUDES

Generally we express our attitudes as per our wish. We are aware of our attitudes
and their influences on our behaviour. Such attitudes are known as explicit
attitude. Since the explicit attitudes function on the conscious level, we are aware
of their cognitive processing and their impact on our behaviour. Explicit attitudes
are activated by control process of evaluation and execution. For example, we
may be aware of our view and feelings towards a particular brand of toothpaste
117
Social Cognition and accordingly this leads us to a specific behaviour toward that (buying or not
buying toothpaste of that brand).
However, there are many other attitudes that function at the unconscious level.
These attitudes are called as implicit attitude. Contrary to the explicit attitudes,
implicit attitudesare under control of automatically activated evaluation and are
executed in behaviour without the awareness of the person holding that attitude.
Thus, implicit attitudes automatically affect behaviours, without conscious thought
and below the level of awareness.
It is assumed that in the process of developing new attitudes people usually

erase and overwrite the old attitudes with the new ones. However, a model of
dual attitudes proposed by Wilson, Lindsey, and Schooler (2000) states that when
a new attitude is developed; it does not erase the old one. Instead, the two attitudes
coexist. The new attitude becomes the explicit attitude; whereas, the old attitudes
are still in memory and function as the implicit attitude. Petty, Tormala, Brinol,
and Jarvis (2006) demonstrated that in many situations, when the old attitude
finds a right situation or are ‘primed’ by the situation, the ‘subconscious’ level
implicit attitudes are expressed in the behaviour.
7.5 FUNCTIONS OF ATTITUDES

Attitudes are formed though learning and are retained even for a lifetime. They,
in many cases, become part of the core of our self. They serve a number of
functions for the individual (Katz, 1960).
Adaptive and Instrumental Function: Favourable attitudes are developed toward

rewarding objects and unfavourable attitudes toward objects that thwart or punish
us. In this process people learn socially acceptable views, opinions and attitudes.
Thus, after being developed, attitudes provide us a simple and efficient means of
evaluating objects. A student learns to express positive attitude toward the school
discipline when he/she is rewarded for doing so and is punished for not behaving
accordingly.
Knowledge Function: Attitudes function as simplified categories for various

social stimuli (people, events, situations, etc.) which further help us to understand
and explain the complex social world. Our attitudes about the object category
provide us with a meaning to the social world and a foundation for making
inferences about its members. Our stereotypical beliefs and strong prejudices
toward a particular racial group are example of such functions of attitudes. Such
schematic functions of attitudes further allow us to predict the behaviours of
people of these categories with less cognitive efforts.
Self-expressive Function: Attitudes are means to define, maintain and enhance

the self-worth. Many attitudes express the basic values of the attitude holder and
reinforce his or her self-image. Some attitudes represent a person’s identification
with a particular group. This function of attitudes operates at two levels. Firstly,
our core values are reflected in the attitudes we hold and we express our attitudes
in our behaviours in the social world. Furthermore, we tend to develop an attitude
consistent with our self concept.
Ego-defensive Function: The ego-defensive function of attitudes refers that we

hold attitudes that protect our self-esteem from harm or justify our acts that make
118
us feel guilty. This function involves psychoanalytic principles where people Attitude And Attitude Change
use defense mechanisms, such as, denial, repression, projection, rationalization
etc., to protect themselves from psychological harm. For example, a player may
protect his ego being heart by his defeat in an interschool badminton match by
developing negative attitude toward match referee.
7.6 ATTITUDE FORMATION

Formation of attitudes is an essential part of the process of our socialisation. We
form attitudes of various nature and valence about different entities of our social
world. These attitudes further steer our behaviour in specific way in different
social situations. Social psychologists have very intensively explored the process
by which these attitudes are formed. Central to this course of attitude formation
is the process of social learning. We learn these attitudes either through direct
experience or through by observing others’ ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ attitudes. A number
of processes by which we acquire or form our attitudes are summarised below.
7.6.1 Mere Exposure

Zajonc (1968) proposed that being merely exposed to an object, including foods,
photographs, words, advertising slogans, etc., may increase positive feelings
towards that object. In a study by Zajonc (1968), participants were repeatedly
exposed to nonsense syllables and to Chinese characters and repeated exposure
led to increase in positive evaluations of both the nonsense syllables and the
Chinese characters.
Generally, this means that familiarity, in fact, may not breed contempt. Familiar
faces, ideas and slogans become comfortable old friends. This mechanism is
explicitly evident in the advertisement slogans. Repeated exposure to these slogans
leads us to like the advertised item. This liking is further translated into buying
behaviour. However, studies have shown that the mere exposure effect is most
powerful when it occurs randomly over time and too many exposures actually
may decrease the effect (Bornstein, 1989). Bornstein (1989) further argued that
repeated exposure increases liking when the stimuli are initially neutral or positive.
Whereas, repeated exposure to initially negative stimuli may increase the negative
emotion.
7.6.2 Personal Experience

Another prominent form of acquiring attitudes is direct personal experience. One
strong direct personal experience can build a very strong attitude or can change
a strong attitude into the opposite direction. For example, atomic bombings on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II must have formed very strong
negative attitude towards atomic weapons. Attitudes acquired through direct
experience are likely to be strongly heldand to affect behaviour. People are also
more likely to search for information to support such attitudes and, therefore,
such attitudes are less susceptible to change.
7.6.3 Classical Conditioning

Most of attitudes we learn through the process of socialisation. Classical
conditioning as a basic mechanism of learning, as proposed by Pavlov (1927),
119
Social Cognition presumes that when a neutral stimulus (conditioned stimulus, CS) is repeatedly
paired with a natural stimulus (unconditioned stimulus, UCS), neutral stimulus
alone acquires the ability to elicit the response (conditioned response, CR) which
naturally occurs (unconditioned response, UCR) after natural stimulus. Pavlov
undertook an experiment that showed that dogs could learn to salivate in response
to other stimuli, such as the sound of a bell, if these stimuli were repeatedly
associated with feeding. This mechanism is overly utilised by the advertisers
and opinion building agents.
Watson, pioneer of behaviourism, demonstrated that how a negative response

(fear) could be acquired through classical conditioning. Watson and Rayner (1920)
conditioned an 11month old boy, ‘Little Albert’, to develop a fear response to a
white rat. Initially, the boy did not show any fear of the rat. In the process of
conditioning, as the boy approached the rat, the researchers made a loud
(unpleasant and aversive) sound just behind the boy’s head. After repeated pairings
of the loud sound and the presence of the rat, Little Albert acquired a conditioned
response and learned to display negative emotion (fear) to the rat alone.
Not only such negative emotions, but positive emotions and likings can also be
developed through this process. Advertisers repeatedly present their brands
associated with those celebrities who are thought to induce positive emotion
among the target audience. Assumptions of classical conditioning suggest that
this leads to liking of that brand which was initially neutral and was consistently
paired with a positive stimulus. Many researchers have further demonstrated
that attitudes can be formed through the mechanism of classical conditioning
even by the exposure to the stimuli that are below the threshold of individual’s
conscious awareness, known as subliminal conditioning (Krosnick, Betz, Jussim,
& Lynn, 1992).
7.6.4 Operant Conditioning

Principles of classical conditioning are helpful in explaining the development of
simple reflexive responses, such as reflexive salivationin dogs in response to the
stimuli associated with food or the negative emotional responses(fear) to stimuli
that have been paired with unpleasant or aversive sound. However, classical
conditioning does not account for more complex behaviours, such as attitudes.
The behavioural psychologist B. F. Skinner (1938) called these types of complex
behaviours as operant responses because they operate on the environment to
produce effects or consequences. In operant conditioning, responses are acquired
and strengthened by their consequences. In the other words, mechanism of operant
conditioning assumes that the behaviours that follow positive consequences are
strengthened and their likelihood is increased. Whereas, the behaviours that follow
negative consequences are weakened and their likelihood is decreased.
In the process of socialisation, parents give rewards to their children in the form
of verbal praise or candies when they express right views. Similarly, children
receive punishments, as well, when they show wrong attitudes. Our parents,
basic family, peers, school, workplace colleagues, etc. are those people and
institutions whose even soft rewards (praise) and punishments (scolding or
neglect) matter a lot to us. When we become members of these groups we learn
to express attitudes similar to those held by them in order to maximise our rewards
and minimise punishments from them. Most of our basic religious and political
120 attitudes are formed in this way. When we become member of a new social
network many a times our old attitudes do not correspond to the attitudes of the Attitude And Attitude Change
new group. Therefore, in order to fulfil the desire to fit in with others in the new
group and get reward for holding the same attitudes we tend to change the old
attitude and form the new attitude similar to the newly joined group (Levitan &
Visser, 2008).
7.6.5 Observational Learning

In the complex social world we often form attitudes in the absence of direct
rewards and punishments. Many times we observe our parents or peers expressing
a particular attitude toward some ethnic group, people, social issue, etc. and
acquire those attitudes by simply observing those attitudes and behaviours. This
process is called as observational learning or modelling in which we acquire
behaviours by observing or imitating others’ behaviours in a particular context
(Bandura, 1997).
The mechanism of social comparison explains the process of attitude formation

through observational learning (Festinger, 1954). In fact social realities are not
dichotomous in the way that we can say that this attitude is right, or that view is
wrong. Therefore, in order to decide that whether our attitudes are right or wrong
we compare our views and attitudes with those of others. Once we find that our
attitudes are similar to those held by others, we assume that we are holding a
right attitude. Otherwise, we tend to modify our attitude corresponding to others’.
However, we do not compare our attitudes to any group arbitrarily; rather we

compare our views only with those people we identify ourselves with. Thus,
these groups are reference groups for us and we compare our views and attitudes
only with them. This process suggests that we form our attitudes in order to fulfil
our desire to be similar to those we like and to differ from those we do not.
Having disagreement with those we like is uncomfortable and, therefore, we
tend to adhere to the attitudes of the liked or reference group to avoid this
un-comfort caused by disagreement (Turner, 1991).
7.6.6 Genetic Factors

Some of the recent studies have furthered the view that strong attitudes, likes
and dislikes, have their genesis in our genetic constitute (Tesser, 1993). Tesser
(1993) has presented some empirical evidences showing that there was more
similarity of attitudes among identical twins than those of fraternal twins. Tesser
(1993) further found that the twins reared apart and those who were reared in the
same home did not differ in their attitudes. These findings led Tesser to suggest
that certain attitudes are predisposed and rooted in our genetic makeup. He
contemplated that such predispositions originate from our inborn physical, sensory
and cognitive skills, as well as from our temperament and personality traits.

1) Principles of classical conditioning are helpful in explaining the development
of ................... responses.
2) We usually learn attitudes either through ................................... or

.....................................
121
Social Cognition 3) The attitudes that function at the unconscious level are called as ..................
4) Allport (1935) defined attitude as “.........................................................”
5) The process of acquiring attitudes by simply observing attitudes and

behaviours is called as ...............................
7.7 ATTITUDE CHANGE

In any democratic country, like India, elections are conducted to decide that
which political party will form the government for the next years. However, it
often happens that the incumbent political party looses the confidence of voters
and the other party wins the majority of voters’ opinions. Thus, attitudes once
formed can be changed also. For example, a person who has positive attitude
toward atomic weapons may begin opposing it, or vice versa. Attitude change is
a process by which valence of attitude is transformed or changed into the opposite
direction. This process is illustrated in figure given below.
Fig. 7.1: Example to show valence and attitude
Social psychologists propose two different approaches to explain this process.

Both the approaches differ in terms of source of attitude change. One approach
assumes that the genesis of the process of attitude change is internal (cognitive
consistency approach). However, the other approach emphasises on the external
sources of attitude change (persuasion).
7.7.1 Balance Theory

Fritz Heider (1946) proposed balance theory which views the situations in a
triad containing three components; P: the person, O: the other person, and X: the
attitude object. Heider hypothesises two types of relationships among elements:
sentiment and unit. Sentiment relationships are characterised by bonds based on
attitudes or evaluations, for example Rohan likes coffee; Sandhya supports moves
for cashless economy; Nitesh cheers Mumabi Indians in the IPL.Unit relationships
indicate possession, for example Ritesh works with Omkar; Gaganhas prepared
a proposal for cashless economy; Mukesh owns the Mumabi Indians in the IPL).
122 Relationships among the elements are indicated by positive (+) or negative (-)
signs. Heider proposed that individuals view such relationships either as balanced Attitude And Attitude Change
(consistent) or unbalanced (inconsistent). For example, the principle that “my
enemy’s enemy is my friend” is balanced, because there is something consistent
about liking the person who has attacked your enemy. Balance in a triad is
concluded by multiplying the signs together. If the outcome is positive, the
cognitive structure is balanced (consistent) and if the outcome is negative, it is
unbalanced (see the Fig 7.2 below).
Fig .7.2: Balance Theory
Balance theory proposes that since balanced states are favoured over unbalanced
states, people are motivated to change an unbalanced state to a balanced state.
Heider argued that by this way people restore consistency in the relationships.
Heider (1958) demonstrated this in a study where participants were exposed to
the triads showing that “Jim doesn’t like Bob, but he likes the poem that Bob
wrote”. Responding to the situation, about 80% of participants felt the requirement
of some change in the relationships. Majority of participants suggested Jim to
change the sentiment relationship with Bob. About one third participants suggested
Jim to change attitude toward the poem. About 5% suggested a change in the
unit relationship between Bob and the poem stating that the poem was actually
not written by Bob.
Though Heider’s balance theory may appear reasonable to explain the

relationships, it does not explain more complex situations. Balance theory takes
the relationship among the elements of the triad into account but it does not talk
about magnitude of these relationships. Simple disliking and enmity both have
negative sign but their magnitudes are not comparable. Balance theory explains
the situations involving only three elements, but the real social situations are far
more complex having more than three elements. Even though balance theory
has been criticised on these points, it has been applied to several areas, such as
developing friendship, conformity and reactions to criticism.
7.7.2 Cognitive Dissonance Theory

In our everyday life there are number of occasions where we show incompatible
attitudes, beliefs or behaviours. For example, many people smoke (behaviour)
even when they know that smoking can increase the risks of cancer (cognition).
123
Social Cognition This incongruity creates a psychological state of discomfort leading to probable
modification in one of the attitudes, beliefs or behaviours so that the discomfort
is reduce and balance is reinstated. Cognitive dissonance, as proposed by
Festinger’s (1957), suggests that a psychological force (an inner drive) functions
to maintain all our attitudes and beliefs in synchronisation and avoids dissonance.
Cognitive dissonance theory assumes that in our daily social life whenever we
notice incoherence among our thoughts, attitudes and actions, an automated
response of psychological distress is generated. Although the degree of dissonance
may vary according to the relevance and importance of opinions, attitudes and
actions and corresponding to the degree of incongruence between belief and
behaviour, we are strongly tend to resolve the dissonance and furthermore, the
greater the dissonance the more you will be motivated to resolve it. It is argued
that dissonance is resolved in any of three basic ways:
Change beliefs: Dissonance between actions and beliefs may very

fundamentally be resolved by changing the beliefs. However, changing belief
is unlikely if the opinion is deep-seated and central to the individual’s belief
system. Moreover, our basic beliefs and attitudes are relatively stable and
people generally hesitate in changing their basic beliefs, attitudes or opinions.
Therefore, people generally do not employ this simplest way of resolving
dissonance.
Fig .7.3: Cognitive Dissonance Theory
Change behaviour: At many occasions this dissonance may be resolved by

simply changing the behaviour in question. A person who smokes even after
knowing that smoking can cause cancer may eventually stop smoking and
thus reduce the dissonance caused by the inconsistency between belief and
behaviour.
Change perception of behaviour: We can resolve the dissonance with the

help of an even more complex mode by changing the way we perceive your
action. In the other words, we may rationalise our actions. A person who
smokes even after knowing that smoking can cause cancer may continue to
smoke with the reasoning that he smokes to avoid the stresses of daily routine
or he smokes only with his friends. In other words, people start thinking
about their action in a different manner or context so that it no longer appears
to be inconsistent with the actions.
124
The cognitive dissonance theory has been very extensively researched and applied Attitude And Attitude Change
in number of significant social behaviours; such as forced compliance behaviour,
decision making and effort justification.
7.7.2.1 Forced Compliance Behaviour

There are number of situations in our social life when we are forced (many times
under pressure of social norms, etiquettes or obligations) to behave publicly in a
way that is inconsistent with our personally or privately held belief. For example,
we are forced to praise a horrible singing of a close friend. Such forced compliance
behaviours lead to dissonance between cognition (belief) and behaviour (action).
Since the action inconsistent to the belief has already been taken, dissonance can
be reduced only by modifying the attitude.
Festinger and Carlsmith (1959) conducted an experiment to test this hypothesis.

In the experiment, after performing a presumably uninteresting task of turning
pegs in a peg board for an hour research participants were requested to report the
task as interesting to other fellow participants who were waiting for their turn.
They were paid either $20 or $1 for doing this. The researchers reported that
regardless of what amount they were paid, most of the participants told the waiting
participants that the experimental task was very interesting. Lastly, on being
asked to rate that how interesting the experiment was, the participants who were
paid $1 reported the monotonous task as more interesting than those who were
paid $20.
The results led the researchers to conclude that an incentive of $1 was sufficient
for showing behaviour inconsistent with the belief which led the participants
who were paid $1 to experience greater dissonance. Consequently, this dissonance
was resolved by modifying the belief that the tasks were interesting and enjoyable.
However, a payment of $20 provided a significant reason for believing task as
really enjoyable and therefore, no or little dissonance was created in such
participants.
7.7.2.2 Decision Making and Cognitive Dissonance

We encounter with many dilemmatic situations in which taking a decision may
induce dissonance. For example, getting married or going for a career is such a
great dilemmatic situation in which decision making becomes so difficult for a
girl reared in a typical Indian social setup. In such dilemmatic situations both the
alternatives have their own advantages and disadvantages and going along one
alternative closes the possibility of availing the advantages of the alternative
that was rejected. Either way, regardless of which of the two alternatives is
selected, advantages of the rejected alternative arouse dissonance.
Brehm (1956), based on his study, proposed that dissonance in such conditions
can be reduced if the person in dissonance enhances the attractiveness of the
alternative he or she has chosen and simultaneously by attaching less attraction
or advantages to the rejected option. Brehm (1956) referred it as ‘spreading apart
the alternatives’.
7.7.2.3 Effort Justification

It seems logical to construe that people attach more value to those goals that are
achieved after great efforts. Aronson and Mills (1959) argued that when we 125
Social Cognition achieve a trivial goal even after investing substantial effort it produces
considerable dissonance. Such dissonance may be reduced by assuming that the
effort or time invested in achieving the goal was not that big. However, such
assumption is unrealistic and hence difficult to reduce dissonance by this way.
Therefore, people tend to justify their efforts by appraising the achieved goal in
a more positive way and by attaching more subjective value to those goals,
consequently leading to the reduced dissonance.
7.7.3 Persuasion
Whenever we switch on our television sets we are exposed to numerous
advertisements that suggest buying different kinds of products, ranging from
apparels to sun glasses, chocolates to toothpastes, tour packages to electronic
gadgets, etc. There are ample research evidences indicating substantial influence
of such advertisements on our buying behaviour. These advertisements actually
change our attitudes towards certain products and brands. Persuasion refers to
changing attitudes by such external communication either in person or through
mass media, either in text or through multi media.
7.7.3.1 Dual Process Models of Persuasion

Some of the persuasive messages and persuaders are more effective than others.
Similarly, some people are more readily persuaded than others. Two seemingly
different models, the elaboration-likelihood model (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986)
and the heuristic-systematic model (Chaiken, 1980), attempt to explain this
process. Despite of minute dissimilarities, both models propose that an effective
persuasive communication follows a dual process and takes the message through
two different routes. Each of these processes differs from the other in terms of
amount of cognitive effort or elaboration they require (central/systematic route
and peripheral/heuristic route.
The persuasive communication takes the central/systematic route, high elaboration

conditions, when the target person is willing and has high processing capacity to
process the content of the message. In contrast, when the target person is less
motivated and has low processing capacity to process the content of the message
the peripheral/heuristic routeis taken. In such low elaboration conditions, the
cues irrelevant to the content or quality of the message are paid greater attention
(refer the figure given below). Although both routes are capable of changing
attitudes, attitudes resulting from the peripheral route are feeble, less resistant to
counter persuasion and weaker in predictingthe behaviour than those resulting
from central route attitudes (Petty, Haugtvedt, & Smith, 1995).
126 Fig .7.4: Dual Process Models of Persuasion

When a persuasive message is processed a number of factors determine the route Attitude And Attitude Change
it will take. When the persuader speaks very fast, deep and systematic processing
of the message becomes difficult and therefore, peripheral route is preferred
over the central route. Mood of the target of the message also play important role
in deciding that which of the two routes is taken. An unhappy target, negative
mood, generally scans his/her environment for threats and problems leading to
very systematically process the information and therefore, in such conditions
central route is preferred. In contrast, happy people use the peripheral route and
therefore they are more susceptible to weak cues like source attractiveness.
Furthermore, when the attitude is more important to the target and has direct
impact on him/her, the message is processed systematically through the central
route. Whereas, persuasive attempts pertaining to the less important attitudes are
processed through peripheral route. Some individual qualities, such as need for
cognition, need for closure, need to evaluate and self-monitoring also determine
the route of persuasive message. People high on these dimensions prefer to process
persuasive messages via central route.
At the outset, if the persuasive communication takes the central route the
effectiveness of the persuasive attempt is majorly affected by the strength and
quality of the argument furthered by the persuader. If content of the persuasive
argument is strong and rich in quality the persuasive attempt is successful.
However, in case of peripheral route several properties of the source of the
message become critical to its effectiveness. Primarily, persuasive attempt is
successful when the source of the message is physically attractive, similar(in
terms of shared attitudes, appearance, or social categories) to the audience and
has credibility in the issues pertaining to the particular attitude.
7.7.3.2 Factors Affecting Persuasion

A persuasive process has four different components: the source, the message,
the channel and the audience. Various properties of these components determine
whether the persuasive attempt will be successful or not.
The Source
The foremost important factor in effectiveness of persuasion is the communicator.
Often we see that similar arguments presented by different people have varying
impacts on the audience. Credible sources are more persuasive than those who
are low on the dimension of credibility. Credibility of the source increases with
our perception of the communicator as an expert of the field and his or her
trustworthiness. Hovland and Weiss (1951) initially took ratings of attitudes of
research participants towards nuclear submarines. One week later all the research
participants were asked to read an identical message regarding nuclear submarines.
However, one group of participants were told that the source of the message was
the famous scientist Robert J. Oppenheimer, presumably a high credible source.
On the other hand, remaining participants were told that the source of the message
was Pravda, the newspaper of the Communist Party of the then Soviet Union.
Researchers arguably presumed that this source would be a low credibility source
for the participants belonging to the United States. Immediately after reading the
message ratings of attitudes of research participants towards nuclear submarines
was taken again. Results indicated greater attitude change in those receiving
message from a presumably credible source than those who received message
from a low credible source.
127
Social Cognition Persuaders who are attractive and high on likeability are more successful in
changing the attitudes of their audience. The reason behind hiring attractive
models to appear in advertisements and to promote sell is the basic principle that
we like those attractive models and therefore, agree to buy the product. Some
researchers have argued that people speaking rapidly persuade more effectively
than those who speak slowly. Presumably, people speaking rapidly present an
impression that they have expertise and know everything of what they are talking
about (Miller, Maruyama, Beaber & Valone, 1976).
The Message
Emotion embedded in the content of the message is also an important factor in
determining the effectiveness of persuasion. Good feelings either induced by
the message or otherwise present in the environment, when persuasion is
attempted, enhance persuasion. Dabbs and Janis (1965) reported that students
participating in the experiment were more influenced by the persuasion when
they were enjoying peanuts and Pepsi while reading the message. In fact, when
the audience is in positive mood the message is processed through the peripheral
route and therefore, the content of the message is ignored resulting into more
impulsive decisions.
Messages suggesting to give up smoking, to avoid unsafe sexual behaviours, to

not drink and drive, etc. generally use fear arousing communication. These
messages very vividly explain the negative consequences of getting involved in
these activities. Janis and Feshbach (1953) reported that the message is most
persuasive when it induces mild fear in the audience. They argued that very high
fear inducing messages legitimately threatens the audience which leads to strong
counter arguments and denial in the audience.
Some messages are designed in such a way that they present opposing arguments.
Contrarily, other messages are designed in such a way that they present only one
sided argument. Studies indicate that two sided messages are more effective in
persuasion as compared to one sided messages. Walster and Festinger (1962)
argued that the two sided messages do not appear to be deliberately framed to
change the attitude and therefore, such persuasive attempts face least resistance
from the audience. On the other hand, one sided messages seem to be deliberately
framed to change the attitude and therefore, audience to such messages show
enhanced resistance leading to less effective persuasion.
The Channel
Some persuasive attempts merely present the verbal messages to the audience.
On the other hand, persuasive messages may also be presented to the audience in
an interactive and experiential manner. Studies indicate that although the mere
reception of the message may lead to substantial degree of persuasion, the extent
of persuasion decreases as the significance and relevance of the issue increases.
When the issue is more relevant and important to the audience interactive and
experiential way of persuasion is more successful.
Several studies have indicated that messages conveyed to the audience

personally are more successful in persuasion than those given through media.
In a study,Eldersveld and Dodge (1954) demonstrated the effectiveness of personal
face-to-face persuasion as compared to other methods in political voting
behaviour. The researchers divided the voters into three groups. The first group
128
was exposed only to the mass media (a control group). 19 per centvoters of the Attitude And Attitude Change
group voted for the change. The second group received four personal mails
suggesting voting for change. 45 per cent of the voters of this voted for change.
Voters of the third group were visited personally and were exposed to a direct
face-to-face appeal to vote for change. Results indicated that 75 per cent voters
of the third group voted for the change.
The Audience
People vary in their susceptibility to persuasion. Some people are easy to persuade,
while others show great resistance to the persuasion efforts. Janis (1954) has
argued that the people who have low self esteem are more easily persuaded than
those having high self esteem. Studies have shown that when audience are
obstructed from paying attention to the message they become more susceptible
to persuasion (Allyn & Festinger, 1961). Furthermore, people in formational
age, adolescents and early adults, are more susceptible to persuasion as compared
to the older audience (Krosnick & Alwin, 1989).
7.7.3.3 Resistance to Persuasion

Although at many occasions persuasion becomes successful in changing our
attitudes, it is not always the case. Many people are indeed very difficult audience
and they very strongly resist the attempts of persuasion. Numbers of factors
determine the extent to which an audience can resist an effort of persuasion.
Reactance
All of us have a strong need of personal freedom to take a position or to have a
view on various issues. When a skilled persuader exerts pressure on us to change
our views or attitudes it threatens our freedom leading to increased level of
annoyance. Consequently, we not only resist the attempts of persuasion many
times we form a strong attitude opposite to the direction desired by the persuader
(Brehm, 1966). When an individual views a persuasive attempt as a direct threat
to his or her image as an independent person, this tendency of reactance becomes
stronger and the individual is strongly motivated to protect his or her attitude
from persuasion. Studies have indicated that in situations when reactance is
activated moderate or weak arguments are more successful in persuasion as
compared to the stronger ones.
Forewarning
There are number of situations where before being exposed to the persuasive
message we know in advance that the message has been intentionally designed
to change our attitude. For example, whenever we switch on our television sets
we know that the advertisements aired during the commercial breaks are
intentionally designed to enhance the possibility of buying the product by the
viewers. Similarly, when we listen to the speakers in a political campaign we
know that the speakers would argue for voting for particular political party. Studies
have been reported indicating that when the audience knows that a message is
intentionally designed to change the attitudes, known as forewarning, the
individual is less susceptible to the persuasive message (Johnson, 1994). When
we know about the intention of the message in advance we have enough time to
formulate arguments to guard our attitude from the persuasive message. Therefore,
in such situations we are cognitively better armed to protect our views.
129
Social Cognition Selective Exposure
Once attitudes are formed they become part of our self and therefore, we have a
strong tendency to protect them. We generally attend the information that are
consistent to our existing attitudes and purposefully avoid the information that
challenges our views. While watching television we change the channel during
commercial breaks to avoid any impact of persuasive attempts. Such selective
exposure and avoiding the information contradictory to our views ensure that
our attitudes are intact and persist for a longer time.
Counterarguments
Studies suggest that when we actively argue against the persuasive message
inconsistent to our attitude our susceptibility to the persuasion is weakened (Eagly,
Chen, Chaiken, & Shaw-Barnes, 1999). This is particularly true for the attitudes
which were initially formed on the basis of strong reasoning and extensive
arguments. When we argue against the message contrary to our attitude it further
provides reasons for holding the attitudes resulting into strengthening of the
existing attitude.

1) Emotion embedded in the content of the message is not an important factor
in determining the effectiveness of persuasion. ( )
2) If content of the persuasive argument is strong and rich in quality, then the
persuasive attemptis successful. ( )
3) Chaiken proposed balance theory in 1946. ( )
4) Dissonance between actions and beliefs may very fundamentally be resolved

by changing the beliefs. ( )
5) Attitude change is a process by which valence of attitude is kept constant in

the same direction. ( )
7.8 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ATTITUDE AND

BEHAVIOUR
Do attitudes really guide our behaviour? This has been a long debated issue for
social psychologists. In one of the classic study, LaPiere (1934) visited to almost
250 hotels and restaurants of different places of the United States with a Chinese
couple to see whether the couple was offered the service or not. After travelling
for almost 2 years, he saw that the couple was denied for service by only one
hotel and restaurant. However, in reply to a mailed questionnaire 92 per cent of
the hotels and restaurants said that they would not offer service to a Chinese
couple. This indicated that their behaviour, offering service to the Chinese couple,
was inconsistent with their attitude expressed in reply to the questionnaire.
Although surprising, the findings of LaPiere’s study suggested that attitudes do
not always predict behaviour. Rather, there are some factors that affect the
relationship between attitude and behaviour.
130
7.8.1 Attitude Specificity Attitude And Attitude Change
In many cases, our general attitudes fail to predict our specific behaviours. For
example, we might, in general, like psychology as a discipline. However, when
it comes to social psychology, one of its specific branches, we may not like it.
Similarly, in LaPiere’s study the attitude reported in the questionnaire was
regarding Chinese couple in general; however, the behaviour observed was toward
a specific Chinese couple. Furthermore, despite of being prejudiced and having
negative attitude toward a particular community in general, one may have
friendship with one or more specific members of that community.
7.8.2 Attitude Accessibility

Extending availability heuristic to the issue of behaviour-attitude link, it is
suggested that the attitude which is more easily accessible more strongly
influences the person’s behaviour (Fazio, 1995). The concept of automatic
behaviour argues that the attitudes which are more readily available activate the
behaviour consistent with the attitude by priming.
7.8.3 Self Awareness

People may hold two different types of self awareness: private self awareness
and public self awareness (Echabe & Garate, 1994). It is suggested that people
holding private self awareness act consistent with their own attitude; whereas,
people holding public self awareness behave according to the attitude held by
the majority of people present in social setting. In the other words, people with
public self awareness act under majority pressure, an instance of conformity. For
example, a person with private self awareness with positive attitude toward
Swachchh Bharat Abhiyan will behave according to his or her attitude and
consequently would not litter at public places. However, when the person is with
his or her friends and the public self awareness of the person is activated, it is
more likely that the person would behave consistent with the attitude of majority
of the group.
7.8.4 Attitude Certainty

Attitude certainty includes two components: attitude clarity, the extent to which
person is clear about his or her attitude and attitude correctness, the extent to
which person thinks that his or her attitude is correct, valid and appropriate to
hold. Petrocelli, Tormala and Rucker (2007) have reported that the attitude high
on the dimension of certainty is more likely to influence the individual’s behaviour
and furthermore, less likely to be affected or changed by persuasive messages.
7.8.5 Attitude Strength

Link between attitude and behaviour is stronger with stronger attitudes as
compared to the weaker attitudes. Strength of a particular attitude is determined
by three different factors that further affect the link between attitude and
behaviour: processing of information regarding the attitude object, personal
involvement or relevance with the issue pertaining to the attitude and direct
experience. Liberman and Chaiken (1996) have reported that when information
pertaining to the attitude is processed more often, it results into enhanced attitude
strength and stronger link between attitude and behaviour. Similarly, attitudes
131
Social Cognition that are more relevant and important to the person and serve some purpose to the
person’s life are stronger and more capable of predicting behaviour. Finally, the
attitudes that are formed through direct experience become stronger and predict
behaviour with greater consistency.
7.9 STEREOTYPE, PREJUDICE AND

DISCRIMINATION
In our everyday social interactions, we often have rigid opinions regarding
particular social groups and their members. We also have some negative feelings
for them and treat them in a way different from how we treat our own group and
its members. In the other words, we have a particular attitude towards these
social groups and this particular attitude is expressed in our opinion, feelings
and behaviour toward the social group and its members. Almost every region of
the world has been facing such problems in the form of ethnic and racial conflicts,
gender biases, political/ideological rivalries, etc. Social psychologists have
construed such issues as a particular form of attitude and have termed them as
stereotype, prejudice and discrimination.
Although the words stereotype, prejudice and discrimination are used in similar
ways in general conversations, they are theoretically explained in different ways
by social psychologists. Social psychologists argue that stereotype, prejudice
and discrimination represent three different components of attitude.
7.9.1 Stereotype
Stereotypes are beliefs that some traits and characteristics are shared by the
members of a particular social group. Stereotypes function as cognitive framework
and influence the way in which information relevant to the stereotype is processed.
Gender stereotype is one of the most prevalent stereotypes across societies. Based
on compilation of findings of various studies on gender stereotype, it is concluded
that females are stereotypically believed as ‘warmand dependent’, whereas; males
are perceived as ‘competent and independent’. Stereotypically associated feminine
traits are warm, emotionally sensitive, kind, submissive, oriented to aesthetics,
mild, etc. On the other hand, traits like competent, emotionally stable, confident,
tough, independent, non-conformist, leader, aggressive, etc. are stereotypically
believed as traits possessed by males. Das (2011) has reported that Indian
television advertisements have portrayed women mostly as young characters, in
relationship or family roles, less frequently as prominent characters, more
frequently in advertisements related to female oriented or beauty products, mostly
in home settings and not often as professionals.
Similar to the schemas, stereotypes function as cognitive structures that help us

in classifying, understanding and retrieving social information. Thus, we classify
people based on the group they belong to and in understanding and interpreting
their behaviour we utilise the cluster of traits that we stereotypically believe
associated with the group. This process significantly minimises our cognitive
efforts in social interactions and help us in predicting behaviours of people based
on their groups. If we are asked to describe social, cultural, ethnic groups, such
as Indians, Pakistanis, Asians, Europeans, Americans, Africans, etc., in terms of
the traits that characterise them; most of us would come up with lists of traits
even for those groups with whom we have very little interaction or even no
132
interaction at all. These traits are actually stored in the stereotype associated Attitude And Attitude Change
with the particular group and are retrieved when the stereotype is activated. Since
stereotypes function as schemas, they facilitate processing of information
consistent with them. In the other words, information consistent with the
stereotype is encoded, stored and retrieved better than the information that are
unrelated to the stereotype which makes the stereotypes difficult to change.
7.9.2 Prejudice
Prejudice is defined as a feeling, primarily negative, toward a person exclusively
on the basis that the person is member of a particular social group. Thus, a person
prejudiced toward a particular social group expresses negative emotions for the
members of that particular group. Gordon Allport (1954) has referred prejudice
as “an antipathy based upon a faulty and inflexible generalization”. This indicates
that although prejudice is expressed toward a particular individual, the negative
emotions are actually targeted to the whole group. Similar to stereotypes/schemas,
prejudice too influences the way by which prejudiced person processes
information related to the particular social group and information consistent with
the prejudice is more readily attended, encoded and retrieved than the information
which is inconsistent.
Some studies have also reported that prejudiced people differentiate social groups
based on a belief that the groups have some common essence among all the
group members which may be biologically influenced (Yzerbyt, Corneille, &
Estrada, 2001). Prejudice is further referred to as an implicit or covert association
between a person’s being member of a particular social group and the evaluative
emotional response a prejudiced person expresses toward that person. This
suggests that in-group and out-group categorisation of our social world
automatically activates emotional evaluation of the people belonging to the social
groups and results into our corresponding responses toward them without being
consciously aware of it.
7.9.2.1 Sources of Prejudice

Prejudice has been one of the major causes of various types of armed conflicts
among different ethnic, racial, political and ideological groups in the world.
Therefore, various sources of prejudice, as studied and reported by social
psychologists, have been discussed below.
Threat to Self Esteem

People tend to evaluate their own group in a way more positive than the other
groups (Tajfel & Turner, 1986). When people perceive a threat to their group’s
image, they respond by a counter attack to the opposite group. This further leads
to more strong identification with the in-group. Thus, it suggests that image of
our own group is strengthened when we evaluate the other group in a negative,
prejudiced, way. However, such a differential evaluation of in-group and out-
group is more evident when the people see a threat to their own group from the
out-group. For example, in an era of global terrorism a particular social group
more strongly identifies with the in-group when it faces a terrorist attack.
Simultaneously, members of the affected social group negatively evaluate the
group they think responsible for the terrorist activity and consequently, they
133
Social Cognition develop prejudice toward members of that social group. Tamborini et al. (2017)
have reported that the research participants who were more exposed to the news
coverage of the 2015 Paris terrorist attacks showed increased prejudice and
reduced pro-social intentions toward the members of the social group they thought
responsible for the incidence.
Competition for Resources

In realistic physical world, the commodities that are valued most are insufficient.
Certainly, fertile lands, lucrative jobs, preferred places, etc. are limited on the
earth and once a particular social group gets them, the other group is naturally
deprived of those resources. The situation is referred to as realistic conflict theory
(Bobo, 1983) which suggests that the social groups engaged in conflict for various
resources view each other in extremely negative manner, often as enemies. Thus,
a conflict for resources turns into a prejudice.
Sherif, Harvey, White, Hood, and Sherif (1961) very efficiently demonstrated
that how competition for resources can induce and intensify conflict between the
groups. The researchers conducted an innovative field experiment commonly
called as the Robbers Cave Experiment, a classic study in the field of social
psychology. Two groups of boys (12 boys randomly assigned to each group) of
similar socio-economic background were taken for a summer camp to a place
near rural Oklahoma. At the camp location, both groups kept disconnected from
each other. Boys of both the groups extensively enjoyed various activities, such
as hiking, swimming, etc. and the members of both the groups very quickly
developed in-group affiliation and attachment. They assigned names for their
respective groups; Rattlers and Eagles, and also made their flags and T-shirts
along with their group symbols stencilled on them. It further enhanced in-group
affiliation and identification.
In the second phase of the study, the two groups were introduced to each other
and were engaged in a series of inter-group competitions for which various
trophies and prizes were on stake. This initiated very intense competition between
the two groups which very soon resulted into positive evaluation of in-group and
negative evaluation of out-group, very heated verbal conflicts, attack on each
other’s camps, etc.; and finally into development of strong prejudices toward
each other.
Social Categorisation and Prejudice

Tajfel, Billig, Bundy, and Flament (1971) studied prejudice with the assumption
that conflicts at the individual level are not the essential components for the
origin of prejudice. Tajfel argued that we categorise our social world into two
categories; that is “us” (our in-groups) and “them”(out-groups). We are
emotionally attached with the “us” category and it becomes a part of our social
identity. Consequently, we evaluate and perceive the “us” category in a more
positive way, whereas the “them” part of the social world is evaluated and
perceived in a negative way. In a study, Tajfel, Billig, Bundy, and Flament (1971)
randomly divided his participants into two halves and made them to “form” two
groups on very unimportant bases. Although there was nothing common among
the members in the in-groups, they allocated more points to the in-group members
as compared to the members of the out-groups. Such discriminatory evaluations
of social categories of “us” and “them” are believed to originate prejudice toward
the other group.
134
7.9.3 Discrimination Attitude And Attitude Change
When prejudice is expressed in overt behaviour, it is termed as discrimination.

Discrimination is expressed in the form of discriminatory treatments, verbal
aggression, violent behaviours, etc. by the members of prejudiced group toward
the members of the target group. There have been several notable instances of
discrimination based on racial, ethnic and gender biases in the history of mankind.
For example, South Africa has witnessed a long history of apartheid where Native
Blacks, Asian Africans and other coloured racial communities were legally denied
from many basic facilities in the society. At its extreme level, the target racial
communities were removed from their homes and were compelled to reside in
designated confined places. In recent past, there have been several cases of violent
crimes against Indian students in Australia. As per an investigation by the Indian
Government, 23 out of 152 such cases reported in media in 2009 had their roots
in racial discrimination (Indian Express, 25 February 2010). Of late, with a
revolution in information technology there has been a surge in derogatory
messages and posts against various social, racial and ethnic groups on social
networking platforms, such as Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp, etc.
However, similar to the attitudes prejudices are also not always overtly expressed
in behaviours. Modern legal provisions, influences of democratic social norms,
fear of retaliatory consequences, etc. prevent people to be overtly engaged in
discriminatory behaviours towards the target social groups. Therefore, prejudices
are expressed more often in disguised forms so that our prejudices are hidden
and not known to others. Some of such disguised forms of discrimination are
discussed below.
Reluctance to help: In the most subtle form of discrimination, members of

prejudiced group are unwilling to help the members of target group in any ways
which could improve their status in the society. For example, people of target
group are denied for house on rent, flexible working hours or work from home
facilities at workplace, etc.
Tokenism: Tokenism is a discriminatory behaviour in which people of the target

society are offered with very insignificant and unimportant help from the
prejudiced group. For example, few people of target group are offered for
employment by an organisation in order to project its image in such a way that
the organisation’s HR functions without any prejudice.
Reverse discrimination: In a more extreme form of tokenism, prejudiced people

may offer help to the people of the target group, even out of the way. Although
reverse discrimination may appear positive, it may have some harmful
consequences in the long run; and also it fails to reduce the long held prejudices.
7.9.4 Reducing Stereotype, Prejudice and Discrimination

Stereotypes, prejudices and discriminatory behaviours of people have significantly
damaged the social fabric of almost every part of the world. However, many
studies of social psychology have suggested many techniques to reduce
stereotypes, prejudices and discrimination.
7.9.4.1 Social Learning Approach

135
Social Cognition Social learning approach argues that stereotypes, prejudices and discrimination
are learned by children in very young age by observing similar behaviours by
the parents and other significant people. Subsequently, their behaviours expressing
such negative attitudes are reinforced and strengthened by appreciating them.
Furthermore, such negative attitudes are also formed by our interactions with
the members of particular out-groups. Some studies have also reported that
adopting these racial attitudes by the children corresponds to the extent they
identify with their parents (Sinclair, Dunn, &Lowery, 2005). Arguably, the social
learning creates a chain by which prejudices are transferred from one generation
to the other. If parents refrain from reinforcing their children for expressing
illogical negative attitudes toward particular social groups and encourage them
to develop and hold logical and socially healthy attitudes, this chain can be broken
and prejudices can be reduced.
7.9.4.2 Increased Intergroup Contact

Prejudices are believed to develop on the basis of hearsay and rumour and even
without any direct experience with the group. In almost every part of the world,
groups involved in conflicts originated from stereotypes and prejudices live in
separated areas restricting any direct interaction between the members of the
groups. However, without any direct interaction people holding stereotypes and
prejudices assume that all members of the particular group possess similar set of
attributes (generally negative) and are strongly against out-groups. However,
increasing intergroup contact, often referred to as contact hypothesis, may
facilitate perception of similarities between the members of the two groups.
Furthermore, people would also notice that there is considerable intra-group
heterogeneity and the members of out-group differ in their attributes (Pettigrew,
1997).
7.9.4.3 Recategorisation: Developing Common Social Identity

In the earlier sections, we have seen that people organise their social surroundings
in in-groups and out-groups and evaluate members of in-groups in positive way,
whereas people of out-group are evaluated in negative way. Let us take the
example of IPL games in which cricket teams of different cities compete against
one another. Here, we support the team of our city since we see our city as in-
group and other cities as out-groups. But when our national team participates in
the World Cup and competes against the teams of other countries, our social
boundaries are recreated by integrating whole nation as the in-group, leading to
develop a common social identity.
This common in-group identity model argues that when people from different
groups recreate their social boundaries to form a common social identity, their
earlier negative attitudes toward each other turn into positiveones.Sherif et al.
(1961) suggested the waysby which the social boundary can be recreated. In the
final phase of the Robber’s Cave study, researchers obstructed the water supply
which was common for both the groups and could be restored only with
cooperative efforts of both the groups. This led the boys of the two groups to
collaborate to achieve the common, superordinate goal. Researchers reported
that the conflict between the two groups further reduced and members of both
the groups started cooperating in other activities as well, resulting into
development of friendships among boys across the groups.
136
7.9.4.4 Feeling of Guilt Originated from Prejudice Attitude And Attitude Change
Although people consciously behave consistent with their stereotypes and

prejudices, they may subconsciously have feeling of guilt for behaving in a way
that does not stand against real life experiences and logical thought process.
Branscombe (2004) has further argued that people can also feel collective guilt
for such stereotypes, prejudices and discriminatory behaviours of other members
of their in-group, even for the behaviours in the history by members of the past
generations of their in-group. Based on a series of studies, Powell, Branscombe,
and Schmitt (2005) suggested that when people reflect on the stereotypes,
prejudices and discriminatory behaviours of their own and of the generations of
their in-group, it induces a feeling of collective guilt and subsequently reduces
racist attitudes and behaviours.
7.9.4.5 Learning to Negate Stereotypes

The underlying process in the origin of stereotypes, prejudices and discrimination
is evaluating people on the basis of the group they belong to. Assuming out-
group homogeneity, we tend to believe that certain traits and characteristics are
shared by all the members of a particular social group. Once such cognitive
structures are formed, they are activated automatically on exposure to the members
of these groups which facilitates sustenance of prejudices. However, Kawakami,
Dovidio, Moll, Hermsen, and Russn (2000) demonstrated that by encouraging
people to consciously negate the stereotypes we can stop their automatic activation
leading to reduced prejudice and discrimination.
7.10 SOCIAL DISTANCE

Social Distance refers to the space or distance between two people or between
members belonging to a group. It basically refers to the extent to which members
of a group or society or people are excluded to participate in activities of each
other’s life. Such distance may be in context of social class, gender or ethnicity.
It is a general tendency that members of the same group mix more easily than the
members of the different group. Bogardus has significantly contributed a scale
to measure the social distance which is known as Bogardus social distance scale.
The distance among individuals may be in terms of emotions, habitual, cultural,
interactional or on basis of norms.
7.11 MEASUREMENT OF ATTITUDE

Several ways of measuring attitudes have been developed. We will be discussing
about Thurston, Likert and Guttman Scale:
Thurstone Scale: The scale was developed by Thurstone in order to measure

attitude in the 20th century. It consists of a series of dichotomous questions
(questions having two fixed options as responses). The participant has to
choose any one of the given response for each statement/ questions. Scores
are assigned to the responses of the statement and his/ her attitude score is
the average of all the scale values of the items with which he/she agrees. It
formally measures sentiments and opinions to gauge an individual’s attitude.
Likert scale: It is one of the psychometric rating scales developed by Renesis

137
Social Cognition Likert. In this scale, there are a series of statements with definite options
(e.g. five options are there in a five point Likert type scale) and the
participants specify their level of agreement or disagreement on a symmetric
agree-disagree scale. In a five point Likert type rating scale the options may
vary from- strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree and
strongly disagree and these options are given weights of 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 or
even reverse, respectively. The total score of an individual is the sum total
of the weights for each response he makes/she to the statements.
Guttman’s Scale: This scale was developed by Louis Guttman to measure

the attitude of individuals. It is aunidimensional, ordinal scale. Responses
to every item, are constant with his/her overall position on the attitude
dimension. If a participant gives a positive response to any question in the
series, then this suggests that he/she will give positive responses to all
preceding questions in this list.
7.12 LET US SUM UP

It can therefore be concluded from the above discussion that, attitude is generally
used to explain our feelings, thoughts and behaviours for other people, issues,
events and situations in our social environment. Attitudes that operate on conscious
level are known as explicit attitude, we are aware of their cognitive processing
and their impact on our behaviour. On the other hand, implicit attitudes operate
at unconscious level under control of automatically activated evaluation and are
executed in behaviour without conscious awareness of the person holding that
attitude. People form attitudes either through direct experience or by observing
others’ attitudes. Some of the studies have considered genetic influence also in
attitude formation. Attitudes once formed can be changed also. Attitude change
is a process by which valence of attitude is transformed or changed into the
opposite direction. Various theories and approaches have attempted to explain
the process of attitude change; such as balance theory, cognitive dissonance theory
and persuasion.

1) Define attitudes and explain its structure. Describe the types of attitude and
also discuss the functions it serves for human being.
2) Elucidate various processes of attitude formation.
3) What is attitude change? Discuss balance theory of attitude change.
4) Critically evaluate cognitive dissonance theory and discuss its significance

in different social behaviours.
5) Explain the process of persuasion. Discuss the factors affecting persuasion

and also explicate the situations in which persuasive attempts are resisted.
138
Attitude And Attitude Change
7.14 GLOSSARY
Attitude: Feelings, thoughts and behaviours for other people, issues, events,
situations, etc.
Implicit attitudes: Operateat conscious level and the person holding the attitude
is aware of its cognitive processing and impact on behaviour.
Implicit attitudes: Operate at unconscious level under control of automatically

activated evaluation and are executed in behaviour without awareness.
Knowledge function: Refers to a function of attitudes to categorise various social

stimuli (people, events, situations, etc.) to understand and explain the complex
social world.
Self-expressive function: Refers to attitude’s function to define, maintain and

enhance the self-worth.
Ego-defensive function: We hold attitudes that protect our self-esteem from

harm or justify our acts that make us feel guilty.
Classical Conditioning: A learning theory proposing that a neutral stimulus

(conditioned stimulus, CS) paired with a natural stimulus (unconditioned stimulus,
UCS), neutral stimulus alone acquires the ability to elicit the response (conditioned
response, CR) which naturally occurs (unconditioned response, UCR) after natural
stimulus.
Operant conditioning: A mechanism of learning assuming that the behaviours

that follow positive consequences are strengthened and their likelihood is
increased. Whereas, the behaviours that follow negative consequences weakened
and their likelihood is decreased.
Observational learning: A mechanism of learning in which we acquire

behaviours by observing or imitating others’ behaviours in a particular context.
Attitude change: A process by which the valence of attitude is transformed or

changed into the opposite direction.
Balance theory: Views the situations in a triad containing three components;

the person, the other person and the attitude object and proposes that since
balanced states among these components are favoured over unbalanced states,
people are motivated to change an unbalanced state to a balanced state.
Cognitive dissonance: Incompatible attitudes, beliefs or behaviours create a

psychological state of discomfort leading to modification in one of the attitudes,
beliefs or behaviours so that the discomfort is reduce and balance is reinstated.
Forced compliance behaviour: Situations in our social life when we are forced
(many times under pressure of social norms, etiquettes or obligations) to behave
publicly in a way that is inconsistent with our belief that we personally or privately
have.
139
Social Cognition Effort justification: Tendency to justify efforts by appraising the achieved goal
in a more positive way and by attaching more subjective value to those goals,
consequently leading to the reduced dissonance.
Persuasion: Refers to the process of changing attitudes by external

communication either in person or through mass media, either in text or through
multi media.
Elaboration-likelihood model: When the target person is willing and has high
processing capacity to process the content of the message, the persuasive
communication takes the central/systematic route and the cues relevant to the
content or quality of the message are paid greater attention.
Heuristic-systematic model: When the target person is less motivated and has
low processing capacity to process the content of the persuasive communication
takes the peripheral/heuristic route and the cues irrelevant to the content or quality
of the message are paid greater attention.
Resistance to persuasion: A situation when the audience strongly resist the

attempts of persuasion.
Reactance: A feeling of direct threat to one’s image as an independent person

leading the individual to strongly protect his or her attitude from persuasion.
Forewarning: A situation when people are aware about the intention of the
message in advance provides enough time to formulate arguments to guard our
attitude from the persuasive message.
Selective exposure: Tendency to avoid information contradictory to one’s views

ensuring that the attitudes are intact and persist for a longer time.
Counterarguments: Actively arguing against the persuasive message

inconsistent to one’s attitude results into weakening of susceptibility to the
persuasion and strengthening of the existing attitude.
Attitude-behaviour link: Refers the extent to which a person’s attitude predicts

his or her behaviour.
Attitude accessibility: The attitudes that are more easily accessible; more strongly
influence the person’s behaviour.
Stereotype: Belief that some traits and characteristics are shared by almost all
the members of a particular social group.
Prejudice: Defined as a feeling, primarily negative, toward a person exclusively

on the basis that the person is member of a particular social group.
Realistic conflict theory: The theory suggesting that the social groups engaged
in conflict for various resources view each other in extremely negative manner,
often as enemies.
Social categorisation: Refers to the tendency to categorise the social world into
two categories; “us” (in-groups) and “them”(out-groups).
Discrimination: An overt expression of prejudice in behaviour, often in the form

140
of discriminatory treatments, verbal aggression, violent behaviours, etc. by the Attitude And Attitude Change
members of prejudiced group toward the members of the target group.
Reluctance to help: A subtle form of discrimination, members of prejudiced

group are unwilling to help the members of target group in any ways which
could improve their status in the society.
Tokenism: A discriminatory behaviour in which people of the target society are

offered with very insignificant and unimportant help from the prejudiced group.
Reverse discrimination: An extreme form of tokenism, prejudiced people may

offer help to the people of the target group, even out of the way.
Common in-group identity model: Argument that when people from different
groups recreate their social boundaries to form a common social identity, their
earlier negative attitudes toward each other turn into positive ones.
Superordinate goal: A goal common for the conflicting groups that can be
restored only with cooperative efforts of the groups.

QUESTIONS
1) simple reflexive
2) direct experience or through by observing others’ ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ attitudes.
3) implicit attitude
4) ‘‘mental and neural state of readiness, organized through experience,
exerting a directive or dynamic influence upon the individual’s response to
all objects and situations with which it is related.”
5) observational learning
1) False
2) True
3) False
4) True
5) False

Cengage Learning.
Branscombe, N. R., &Baron, R. A. (2016). Social Psychology (14th ed.). Boston:

References
141
Social Cognition Allport, G. W. (1935). Attitudes. In C. Murchison (Ed.), Handbook of Social
Psychology (pp. 173–210). Worcester, MA: Clark University Press.
Allport, G. W. (1954). The Nature of Prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Allyn, J., & Festinger, L. (1961). The effectiveness of unanticipated persuasive
communications. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62(1), 35-
40.
Aronson, E., & Mills, J. (1959). The effects of severity of initiation on liking for
a group. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59, 177-181.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W. H.

Freeman.
Bobo, L. (1983). Whites’ opposition to busing: Symbolic racism or realistic group

conflict? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 1196-1210.
Bornstein, R. F. (1989). Exposure and affect: Overview and meta-analysis of

research, 1968–1987. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 265-289.
Branscombe, N. R. (2004). A social psychological process perspective on

collective guilt. In N. R. Branscombe& B. Doosje (Eds.), Collective Guilt:
International perspectives (pp. 320–334). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Brehm, J. (1956). Post-decision changes in the desirability of alternatives. Journal

of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 52, 384-389.
Brehm, J. (1966). A Theory of Psychological Reactance. New York: Academic

Press.
Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic Versus Systematic Information Processing and the

Use of Source Versus Message Cues in Persuasion. Journal of Personality &
Social Psychology, 39(5), 752-766.
Dabbs, J. M., Jr., & Janis, I. L. (1965). Why does eating while reading facilitate
opinion change? An experimental inquiry. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, 1(2), 133-144.
Das, M. (2011). Gender Role Portrayal in Indian Television Ads. Sex Roles, 64,
208-222.
Eagly, A. H., Chen, S., Chaiken, S., & Shaw-Barnes, K. (1999). The impact of
attitudes on memory: An affair to remember. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 64-89.
EchebarriaEchabe, A., & Valencia Garate, J. F. (1994). Private self-consciousness

as moderator of the importance of attitude and subjective norm: The prediction
of voting. European Journal of Social Psychology, 24(2), 285-293.
Elderveld, Samuel J. and Richard W Dodge. 1954. Personal Contact or Mail

Propaganda? An Experiment in Voting and Attitude Change. In Daniel Katz,
Dorwin Cartwright, Samuel J. Elderveld, and Alfred M. Lee (Eds.), Public
Opinion and Propaganda (pp. 532-542). New York: Dryden Press.
Fazio,R. H. (1995). Attitudesasobject-evaluation associations: Determinants,

142 consequences, and correlates of attitude accessibility. InR. E. Petty & J. A.
Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude Strength: Antecedents and Consequences(pp.247-282). Attitude And Attitude Change
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

7, 117-140.
Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford

University Press.
Festinger, L., &Carlsmith, J. M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced

compliance. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58, 203-210.
Heider, F. (1946). Attitudes and Cognitive Organization. Journal of Psychology,

21, 107-112
Heider, F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relation.New York: Wiley.
Hovland, C. I., & Weiss, W. (1951). The influence of source credibility on
communication effectiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly, 15, 635-650.
Janis, I. L. (1954). Personality correlates of susceptibility to persuasion. Journal

of Personality, 22, 504-518.
Janis, I., & Feshbach, S. (1953). Effects of fear-arousing communications. Journal

of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 48, 78-92.
Johnson, B. T. (1994). Effects of outcome-relevant involvement and prior

information on persuasion. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 556-
579.
Katz, D. (1960). The functional approach to the study of attitudes. Public Opinion
Quarterly, 24, 163-204.
Kawakami K., Dovidio, J. F., Moll, J., Hermsen, S., &Russn, A. (2000). Just say
no (to stereotyping): Effects of training in the negation of stereotypic associations
on stereotype activation. Journal and Personality and Social Psychology, 78,
871-888.
Krosnick, J. A., & Alwin, D. F. (1989). Aging and susceptibility to attitude change.
Krosnick, J. A., Betz, A. L., Jussim, L. J., & Lynn, A. R. (1992). Subliminal
conditioning of attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 152-
163.
LaPiere, R. T. (1934). Attitudes vs. actions. Social Forces, 13, 230-237.
Levitan, L. C., & Visser, P. S. (2008). The impact of the social context on resistance
to persuasion: Effortful versus effortless responses to counter-attitudinal
information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 640-649.
Liberman, A., &Chaiken, S. (1996). The direct effect of personal relevance on

attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 269-279.
Miller, N., Maruyama, G., Beaber, R. J., &Valone, K. (1976). Speed of speech
143
Social Cognition and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34(4), 615-624.
Only 23 of 152 Oz attacks racist, Ministry tells LS. Indian Express. Retrieved 25
February 2010.
Pavlov, I. P. (1927). Conditioned reflexes: an investigation of the physiological

activity of the cerebral cortex. Oxford, England: Oxford Univ. Press.
Petrocelli, J. V., Tormala, Z. L., Rucker, D. D. (2007). Unpacking attitude certainty:

Attitude clarity and attitude correctness. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 92,30-41.
Pettigrew, T. F. (1997). Generalized intergroup contact effects on prejudice.

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 173-185.
Petty, R. A., Tormala, Z. L., Brinol, P., & Jarvis, W. B. G. (2006). Implicit
ambivalence from attitude change: An expiration of the PAST model. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 21-41.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and Persuasion. New

York: Springer-Verlag.
Petty, R.E., Haugtvedt, C.P. and Smith, S.M. (1995) Elaboration as a Determinant
of Attitude Strength: Creating Attitudes That Are Persistent, Resistant, and
Predictive of Behaviour. In R.E. Petty and J.A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude Strength:
Antecedents and Consequences (pp. 93-130). Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah.
Powell, A., Branscombe, N. and Schmitt, M. (2005). Inequality as Ingroup

Privilege or Outgroup Disadvantage: The Impact of Group Focus on Collective
Guilt and Interracial Attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(4),
508-521.
Sherif, M., Harvey, D. J., White, B. J., Hood, W. R, &Sherif, C. W. (1961). The
Robbers’ cave experiment. Norman, OK: Institute of Group Relations.
Sinclair, S., Dunn, E., &Lowery, B. S. (2005). The relationship between parental
racial attitudes and children’s implicit prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social
Skinner, B. F. (1938). The Behavior of Organisms: An Experimental Analysis.

Stangor, C., Sechrist, G. B., &Jost, T. J. (2001). Changing racial beliefs by

providing consensus information. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
27, 486-496.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior.
In S. Worchel& W. G. Austin (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations
(2nd ed., pp. 7–24). Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole.
Tajfel, H., Billig, M., Bundy, R., &Flament, C. (1971). Social categorization and
intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1, 149-178.
Tamborini, R., Hofer, M., Prabhu, S., Grall, C., Novotny, E. R., Hahn, L.
&Klebig,B.(2017).The impact of terrorist attack news on moral intuitions and
144
outgroup prejudice. Mass Communication and Society,20,800-824. https://DOI: Attitude And Attitude Change
10.1080/15205436.2017.1342130
Tesser, A. (1993). The importance of heritability in psychological research: The

case of attitudes. Psychological Review, 100, 129-142.
Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Walster, E., & Festinger, L. (1962). The effectiveness of “overheard” persuasive
communication. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 65, 395-402.
Watson, J.B. & Rayner, R. (1920). Conditioned emotional reactions.Journal of

Experimental Psychology, 3, 1, 1-14.
Wilson, T., Lindsey, S., & Schooler, T. Y. (2000). A model of dual attitudes.
Psychological Review, 107, 101-126.
Yzerbyt, V. Y., Corneille, O., & Estrada, C. (2001). The interplay of subjective
essentialism and entitativity in the formation of stereotypes. Personality and
Social Psychology Review, 5, 141-155.
Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality

145
BLOCK 4
SOCIAL INFLUENCE
Social Cognition
INTRODUCTION
The present block consists of three units. The first unit discusses about the others’
influence on our behaviour in a social setting. While influencing our behaviour
this ‘other’ person may or may not be interacting with us. The three types of
social influences on our behaviour are: conformity, adherence to social norms or
following majority; compliance, acceding to direct request from others; and
obedience, following orders given by some authority. The present unit will explain
compliance, conformity and obedience as processes of social influence. Further,
through this unit you will also come to know about the various factors affecting
conformity and the ways to resist conformity. The unit will also explain you the
concept of compliance and the various strategies for gaining compliance. At the
end of the unit you will be explained about the concept and relevance of obedience.
The second unit of this block discusses about the concept and various theoretical
approaches of aggression. It also explains the various factors that affect aggression
as well as the strategies and techniques to reduce aggression. The unit also tries
to explain the nature, causes and steps to reduce bullying behaviour.
In the third and last unit of this block, you will come to know about the concept
and process of interpersonal attraction. You will also understand the various factors
of interpersonal attraction and the concept of pro-social behaviour. In the end of
the unit, we will also discuss about the various motivational factors of pro-
social behaviour and the factors affecting pro-social behaviour.
148
Attitude And Attitude Change
UNIT 8 SOCIAL INFLUENCE*
Structure
8.0 Objectives
8.1 Introduction
8.2 Conformity
8.2.1 Solomon Asch: Pioneer of Research on Conformity
8.2.2 Impact of Conformity
8.2.3 Factors Affecting Conformity
8.2.4 Reasons for Conformity
8.2.5 Disadvantages of Conformity
8.2.6 Resisting Conformity
8.2.7 Minority Influence
8.3 Compliance
8.3.1 Principles of Strategies Used in Compliance
8.3.2 Strategies for Gaining Compliance
8.3.2.1 Techniques Based on Friendship or Liking
8.3.2.2 Techniques Based on Commitment and Consistency
8.3.2.3 Techniques Based on Reciprocity
8.3.2.4 Techniques Based on Scarcity
8.4 Obedience
8.4.1 Milgram’s Experiment
8.4.2 Reasons for Destructive Obedience
8.4.3 Resisting Destructive Obedience
8.5 Let Us Sum Up
8.7 Glossary
8.0 OBJECTIVES
Explain compliance, conformity and obedience as processes of social
influence;
Describe reasons for displaying conformity, various factors affecting
conformity and the ways to resist conformity;
Discuss the concept of compliance and explain various strategies for gaining
compliance; and
Explain that concept and relevance of obedience.
8.1 INTRODUCTION
Whenever we are in a social setting, our thoughts and behaviours are affected by
elements which are external to our body and mind. Suppose you are driving your
Social Influence bike at night on a lonely road of your colony, you will drive in a quite carefree
manner. But when you drive on a heavy traffic road, you stay vigilant and follow
certain traffic rules. Maybe you want to avoid accident or you want to avoid
traffic inspector. Whatsoever the reason may be but your thoughts and your
behaviour get affected due to a social setting. Interestingly, sometimes your
behaviour is affected just by thinking about someone even though that someone
may not be present there. For example, although you get a lonely road in daylight,
yet you follow the traffic rules because you assume that a traffic inspector might
be present at the next crossroad. This form of influence is known as symbolic
social influence.
Social influence may be of many forms. It may be a request from someone that
affects your behaviour (compliance) or it may be social norms that change your
behaviour (conformity) or it may be an order from some authority that has brought
some change in your behaviour (obedience).
8.2 CONFORMITY
In almost every social setting that you encounter in your daily lives, there are
some rules about the “accepted behaviour” in that setting. How one should behave
and what one should not do is stated by those rules. These rules are known as
social norms. In some settings, these norms are formal, explicitly stated and
clearly mentioned in written form. For example, “Please form a Queue” sign
board in a post office. However, in many other settings norms are informal, implicit
and unstated. A widely accepted norm in most of the cultures around Indian sub-
continent is that after marriage, a girl should leave her parent’s house to live with
her husband’s family. Whatsoever the case may be, the norms play a very
important function of removing uncertainties and chaos from a social situation.
Norms restrict a person to behave in a predictable manner and hence reducing
uncertainties. That is why even though norms place restrictions on people, yet
people follow them.
Our tendency to conform to the social norms is so dominant that we are under a
social pressure to be similar to the people in our surrounding. Not just the norms,
but people around us also provide us a standard set of behaviour and opinions
against which we evaluate our own behaviour and opinions. They may or may
not be the correct standards, yet we use them to judge our own behaviour. For
example, people standing at the back in a political rally may not be able to listen
to the speech of the leader. Yet they clap just by seeing that the others standing
there are clapping.
8.2.1 Solomon Asch: Pioneer of Research on Conformity

Solomon Asch (1951, 1955) performed a classic experiment to exhibit this
phenomenon. In his very innovative study, real participants were made to sit
with 6-7 fake participants (placed by researcher and seemed genuine to the real
participant). They were given a perceptual problem to solve wherein they had to
indicate that which of the three comparison line matched the standard line in
length. On certain occasions (critical trials), fake participants deliberately gave
wrong answers. It was observed that, in most of the critical trials (76% of times),
the real participants gave in to the group pressure just to conform with the other
(fake) participants, even though the real participants were correct and the fake
150 participants were wrong.
Asch further reported that nearly one fourth of the research participants never Social Influence
accepted the answer given by the group and thus they did not succumb to the
group pressure. Similarly, there were many other participants who accepted the
group answer almost always. On further probing, they accepted that they were
less confident in their judgements and thought that they were wrong and others
were right. Many of those participants who accepted the majority view knew
that the answers given by others were wrong, even though they could not resist
the group pressure and conformed to the majority view.
Asch (1956, 1959) further conducted researches on conformity with some well
thought and innovative modifications in his classic study layout. He introduced
research accomplices who gave the correct answer or an answer which was
between the correct one and the one which was given by the majority. In another
study, the research accomplice gave more incorrect answer than that chosen by
the group. Thus, the studies were planned in such a way that the consensus of the
group was broken. Findings suggested that the real participant showed lesser
conformity to the group under all three conditions. This indicated that the unbroken
agreement of the group is the key component or force behind conformity and
once this unanimity is broken anyhow, the impact of group pressure is reduced
and it becomes much easier to resist. Asch further introduced some innovation in
his basic research design. He asked his research participants to write down their
answers on a paper and not to speak them out loudly. Interestingly, since the
participants were not required to openly show their disagreement with group,
the incidence of conformity reduced significantly. This finding indicated the
difference between public conformity and private acceptance suggesting that at
a number of occasions even if we explicitly act as per the social norms, we
actually donot alter our personal views.
8.2.2 Impact of Conformity

As a human being we desire to be independent in terms of our thoughts, feelings
and behaviours. No matter which culture is considered, most of the people of
that culture eat and dress in similar ways. They prefer similar media of recreation.
Despite the desire to be independent we surrender to the impact of social influence
to a great extent. However, the desire to be independent does not allow us to
accept the fact we are influenced by the pressure of social norms. Several
psychological studies have demonstrated that despite being influenced by group
opinions, research participants denied that they were influenced by others (Pronin,
Berger &Molouki, 2007). People also think that their behaviours are less
influenced by the social norms than those of other people. Pronin, Berger and
Molouki (2007) termed this phenomenon as introspection illusory and proposed
that we conform to the social norms often through automatic route without our
conscious awareness and beyond the introspective boundary.
8.2.3 Factors Affecting Conformity

Although conformity is so pervasive in our social behaviour, it is also true that
all people do not succumb to the majority view all the time and to the same
degree. There are number of factors that affect the level of conformity people
show to the social norms.
Cohesiveness and desire to be accepted by a particular group is one of the

most prominent factors that determine the extent of conformity we are likely 151
Social Influence to exhibit to the group’s norms. Higher this factor will be, more we will
conform to the norms of that particular group (Turner, 1991). In a cohesive
group, members are attracted toward one another and also want to continue
their belongingness. Thus, they have strong tendency to think, feel and behave
in a similar way. This leads them to adhere to the norms of the group.
Generally as the size of the group increases more pressure we feel to conform
to the group. However, relation between size of the group and the level of
conformity has been inconclusive. Some studies claim that conformity
increases only up to three to four members and after that the group influence
becomes either constant or even decreases (Asch, 1956). Some other studies
claim that conformity increases with the group size up to eight members
and ahead of that (Bond & Smith, 1996).
Apart from their classification as formal and informal, norms can also be
classified as descriptive and injunctive. Descriptive norms explain what
people generally do in a given situation; whereas, injunctive norms tell us
that what should be done in a given situation. For example, people do not
play loud music in a funeral is a descriptive norm; whereas, prescribing not
to smoke near a petrol pump is an injunctive norm. According to normative
focus theory (Cialdini, Reno & Kallgren, 1990), we conform only to those
norms which we consider relevant to us. The theory argues that norms steer
our behaviours mainly when we think about them and view them as relevant
to our behaviour. Contrary to this, the effects of social norms are reduced
when we do not think about them or view them as irrelevant. Furthermore,
Aarts and Dijksterhuis (2003) suggested that there are certain situational
norms that guide our behaviour in specific environment. For example, we
speak gently in a hospital and shout loud in a stadium. These norms affect
out behaviour very strongly and in an automatic manner, without our
conscious awareness.
8.2.4 Reasons for Conformity

Whatsoever the impact, incidence and extent of conformity are, we all succumb
to the social norms at variety of occasions in our social lives. Social psychologists
have attempted to find out the reasons behind our behaviours that conform to the
social norms.
Normative Social Influence-Desire to be liked: We all have strong desire

to be liked by the members of our group. When we conform to the social
norms and to the people of our group, we appear similar to them. This, in
turn, increases the likelihood of their approval and acceptance for us.
Informative Social Influence-Desire to be right: There are number of

social issues for which we do not have any objective standard for judgement.
We do not have objective measure by which we could ascertain that which
of the political views is right or what should be a correct response to the
street beggars. As stated earlierthat people around us provide us a standard
set of behaviour and opinions through which we evaluate our own behaviour.
Hence by conforming to people around us, we develop a sense of correctness.
This effect becomes even more prompt in highly uncertain situations, where
there are no available measures of right or wrong (Baron et al., 1996).
152
8.2.5 Disadvantages of Conformity Social Influence
Whatsoever the reason behind conforming is, it has both positive and negative
effects. Conformity helps to reduce uncertainty from people’s behaviour. Due to
conformity, we can predict others’ behaviour in a social setting and hence can
behave accordingly. While driving on road, we know that everyone will drive on
left side and will stop at red light signal. Similarly, in an emergency situation,
people follow others to escape from the situation. In case of fire, people follow
others to reach the nearest fire exit. Disadvantages of conformity include blind
adherence to certain norms like gender norms. Gender Norms are those norms
which describe appropriate acceptable behaviour for men and women in a
particular culture. This can place limits on the opportunities and career aspirations
of women (Eagly, 2007). Due to this only, trans-genders face number stereotypical
behaviours against them. Conformity is the most prominent cause behind
continuation of number of superstitious behaviours since generations. Other
negative effects of conformity include uncontrolled behaviour of crowd. In a
crowd, people follow others and ultimately do something so extreme which they
would have never done had they been alone.
8.2.6 Resisting Conformity

Although desire to be liked and desire to be right put so much pressure upon us
to conform, yet we can find number of instances where people choose not to
conform and stand out from the crowd. For example, although gender norms say
that man should have short hairs and women should have long hairs, yet we
often encounter the contrary as well, we see long haired men and short aired
women. In the classic experiments of Solomon Asch, mentioned earlier, we saw
that 76% of the time real participants followed the group pressure, yet 24% times
they choose to stand apart from the group. People do not conform to all the
norms. Instead they pick and choose the norm they want to conform. Also, a
person may conform to a particular norm in one situation but not in the other.
The factors which define our ability to resist conformity are given below:
Need to maintain individuality: Just like the desire to be liked and desire
to be right, there is a desire for individuation characterising, the desire to be
distinguished from others in some respect (Maslach, Santee & Wade, 1987).
Higher the desire for individuation, lower will be the need to conform and
vice versa. Studies have been reported which indicated that the need for
individuation varies in different cultures. This need is generally found to be
higher in individualistic cultures and lower in collectivistic culture. Hence,
accordingly, the need to conform will be lower in individualistic cultures
and higher in collectivistic cultures (Bond & Smith, 1996).
Need to maintain personal control: Choosing to behave in a manner that

others do restricts our personal freedom. The results of various studies suggest
that higher the need to maintain personal control, lower will be the chances
of yielding to social pressure.
Norms that encourage individualism: There are certain groups in the

society that have been created for fighting against social evils and for bringing
revolution in society. Norms of such group encourage its members that they
should not conform to the societal rules. For example, members of NGOs
working against female foeticides behave against the society’s beliefs 153
Social Influence established through generations, though a social problem. These groups
deliberately act against the social norms to bring some change in the society.
8.2.7 Minority Influence

Conformity is doing what the others usually do. Here the others are in majority
and the one who is conforming is in minority. However, there are examples where
individuals or a small group has brought change in the behaviours of large
majority. Revolutionaries like Mahatma Gandhi, Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Vinoba
Bhave, etc. are few such people who brought change in the attitudes of the society.
But, for minorities in order to successfully influence majorities, following
conditions must be satisfied (Moscovici, 1985):
They must be consistent in their opposition to the majorities. They must not
appear divided.
They must not be rigid or dogmatic. Minorities that repeats same proposition
over and again are less persuasive than those that display a degree of
flexibility.
Minorities that argue for a position that is consistent with current social
trend are more influential.
1) Apart from their classification as formal and informal, norms can also be
classified as ………………………. and ……………………….
2) As the size of the group increases more pressure we feel to ………………..

to the group.
3) ………………… restrict a person to behave in a predictable manner and

hence reducing uncertainties.
4) Introspection illusory refers that ………………………………………
5) Due to conformity, we can predict ………………………… in a social setting

and hence can behave accordingly.
8.3 COMPLIANCE
Compliance is a form of social influence where we accede or give acceptance to
direct request form some other person. In our daily life, we encounter many
persons whose success in their profession depends upon their ability to make
others comply. Salespersons, advertisers, insurance agents, politicians,
professional negotiators, etc. are some examples of such compliance professionals.
Not only these professionals but we also indulge in lot of events of making others
comply. Consider your mother going to market for the weekly shopping. While
bargaining with the vegetable vendor, both mother and vendor are involved in
compliance strategies. Whenever you try to finalise any plan for party with your
friends, all of you try to convince others with their ideas and finally you reach at
some conclusion.
154
8.3.1 Principles of Strategies Used in Compliance Social Influence
Cialdini (1994, 2006) studied various strategies used by compliance professionals

and concluded that various techniques of compliance depend on six principles:
Friendship or liking: We comply more with the persons whom we like.
Commitments or consistency: We comply with the request for those
behaviours which are consistent with our prior commitments.
Scarcity: There is a greater chance for us to comply with those requests that
focus on scarcity.
Reciprocity: We are more likely to comply with the requests of those who
had previously given us a favour.
Social validation: We are more likely to comply with the request for
behaviours which are in line with our social norms and beliefs.
Authority: We tend to comply with someone who holds legitimate authority.

For example, advertisement of an apparel brand is more appealing if endorsed
by some actor or fashion designer rather than by a politician.
8.3.2 Strategies for Gaining Compliance

Not only compliance professionals but we also knowingly or unknowingly use
various strategies in order to win negotiations in our routine lives. Psychologists
have investigated these strategies in a more systematic manner.
8.3.2.1 Techniques Based on Friendship or Liking

As stated earlier, we are more likely to comply with those whom we like, hence,
to gain compliance we use:
Ingratiation: Getting others to like us. Various ingratiation techniques include

flattery, self-promotion, improving one’s own image, etc.
Flattery: Persons trying to gain compliance usually praise their target so that
they build a positive image of themselves and hence increase chances of gaining
compliance.
Self-Promotion: Informing others about our previous achievements increases

others’ confidence in us. This, in turn, increases our chances of gaining
compliance. Not only the promotion of requester, but their promotion of product
also is useful in gaining compliance. For example,consider any advertisement
on the television, they all display their past accomplishments and tell us about
the good characteristics of their products in order to make us appreciate and
agree to buy their products or in other words to comply with their request.
Improving Self-Image: Emitting positive non-verbal cues, having a presentable

appearance and doing favours to others improve our image in front of our targets.
This makes our target develop faith in us and hence increases the chances of
gaining compliance. The best examples of this type of techniques are insurance
agents. The way they dress up, the way they talk, their body language, everything
is so organized and presentable that the target is impressed easily.
155
Social Influence Incidental Similarity: Furthermore, requesters try to draw the attention of their
targets towards some similarity between them, such as they have same home
town, they have same alma-matter, etc.
8.3.2.2 Techniques Based on Commitment and Consistency

In case of having some prior commitments, we are more likely to comply with
any request which is consistent with the commitment. Alternatively, we comply
with request for behaviours which are consistent to our prior actions. Strategies
of compliance based on this principle are Foot-in-the-door technique and Lowball
procedure.
Foot-in-the-door: In Foot-in-the-door technique, initially a small deal is offered

by the requester. This deal is designed in such a way that the targets easily accept
this. Once the target accepts this deal, the larger and actual deal is offered to the
target. In this case, the target is more likely to accept this larger deal because
rejecting this will not be consistent with his/her prior actions. Recently, one of
the renowned companies launched its mobile communication services in India.
They initially offered free calling and data service to their clients for few months.
Later, they charged this service, which was more or less similar with the rates of
other service providers. Yet, results showed that a large chunk of users continued
with the same network and service provider only.
Lowball Technique: In lowball procedure, a deal is first offered to the target, but
once the target accepts this deal, the deal is made less lucrative. Studies have
shown that this strategy is successful in gaining compliance (Cialdini, Cacioppo,
Bassett & Miller, 1978). Here also, the target has option to reject the deal once
requester introduces changes in it. Yet prior commitment of the target makes
them accept the changed deal also. For example,whenever you choose for an
insurance scheme, the terms and conditions of the product are disclosed after
you agree to buy the product.
8.3.2.3 Techniques Based on Reciprocity

If someone has done some favours in the past, he or she is more likely to accede
to any request made by that person. Strategies using this principle are Door-in-
the-face and That’s-not-all techniques.
Door-in-the-face technique: Door-in-the-face technique is the opposite of foot-

in-the-door technique. Here, first a larger deal is offered by the requester. Once
the target rejects this deal, a smaller and actual deal is presented before them.
The apparent shift of the requester from a larger deal to a smaller deal appears as
a favour to the client. Hence the target feels obligatory to do a return favour to
the request. So client is more likely to accept the deal. Best example of this
technique can be seen when a shopkeeper bargains with a customer. He initially
sets the price to a very higher level. Later he accedes to the request of their
customer to lower the price.
That’s-not-all technique: In the That’s-not-all technique initially a deal is offered

and before target accepts or rejects this deal, something additional is provided
(like extra discount, or additional complimentary gifts, etc.) to the target in order
to make the deal more attractive. By throwing this additional offer, requester
pretends to do favour to the client and hence client is compelled to accept the
156
request. This technique is frequently used by advertising channels like Naaptol, Social Influence
Home Shop 18, etc.
8.3.2.4 Techniques Based on Scarcity

Anything which is scarce appears to be more valuable. Hence any request
focussing on such scarce objects generally attracts more attention. Strategies
using this technique are Playing Hard to Get and Deadline techniques.
Playing Hard to Get: In Playing Hard to Get technique the object of request is
portrayed as rapidly exhausting and the target person has to work really hard to
get that object. “Limited Stock” displays on the shops use this tactic to gain
compliance.
Deadline technique: Similarly, in Deadline technique, deal is made available

for a limited period and the target person has to hurry to get benefit of the deal.
“Offer for Limited Period” is an example of this strategy.
8.4 OBEDIENCE
This is a form of social influence in which a direct order by a person compels
others to behave in a particular manner. However, the person giving order can
use other means also to influence the behaviours, such as request instead of
order (Yukl & Falbe, 1991). Thus, this form of social influence is less frequent
than other two forms discussed earlier. Obedience, as a social influence, can
sometimes be highly destructive. For example, military troop obeying their
command can be brutal towards their target.
8.4.1 Milgram’s Experiment

Obedience to the authority can be seen quite often but experiments by Stanley
Milgram (1963, 1974) demonstrated that even people without any legitimate
authority can also obtain high levels of submission from others. Participants (all
males) were told that the experiment aimed at exploring the effects of punishment
on learning. Real participants were then paired up with another participant, who
in reality was a fake participant (an assistant of the researcher). In each pair, one
participant had to act as a teacher and the other participant had to act as a learner.
The role of teacher and learner was decided on the basis of a slip drawn from a
hat. However, the slips were drawn in a pre-decided manner so that the real
participant always got the role of teacher.
Apparatus: Apparatus used in the Milgram’sexperiment was a board containing

30 switches marked from 15 volts to 450 volts. Participants were told that pressing
each switch will give an electric shock to the person sitting on the receiving
chair. The amount of shock generated by pressing each switch was told to be
equivalent to the amount of volt mentioned above that switch. However, in reality,
no shock was received by the person sitting on the receiving end. The only real
shock ever felt by person sitting on receiving chair was a mild pulse from third
button, just to convince participant that the apparatus was real.
157
Social Influence
Fig. 9.1: Apparatus used in Milgram’s Obedience Experiment (Retrieved from https://
www.simplypsychology.org/milgram.html)
Procedure: In each pair, the learner (fake participant) had to perform a simple
task of learning (reciting the second word of the previously memorized pair after
listening to the first word of that pair). The participant in the teacher role (real
participant) had to read out those words to the learner and to punish the learner
on errors (by giving an electric shock through the apparatus). The real participant
was seated in front of the apparatus. The experimenter (who was conducting the
experiment) was present with him. The assistant (learner) was seated on the
chair receiving the shock. He was visible to the real participants. During the
experiment, the learner deliberately made many errors. Every time he made an
error, the real participant had to give a shock to the learner. If he hesitated, the
experimenter pressured him to continue with a graded series of urge like: “The
experiment requires you to continue”; “It is essential that you continue”; “You
will have no other choice, you must go on”.
Fig. 9.2: Seating Arrangement in Milgram’s Obedience Experiment (https://

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment)
Results: Results indicated that 65% of the total participants proceeded through
the complete series till 450 volt. Few participants protested and asked the
experiment to stop but later yielded to the experimenter’s demand to proceed.
Participants continued even after the assistant acted to become unconscious at
the level of 300 volts. In such cases, the participants were asked to consider no
response from the learner as an error and hence to continue the punishment to
the learner. Other studies have also reported similar results for different cultures
and with children and adults also (Kilham& Mann, 1974; Shanab&Yanya, 1977).
158
8.4.2 Reasons for Destructive Obedience Social Influence
History of human race has numerous examples showing that destructive obedience
can become extremely detrimental to the mankind. Many dictators have been
responsible for death of thousands of people through assassinations, massacre,
etc. Psychologists have studied the reasons that lead people to obey the destructive
commands of such dictators.
People obeying the order are relieved of the guilt feeling by the fact that
they are just following the command. Hence they do not hesitate in obeying.
In Milgram’s experiment, participants were told that they will not be
responsible for the learner’s well-being.
People giving commands; usually wear some uniform or some insignia which
is a symbol of their authority and power. It is a general norm of our society
to obey the seniors. Hence most cannot disobey the commands. The
experimenter in the Milgram’s experiment wore a white coat which gave
the participants a feeling that the experimenter is a doctor.
Orders are gradually increased in their relative strength to harm others. For
example, initially the order may be given to a police team to just arrest a
group of protesters. But later on, the orders may be escalated to brutal beating
of the protesting group. In Milgram’s experiment as well, participants were
initially instructed to give mild shock to the learner and the magnitude of
shock was increased in a graded manner.
Events involving destructive obedience proceed so quickly that the person

who obeys the command do not get time to reflect their actions and
systematically think about their activities. In Milgram’s experiment,
participants got really less time before they started giving extreme shocks
to the learners.
8.4.3 Resisting Destructive Obedience

Following strategies can be effective in resisting destructive obedience:
Reminding that the people who are following the commands are responsible
for the harm done.
Reminding that after a particular point of time, total submission to destructive
commands can be unethical.
Exposing the individuals to the actions of the models who disobeyed
commands.
Questioning the expertise and authority of the person who is giving
command.
Knowing about the true power of commanding authority.
1) Compliance is a form of social influence in which a direct order by a person
compels others to behave in a particular manner. ( )
159
Social Influence 2) Playing hard to get technique, deal is made available for a limited period
and the target person has to hurry to get benefit of the deal. ( )
3) In Foot-in-the-doortechnique, initially a small deal is offered by the requester.

( )
4) Various ingratiation techniques include flattery, self-promotion, improving

one’s own image. ( )
5) Obedience is a form of social influence where we accede or give acceptance

to direct request form some other person ( )
8.5 LET US SUM UP

The above unit discussed about the others’ influence on our behaviour in a social
setting. While influencing our behaviour this ‘other’ person may or may not be
interacting with us. The three types of social influences on our behaviour are:
conformity, adherence to social norms or following majority; compliance,
acceding to direct request from others; and obedience, following orders given by
some authority.
In a social setting, pressure to conform to the majority is so high that people

conform to the majority view even if the majority is wrong. This pressure is even
higher if the majority is unanimous in its views and the size of the majority is
large. However, Normative Focus Theory suggests that if the person does not
consider the norm or majority behaviour relevant to him or her then he may not
display conformity. By conforming to others, people get a feeling that their
behaviour is appropriate and believe that this will increase their acceptance in
society. Conforming to the majority places a restriction on our behaviour. Hence
sometimes, it has been seen that people resist conforming to the majority
behaviour. This happens when they have desire to maintain individuality and a
sense of self control on their behaviour. It has also been seen that some minorities,
who are unanimous and consistent in their views, change the attitude and
behaviours of majorities.
Compliance is a phenomenon used by many professionals, like advertisers,

politicians, insurance agents, etc., for success in their jobs. They use many
principles for convincing their targets. These principles are based on friendship,
commitment, scarcity, reciprocity, social validation and authority. Based on these
principles many techniques have been designed to make others comply. Some of
these techniques are foot-in-the door technique, starting with a smaller deal and
then switching to actual deal; Lowball Technique, making deal less lucrative
once it is accepted; door-in-the-face technique, starting with larger deal and then
switching to actual deal; that’s-not-all technique, making deal more lucrative
before it is accepted; playing hard to get and deadline technique, presenting the
object as quickly exhausting. Compliance is a bidirectional process. We try to
convince others on our ideas and simultaneous agreeing to some of their views.
Obedience is a form of social influence which is least used because the person
using this can use other, more effective, forms of influencing behaviour.
Experiments of Stanley Milgram presented a very surprising phenomenon that
people obey the destructive commands even from persons who do not have
legitimate authority.
160
Social Influence
1) Present an account of conformity with the help of Solomon Asch’s classical
experiment.
2) Explain various reasons behind conformity. Briefly explain the various

factors affecting conformity.
3) Describe the conditions under which people resist to conform. Also bring
out the conditions under which, minority can influence majority.
4) Describe compliance as a form of social influence. What are the various

techniques used by compliance professionals in convincing others to accept
their offer?
5) What is destructive obedience? Explain the reasons behind destructive

obedience andthewaysto resisted it.
8.7 GLOSSARY
Social influence: Attempts to bring change in the behaviour, attitudes or feelings
of others people.
Conformity: Tendency to get influenced by the social norms and to think, feel
or act in the way majority think, feel or act.
Introspection illusory: Underestimating the impact of social influence on our

own behaviours and overestimating the same in actions of others.
Descriptive norms: Norms that explain that what people generally do in a given
situation.
Injunctive norms: Norms that prescribe us about approved and disapproved

behaviours in a given situation.
Normative focus theory: Theory stating that we conform only to those norms
which we consider relevant to us.
Normative Social Influence: Conformingto the social norms in order to fulfil

our desire to be liked and to be accepted by others.
Informative Social Influence: Conformingto the majority view in order to

increase a sense of correctness.
Compliance: A form of social influence where we accede to direct request form

some other person.
Foot-in-the-door: A compliance technique in which initially a small deal is

offered by the requester and once the target accepts this deal, the larger and
actual deal is offered to the target.
Lowball Procedure: A compliance technique in which a deal is first offered to

the target and once the target accepts this deal, the deal is made less lucrative.
161
Social Influence Door-in-the-face technique: A compliance technique in which a larger deal is
offered first by the requesterandonce the target rejects this deal, a smaller and
actual deal is presented before them.
That’s-not-all technique: A compliance technique in which initially a deal is

offered and before target accepts or rejects this deal, something additional, such
as extra discount, or additional complimentary gifts, etc., is provided.
Playing Hard to Get: A compliance technique whichemploys portraying the object

as scarce and very difficult to obtain.
Deadline technique: A compliance technique in which deal is made available

for a limited period and the target person has to hurry to get benefit of the deal.
Obedience: A form of social influence in which a direct order by a person compels

others to behave in a particular manner.

QUESTIONS
1) descriptive and injunctive
2) conform
3) Norms
4) we conform to the social norms often through automatic route without our
conscious awareness and beyond the introspective boundary.
5) others’ behaviour
1) False
2) False
3) True
4) True
5) False

Cengage Learning.

References
Aarts, H., &Dijksterhuis, A. (2003). The silence of the library: Environment,
situational Norm and social Behavior. Journal of Personality and Social
162
Asch, S. E. (1951). Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion Social Influence
of judgment. In H. Guetzkow (Ed.),
Asch, S. E. (1956). Studies of independence and conformity: A minority of one

against unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs, 70 (Whole No. 416).
Asch, S. E. (1959). A perspective on social psychology. In S. Koch (Ed.),

Psychology: A Study of a Science (Vol. 3, pp. 363-383). New York: McGraw-
Hill.
Baron, R. S., Vandello, U. A., & Brunsman, B. (1996). The forgotten variable in
conformity research: Impact of task importance on social influence. Journal of
Bond, R., & Smith, P. B. (1996). Culture and conformity: A meta-analysis of

studies using Asch’s (1952b, 1956) line judgment task. Psychological Bulletin,
119, 111-137.
Cialdini, R. B. (1994). Influence: Science and Practice (3rd ed.). New York:
Harper Collins.
Cialdini, R. B. (2006). Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion. New York:

Collins
Cialdini, R. B., Cacioppo, J. T., Bassett, R., & Miller J. A. (1978). A low-ball
procedure for producing compliance: Commitment then cost. Journal of
Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R., & Kallgren, C. A. (1990). A focus theory of normative
conduct : Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places.
Eagly, A. H. (2007). Female leadership advantage and disadvantage: Resolving

the contradictions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31, 1-12.
Groups, leadership, and men. Pittsburgh: Carnegie. Asch, S. E. (1955). Opinions

and social pressure. Scientific American, 193, 31-35.
Kilham, W., & Mann, L. (1974). Level of destructive obedience as a function of

transmitter and executant roles in the Milgram obedience paradigm. Journal of
Maslach, Christina & T. Santee, Richard & Wade, Cheryl. (1987). Individuation,
Gender Role, and Dissent: Personality Mediators of Situational Forces. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology. 53. 1088-1093.
McLeod, S. A. (2017, Feb 05). The Milgram shock experiment. Retrieved from
https://www.simplypsychology.org/milgram.html
Milgram, S. (1963). Behavior study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social

Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority. New York: Harper.
Moscovici, S. (1985). Social influence and conformity. In G. Lindzey& E. Aronson
(Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (3rd ed.). New York: Random House.
163
Social Influence Pronin, E., Berger, J., &Molouki, S. (2007). Alone in a crowd of sheep:
Asymmetric perceptions of conformity and their roots in an introspection illusion.
Shanab, M. E., & Yahya, K. A. (1977). A behavioral study of obedience in children.

Turner, J. C. (1991). Social Influence. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment, accessed on 18/4/19
164
Social Influence
UNIT 9 AGGRESSION AND SOCIAL
INFLUENCE*
Structure
9.0 Objectives
9.1 Introduction
9.2 Aggression: Meaning and Forms
9.3 Theoretical Approaches to Aggression
9.3.1 Biological Approaches
9.3.2 Drive Approaches
9.3.3 Social Learning Approaches
9.3.4 Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis
9.3.5 Excitation Transfer Theory
9.3.6 General Aggression Model (GAM)
9.4 Causes of Aggression
9.4.1 Personal Factors
9.4.1.1 Frustration and Provocation
9.4.1.2 Personality and Aggression
9.4.1.3 Bio-chemical Influences
9.4.1.4 Displaced Aggression
9.4.1.5 Age and Aggression
9.4.1.6 Gender and Aggression
9.4.2 Interpersonal, Social and Cultural Factors
9.4.2.1 Exposure to Mass Media and Aggression
9.4.2.2 Social Rejection
9.4.2.3 Influence and Need Fulfilment
9.4.3 Situational and Environmental Factors
9.4.3.1 Weapon Effect
9.4.3.2 Environmental Discomfort
9.5 Reducing Aggression
9.5.1 Social Learning: Punishment and Modelling
9.5.2 Catharsis
9.5.3 Cognitive Strategies
9.6 Bullying Behaviour
9.6.1 Motives behind Bullying Behaviour
9.6.2 Steps to Reduce Bullying Behaviour
9.7 Let Us Sum Up
9.9 Glossary
Lucknow Road, Timarpur, Delhi
165
Social Influence
9.0 OBJECTIVES
Define aggression;
Describe various theoretical approaches of aggression;
Explain various factors that affect aggression;
Discuss various strategies and techniques to reduce aggression; and
Explain the nature, causes and steps to reduce bullying behaviour.
9.1 INTRODUCTION
Aggression is one of the most primitive adaptive behaviour that has been used
not only by human being, but also by other species. In the primitive societies,
survival was dependent upon the ability to overpower the physical might of others
by being hostile and aggressive towards them. However, technological
advancements have brought about different more fatal, though easier, ways of
expressing aggression. Now, there are many sophisticated weapons that are easily
available and can be smoothly operated in interpersonal aggressive and hostile
moments. Moreover, many weapons of mass destruction have been developed
by nations and the world always faces fear that these weapons may be used by
any country out of individual insanity and stupidity of dictatorial heads of some
of these nations. Thus, aggression, anger and hostility form an extreme form of
social behaviour and therefore, social psychologists have attempted to explore
various aspects of aggression, such as the process of expression of aggressive
behaviours, factors that affect aggression, strategies and techniques to reduce
aggression, etc.
9.2 AGGRESSION: MEANING AND FORMS

Contrary to pro-social behaviour and interpersonal attraction; aggression, anger,
violence and bullying behaviours represent a completely opposite axis of social
behaviours. Aggression is defined as a behaviour that is aimed at producing
physical or psychological harm to another person. Anderson and Bushman (2002)
have defined human aggression as “any behaviour directed toward another
individual that is carried out with the proximate (immediate) intent to cause
harm. In addition, the perpetrator must believe that the behaviour will harm the
target and that the target is motivated to avoid the behaviour”. Bandura (1973)
has defined aggression as “a harmful behaviour which violates social conventions
and which may include deliberate intent to harm or injure another person or
object”. Buss (1961)defined aggression as “a response by an individual that
delivers something unpleasant to another person”.
Thus, aggression encompasses a range of behaviours in our social interactions

that intends to harm others, either directly or indirectly. Aggressive behaviour
often involves some physical act of violence intended to cause physical injury to
the target person, e. g. hitting someone either by any weapon or even by using
any part of our body. Verbal aggression involves behaviours by which we intend
to emotionally hurt others by using hostile language. Many times we intimidate
others by using non-verbal gestures that imply a threat of violence. Furthermore,
166
indirect expression of displeasure or a subtle anger is also a form of passive Aggression and Social
Influence
aggression. Many times when we fail to express our aggression directly to our
boss, we passively show our aggression by deliberately not completing the
assigned job or by completing the task with very poor quality.
Often, an aggressive behaviour intends to hurt others, either physically or

psychologically, and is motivated by the aggressor’s feelings of anger and hostility.
Such aggression is called as hostile aggression. However, there are number of
instances when aggression has some hidden goal and intends to harm others in
order to fulfil that goal. Such aggressive behaviours are called as instrumental
aggression. In the age of virtually linked world, another form of aggression has
emerged significantly in the recent past where a person can harm others by
uploading and spreading some embarrassing and defaming documents,
photographs, comments, allegations, etc. on social networking platforms.
9.3 THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO

AGGRESSION
Being a significant obstruction for promotion of fraternity in the human being,
aggression has been a very important area of study for the social psychologists.
Researchers in this field have been largely focused on understanding its nature
and causes, with an objective to reduce aggression in various social contexts.
Explanations of aggression are represented by an array of theoretical perspectives
originating from researches from various directions in the field of social
psychology.
9.3.1 Biological Approaches

Traditionally, aggression has been believed to be originated from biological
factors. While proposing psychoanalytic theory, Freud suggested that aggression
in human beings primarily comes from an innate destructive instinct, thanatos
or death instinct, that is initially directed against the self. He further argued that
the aggressive behaviours represent redirection of this death instinct towards
others in the society. Similarly, Lorenz (1966) proposed that human beings share
an inherited fighting instinct with other species. Lorenz’s ethological approach
assumes that aggressive behaviours actually serve as a mean for males to obtain
the mating partners to pass their genes to the next generation. In the process of
evolution and in the quest of survival, aggression is further believed to be useful
tool to secure food, territory, etc. that are thought to be valuable and essential for
survival.
9.3.2 Drive Approaches

While rejecting biological explanation to the aggressive behaviours, many social
psychologists proposed a psychological explanation which assumed that
aggression is primarily originated from a strong drive to harm others. These
theorists (Berkowitz, 1989; Dollard, Doob, Miller, Mowerer & Sears, 1939) argue
that number of situational factors, such as frustration, provocation by others,
presence of a priming cue (weapon), etc. may instigate this drive in the person
which is expressed in the form of aggressive behaviours at the overt level. Thus,
drive theories disregard the proposition that aggression is result of an innate
167
Social Influence instinct. Rather, they believe that aggressive behaviours are largely driven by
external or situational factors.
9.3.3 Social Learning Approaches

Contrary to the innate instinct and drive perspectives, social learning approach
proposes that aggressive behaviours are learned in the same way as we learn
other social behaviours (Bandura, 1997). Aggressive behaviours are learned either
by direct experience or by vicarious conditioning, observing aggressive social
models. Learning of aggression by direct experience occurs when a person’s
aggressive behaviour is rewarded and reinforced in a given situation. On the
other hand, aggressive behaviours can be learned by merely observing models
attaining their goals by aggressive behaviours. Apart from such live modelling,
we can learn aggressive behaviours by watching aggressive/violent movies and
television programmes and by playing aggressive video games also. Social
learning approach further suggests that even the aggressive behaviours are once
learned, they are latently stored in the behaviour reservoir of the individual.
Expression of these behaviours in any given situation is dependent on number of
factors related to person’s experiences in similar situations in the past; such as
rewards or punishments received for aggressive behaviour in similar situations
in past. Social learning also helps us in understanding the appropriate and socially
approved ways and targets of aggressive behaviour in a situation.
9.3.4 Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis

In one of very influential explanation of aggression, frustration-aggression
hypothesis assumed frustration as the most important cause of aggression. In its
strongest and primary form, the hypothesis proposed that “the occurrence of
aggressive behaviour always presupposes the existence of frustration and,
contrariwise, that the existence of frustration always leads to some form of
aggression” (Dollard et al., 1939). The hypothesis further defines frustration as
an environmental event as “an interference with the occurrence of an instigated
goal-response”. Thus, the hypothesis proposes that frustration, as an event that
obstructs the attainment of the goal by any obstacle to the goal directed behaviour,
leads to aggression.
Although frustration-aggression hypothesis appears extremely appealing, large

number of social psychologists expressed their disagreement with its both basic
propositions that frustration always leads to aggression and aggression is always
a consequence of a frustration. Reacting to such criticisms, the theorists
reformulated the initial theory and Miller (1941) argued that aggression is not
the only consequence of frustration; rather, one of numerous likely outcomes of
frustration. Some studies have also claimed that frustration predicts aggression
more strongly when it is perceived as illegitimate and unjustified (Dill &
Anderson, 1995).
A significant reformulation of frustration-aggression hypothesis was proposed

by Berkowitz (1989). He argued that owing to its aversive nature, frustration
produces negative affect that generates ‘aggressive inclination’ that is
proportionate to the negative affect produced by the frustration. This revision
argues that the negative affect, and not the frustration is the immediate reason of
aggressive behaviour. In the other words, frustration produces negative affect
and the negative affect elicits aggressive inclinations. Berkowitz’s revision further
168
argues that frustration is just one of several impending sources of negative affect Aggression and Social
Influence
and aggressive inclinations and there are additional sources of aggressive
inclinations, such as insults, anxiety, environmental discomfort, etc.
Excitation transfer theory (Zillmann, 1994) suggests that emotional arousal

persists over time and elevated excitement in one condition can transfer to
subsequent condition; Berkowitz also talked about aggressive inclinations and
conceptualised them as constituted by affective and cognitive components. He
argued that aggressive inclinations are neither overt aggression nor the negative
affect produced by frustration automatically and essentially leads to aggressive
behaviour. Rather, several factors prevent overt expression of aggressive
behaviour, such as reappraisal of the situation, strong incentives for not behaving
aggressively, highly aversive consequences of behaving aggressively,
inaccessibility of the source of frustration, unavailability of opportunity to act
aggressively, etc. Thus, Berkowitz reformulates frustration-aggression hypothesis
as a mediation hypothesis claiming that number of factors mediate between
negative affect produced by frustration and aggression and actually these
mediating factors determine whether the person will engage in the overt aggressive
behaviour or not. Nonetheless, Berkowitz’s modifications enhanced the
acceptability of the frustration-aggression hypothesis.
9.3.5 Excitation Transfer Theory

leading to enhanced likelihood of aggressive reaction in response to provocation,
frustration or other factors present in the subsequent condition. For example, on
the way to your office in the morning you find a very heavy traffic and narrowly
escape a minor accident. Again, after reaching to the office you see that the lift is
not functioning and you have to go up to the ninth floor by the stairs to reach to
your cabin. To further worsen the situation, you see that your office attendant
has littered the floor of your cabin by tea and finally, your aggression gets erupted
and you burst on the office attendant. Excitation transfer theory suggests that
since arousal is carried forward to subsequent situations and therefore, the
aggressive behaviour shown to the office attendant was certainly partly caused
by the arousal that persisted from your earlier annoying experiences of heavy
traffic and lift not being in order. This theory also argues that the dissipating
effect of arousal is stronger in the situation when we are either not aware of any
such residual arousal or attribute the residual arousal to the present situation, in
case we are aware of it.
9.3.6 General Aggression Model (GAM)

Based on drawing inputs from a varied range of theoretical approaches of
aggression and taking the role of social, cognitive, developmental and biological
factors on aggressioninto account, general aggression model (GAM) presents a
three-stage comprehensive and integrative framework for understanding human
aggression (Anderson & Bushman, 2002).
169
Social Influence
Stage One: Input Variables
Situation Factors Person Factors

Frustration Personal dispositions
Provocation Individual’s attitudes, beliefs,
intentions and temperament
Exposure to aggressive models
Skills for performing aggressive
Environmental discomfort
acts
Stage Two: Route

Present Internal State
Affect
Cognition Arousal
Stage Three: Appraisal and Decision
Thoughtful Action Impulsive Action
Nonaggressive Aggressive Behaviour

Behaviour
Fig. 9.1: General aggression model (Source: Bushman & Anderson, 2002)
At the first stage, the GAM assumes two types of input variables responsible for
instigating expression of overt aggression. Factors coming under situational
variables include frustration, provocation, exposure to in vivo or in vitro aggressive
models, environmental elements causing discomfort to the person, etc. Variables
pertaining to individual differences are related with the personal dispositions for
aggressive behaviours, individual’s attitudes, beliefs, intentions and temperament
and skills for performing aggressive acts. GAM further assumes that personal
and situational variables function in an additive or interactive way and therefore,
aggression is directly linked with the number of personal and situational variables
present in a given incidence.
The second stage pertains to the routes through which personal and situational
factors affect the person’s appraisal and decision processes leading to either
aggressive or nonaggressive outcomes. GAM argues that the personal and
situational factors influence the person’s present internal state constituted by his
170
or her affect (hostile feelings and hostile gestures and facial expressions), cognition Aggression and Social
Influence
(hostile thoughts, beliefs and attitudes) and arousal (physiological arousal and
excitement) which further moderate the likelihood of aggression. Different input
variables affect different present internal state variables, but present internal state
variables also influence each other in interactive and reciprocal ways. Affect can
influence cognition and arousal. For example, feeling angry can encourage hostile
thoughts and increase arousal. Similarly, cognition and arousal can influence
affect. For example, interpreting a situation in a hostile manner can increase
anger, which in turn can increase arousal. GAM does not assume any specific
sequence of the present internal state variables and suggest that any of the three
variables can occur first and then influence the other two.
The third and final stage of GAM is the outcome stage where the person interprets
the situation and based on his or her appraisal of the current situation and
restraining factors, decision on being involved in aggressive or nonaggressive
behaviour is taken. GAM argues that based on situational appraisal and
reappraisal, the person engages either in thoughtful action; leading to
nonaggressive behaviour, or in impulsive action; leading to aggressive behaviour.
GAM has further explained the process of social learning by which exposure to
real or virtual aggressive models increases the likelihood of aggressive behaviours.
Recurring exposure to these stimuli strengthens the aggression related knowledge
structures; such as beliefs, attitudes, schemas and scripts relevant to aggression
and with increasing strength of these knowledge structures, these are more
activated by situational or person variables. Thus, repeated exposure to aggressive
models actually “primes” the person for aggressive behaviour.

Fill in the following Blanks:
1) General aggression model (GAM) presents a three-stage comprehensive
and integrative framework for understanding …………………..
2) Freud suggested that aggression in human beings primarily comes from an

innate destructive instinct, the ………………..
3) Contrary to pro-social behaviour and interpersonal attraction; aggression,

anger, violence and bullying behaviours represent a completely opposite
axis of ……………………………..
4) Aggression is defined as
…………………………………………………………………….
5) Excitation transfer theory (Zillmann, 1994) suggests that emotional arousal

…………………………………………………………
9.4 CAUSES OF AGGRESSION

Despite having extremely negative impacts on social relations, aggression is
quite common in human life. Similar to other social behaviours, aggression also
involves a complex process before it is expressed in behaviours. Many times we
behave aggressively in the situations in which we remain cool and calm at other
171
Social Influence occasions, and vice-versa. Arguably, there are number of factors that tend us to
engage in aggressive behaviour.
9.4.1 Personal Factors
9.4.1.1 Frustration and Provocation

As discussed in the earlier section, frustration is believed to be one of the most
common causes of aggression. Frustration-aggression hypothesis (Dollard et al.,
1939) argued that we behave aggressively when any obstacle obstructs our goal
directed behaviour and consequently we fail to obtain the goal. Some studies
have reported hat frustration is greater when goal directed behaviour is obstructed
when we are closer to the goal. Arguably, greater frustration leads to more
likelihood of being engaged in aggressive behaviour (Harris, 1974). Direct
physical or verbal provocation is another very strong reason of aggression. In
many social situations people intentionally and unfairly criticise us, pass sarcastic
comments targeted to us, physically harm us or express any such intention. Such
provocations lead us to engage in aggressive behaviour towards the source of
provocation. Studies have been reported indicating that expression of arrogance,
unjustified criticisms, public teasing, others’ actions that damage or threaten to
damage our public image or status, etc. are some strongest provocations that
cause aggressive behaviours.
9.4.1.2 Personality and Aggression

There are number of similar situations to which different people respond
differently. Social psychologists suggest that complex social behaviours like
aggression and violence are often outcomes of an interaction between situational
variables and traits or personal dispositions of individuals present in the situation.
The TASS model (the traits as situational sensitivities model) argues that there
are some traits that enhance the person’s sensitivity arguably by reducing threshold
for responding to the situation. For example, generally people behave aggressively
only when they are faced with strong situational factors, such as strong
provocation or frustration. The TASS model suggests that people with high trait
aggressiveness respond aggressively even to very weak provocations. However,
people with low trait aggressiveness require strong provocations for overt
expression of aggression.
Similarly, persons with Type A behaviour pattern are extremely high on

competitive drive and they are always hasty in their time management leading
them to highly irritable and aggressive in social interactions. On the other hand,
persons with Type B behaviour pattern are relatively relaxed and generally respond
sensibly and in sober way even when they are faced with highly stressful
situations.
Furthermore, low self-control has been reported as one of the strongest predictor
of aggression. Social psychologists have argued that persons high in narcissism
react with extremely high levels of aggression when other people behave against
their wish, putting their unrealistically inflated self-image in danger and
consequently, their egos are threatened.
172
9.4.1.3 Bio-chemical Influences Aggression and Social
Influence
Similar to other emotional reactions, aggression is also influenced by various

chemicals. One of such chemicals is testosterone, the male hormones. In a meta-
analysis, testosterone has been found to be positively correlated with aggression
and aggressive tendencies (Book, Starzyk & Qunisey, 2001). Similarly, violent
prisoners measured higher levels of testosterone as compared to non-violent
prisoners in a comparative measurement (Dabbs, Carr, Frady & Riad, 1995).
Another endogenous chemical important in aggressive behaviours is serotonin,
a neurotransmitter which is found responsible for positive and pleasant emotions.
Serotonin level has been also found to be negatively associated with aggression.
In the other words, low level of serotonin has been reported in people who are
highly aggressive.
Furthermore, several surveys have reported that alcohol consumption is also

highly correlated with aggression and violent behaviours. Alcohol weakens the
process that inhibits the learning of socialisation that we should not behave
aggressively in social interactions. A cognitive explanation of positive correlation
between alcohol and aggression presumes that alcohol impairs the information
processing capacity of the individual required to inhibit response impulses, leading
to reduced ability to anticipate negative consequences of aggressive responses
and furthermore, person fails to take note of social values and norms that restrict
a person to behave aggressively.
9.4.1.4 Displaced Aggression

Many times we are not able to express our aggression to the original provocation
or target due to many possible reasons; such as unavailability of the source,
abstract or intangible nature of the source, the source being stronger and fear of
getting punished for aggressive and violent behaviour in the situation. In such
conditions, our aggression is displaced and is expressed to a target that is either
innocent or is mildly offensive and provocative and thus, functions as a trigger
for our aggressive behaviour.
9.4.1.5 Age and Aggression

Despite of general belief that children do not involve in violent actions and
aggressive behaviours as much as the adults do, the relationship between age
and aggression is not that much simple. Arguably, due to lack of social skills
younger children and adolescents largely depend on physical aggression to settle
their disputes and to get their needs fulfilled. However, as the children grow up,
the socialisation process teaches them other mature ways to resolve their issues
and hence, they progressively learn to resist their aggression in variety of social
interactions.
9.4.1.6 Gender and Aggression

Studies on rats have shown that male rats react to the stressful conditions either
by fighting or by running away from the situation, commonly termed as fight or
flight response. Contrariwise, female rats react to the similar situations by
nurturing others and by getting engaged in social relations, termed as tend and
befriend response (Taylor et al., 2000). Similar findings have been reported by
various surveys conducted on human population (Steffensmeier & Allan, 1996)
173
Social Influence showing that in almost all societies gender differences in aggression exist with
males being physically and verbally more aggressive than the females.
Presumably, across the societies females are intensely socialised to resort to more
indirect forms of aggression and to be less expressive in direct physical and
verbal aggression.
9.4.2 Interpersonal, Social and Cultural Factors
9.4.2.1 Exposure to Mass Media and Aggression

A content analysis conducted by the US National Television Violence Study has
reported that almost 60% of TV programmes contain significant amount of
violence. Studies conducted using various methods have consistently reported
that children and adults exposed to violent content in the mass media, such as
TV programmes, films, video games, etc., tend to more engage in violent and
aggressive behaviours. In one of such studies by Bandura, Ross and Ross (1963),
children were exposed to one of the two types of virtual models through TV
shows. One group of children was exposed to an aggressive model; whereas, the
other group of children was exposed to a non-aggressive model. Later on, children
of both groups were given opportunity to play with toys similar one shown in the
TV show. The researchers reported that the children who were exposed to the
aggressive models expressed similar behaviours and played in aggressive and
violent ways with the toys. Similar results have been reported in the studies that
have used violent news, violent lyrics in music and violent video games as
materials to foster modelling (Anderson, 2004).
The GAM, discussed in an earlier section, provides an explanation for the effect
of exposure to media violence on aggressive behaviour (Bushman & Anderson,
2002). The GAM argues that consistent and prolonged exposure to media violence
modifies our cognitive schemas, beliefs, attitudes and scripts and strengthens
the knowledge structures related to aggression. As these knowledge structures
become stronger, they lead people to a hostile expectation bias, a belief that
other people generally behave in aggressive way. This belief further leads us to
easily become aggressive and violent, even in response to general environmental
conditions.
9.4.2.2 Social Rejection

Social rejection is one of the strongest instigators of human aggression. Human
beings enjoy social relations and when we are excluded from the society, it
negatively impacts our self-image and self-esteem and further leads us to become
hostile and aggressive in social interactions. Studies have been reported showing
that when we are rejected by others, it stimulates a hostile cognitive mind-set or
bias which inclines us to perceive others’ ambiguous and largely neutral
behaviours as hostile. In such situations this bias leads us to respond in aggressive
way (De Wall et al., 2009). From evolutionary perspective, we require to associate
with others in society in order to fulfil our basic biological and social needs, and
to survive. However, when we are socially rejected, fulfilment of this need is
thwarted and our survival is jeopardised; leading to stimulation of instinct and
responding in aggressive way.
174
9.4.2.3 Influence and Need Fulfilment Aggression and Social
Influence
Another approach that tries to understand human aggression proposes that

aggression is a way to exert influence on others’ behaviour in social interactions
and using this influence as a mean to get their needs fulfilled. However, aggression
is used as a mean of social influence in specific situations; such as when we
believe that being aggressive will obtain success and the target is unlikely to
retaliate.
9.4.3 Situational and Environmental Factors
9.4.3.1 Weapon Effect

As demonstrated by many studies, angry persons are more prone to express their
aggression when they are exposed to a weapon in the situation. In one of such
studies, Berkowitz and Le Page (1967) showed that the participants who had
seen gun were more aggressive and delivered higher level of electric shock to
the research accomplices than those who saw sports items.
9.4.3.2 Environmental Discomfort

Many surveys and correlational studies have reported a positive correlation
between temperature and aggression and violence. Longitudinal studies have
indicated that violent crimes are reported more in the hotter years and months
than the cooler ones (Anderson et al., 1997). Studies comparing violence rates of
various geographical regions have also found higher violent crime rates in the
hotter areas, as compared to relatively cooler areas. Many other environmental
discomforts, such as noise, smoke, air pollution, etc. have also been found to be
associated with higher levels of aggression and violence.
9.5 REDUCING AGGRESSION

As a complex social behaviour, aggression is an outcome of interaction between
personal, interpersonal, social and cultural factors and is expressed in overt
behaviour when it is triggered by some situational and environmental variables.
Thus, a number of strategies are proposed by social psychologists in order to
reduce or control aggressive behaviour.
9.5.1 Social Learning: Punishment and Modelling

The behavioural and social learning approaches of psychology assume that
undesirable aggressive behaviour is learned with the same process as adaptive
social behaviours are learned. The most traditional and common approach to
deter aggressive behaviour is using punishment. Punishment works on the
principles of operant conditioning which assumes that the strength of association
between the stimulus and the response will be weakened if an aversive
consequence or outcome is made contingent upon the response. Therefore, the
likelihood of aggressive behaviour is decreased when the consequence of an
aggressive behaviour is made painful or aversive. However, punishment is a
risky strategy and some care is required to be taken before using it. For example,
punishment should be given immediately after the aggressive behaviour, each
and every aggressive behaviour should follow punishment in order to avoid
175
Social Influence confusing conditioning, punishment should be strong and it should also be justified
with sufficient explanation and reasoning.
Observational learning theories of social learning approach assume that as

aggressive behaviours are learned by observing aggressive social models, these
behaviours can be prevented and controlled by exposing the people to non-
aggressive models or to the models who are involved in pro-social behaviours.
Bushman and Anderson (2002) argued that exposure to violent media cognitively
primes us to respond in aggressive way. Therefore, probability of developing
such cognitive biases is significantly reducedif we are exposed to non-aggressive
models, leading to decreased sensitivity to the environmental triggers of
aggressive behaviour. Furthermore, exposure to the models involved in pro-social
behaviours strengthens adaptive social behaviours.
9.5.2 Catharsis
Catharsis, a concept originated from psychoanalytic approach, is the process in
which a strong emotion is vented out at some displaced target in milder form.
Catharsis of aggression is expression of one’s aggressive intent at a target that is
in some way associated with the original source of aggression in some relatively
non-harmful manner. There is an assumption that catharsis reduces the possibility
of overt aggressive behaviour in its harmful form. Studies have shown that non-
harmful behaviours, such as going for vigorous sports, aggressing at the
photograph of an enemy or shouting in foul language in an empty room, that are
a substitute to the actual aggressive behaviour, have proved to reduce anger and
aggression. However, such effects have been found to be only temporary and
when the person is placed in the actual social setting, the aggressive behaviour
may recover again. Furthermore, contrary to the belief that safer aggressive acts
such as watching televised violence, attacking an inanimate object or verbal
aggression may reduce the chances of aggressive behaviour, studies have shown
that aggression may actually increase due to involvement in minor aggressive
behaviours by reducing the inhibition for such behaviours.
9.5.3 Cognitive Strategies

General aggression model proposes that aggression is a behavioural outcome of
various personal and situational factors that operate through three different routes:
affect, cognition and arousal and also that there is significant interaction between
these three components of internal state of the person. Cognitive strategies to
reduce aggression function on the argument that intervention at the level of
processing of aggressive thoughts can be helpful in breaking of cycle that promotes
aggressive tendencies and behaviours. Apology is one of the most common and
simple strategy to reduce aggression. When an aggressive behaviour is followed
by an apology, the aggressive behaviour is attributed as an unintentional act.
However, effectiveness of apology in reducing the likelihood of aggression
depends on its genuineness.
Aggression has been believed as an adaptive behaviour in primitive societies.

However, cooperation and collaboration are more required in today’s developed
and civilised societies that require restraining aggressive behaviours. Therefore,
self- regulation and self-control of one’s own behaviour is a requisite for
maintenance of social order and growth and development of all people in the
society. However, processes like self-regulation and self-control require
176
significant amount of cognitive resources that are less available in a state of Aggression and Social
Influence
anger and aggression. Concept of cognitive deficit assumes that a person’s
cognitive resources available to process information regarding the consequences
of aggressive behaviour are reduced when he or she is extremely angry. In order
to avoid such situation while visiting a potentially irritating setting, pre-attribution
of others’ aggressive behaviour as his or her unique way of communication,
rather than malicious intentions, may significantly reduce the probability of
aggression. Similar to the effect of the pre-attribution to unintentional causes,
preventing oneself from ruminating or thinking repeatedly about previous or
imagined irritating behaviour of others may help avoid cognitive deficit. For
example, reading articles of one’s interest or watching pleasant or comedy films
may check ruminations and help the person to regain control over cognitive
processes.
9.6 BULLYING BEHAVIOUR

Think about some specific, but very common behaviours; such as using very
foul language about someone either in person or in their absence, teasing someone,
making rude gestures, spreading rumours about someone, hurting someone
physically, excluding someone from a group, etc. All these are examples of
bullying, a behaviour that is quite similar to aggression. Olweus (1999) has defined
bullying as “a form of behaviour in which one person repeatedly assaults one or
more others who have little or no power to retaliate”. Bullying behaviour can be
expressed in several forms, such as verbal, physical, psychological or social.
Although usually bullying is thought as a direct and interpersonal behaviour, in
the age of virtually connected world it can happen online also. Moreover,it can
be targeted either at one person or at a group of people. Primarily, bullying
behaviour is believed more common among children and teenagers in the school
contexts. However, it is also found in other contexts, such as home environment,
offices, prisons, informal social groups, etc.
9.6.1 Motives behind Bullying Behaviour

Despite incessant efforts of the authorities to control or reduce bullying behaviours
in the most vulnerable environments like schools and prisons, this behaviour is
still very common and people often complain about such victimisation. Roland
(2002) has attempted to explain the causes behind bullying behaviour. Primarily,
he suggested that there are two key motives behind bullying behaviour: desire to
exercise power over others and desire to be part of a powerful (bully) group. He
argued that both of these motives lead a person to perceived enhanced social
status. The research findings further suggested that girls had an additional motive
that led them to engage in bullying behaviour. He found that the girls with higher
tendency to be unhappy or depressed were more inclined to engage in bullying
behaviour. The researchers argued that being engaged in bullying behaviour
enhances the perceived social status and makes the bullies feel better and happier;
leading to reduced tendency to feel unhappy or depressed.
9.6.2 Steps to Reduce Bullying Behaviour

Bullying may affect the victims in many ways. Any such constant victimisation
brings about some relatively permanent changes in the victim’s personality, such
as low self-esteem, social phobia, generalised anxiety or even depression. In
177
Social Influence many extreme cases, where the victim is not able to find any way to get rid of
this embarrassing situation, he or she even commits suicide. Looking at such
distressing effects of bullying behaviour on the victims, many steps have been
suggested to reduce it. Firstly, we should accept that bullying is a very common
phenomenon with very uncommon and devastating effects. It must be treated as
a serious problem and the authorities involved in the specific settings, such as
teachers, parents, students, prisoners, wardens, guards, colleagues, supervisors,
etc. should not only pay adequate attention to it, but also unanimously and
decisively take action against it. Since bullying is recurring in nature, the potential
victims should be educated for it. They should be regularly made aware about
the institutional measures that counter bullying behaviours and provide protection
to the victims. Furthermore, appropriate and prompt punitive actions against
bullying behaviours can help in controlling such behaviours to a great extent.

1) When an aggressive behaviour is followed by an apology, the aggressive
behaviour is attributed as an unintentional act. ( )
2) General aggression model proposes that aggression is a behavioural outcome

of various personal and situational factors that operate through three different
routes: affect, cognition and arousal. ( )
3) Catharsis is the process in which a strong emotion is vented out at some

displaced target in milder form. ( )
4) Type B behaviour pattern are extremely high on competitive drive and they
are highly irritable and aggressive in social interactions. ( )
5) Aggression cannot be used as a mean of social influence at specific situations.

( )
9.7 LET US SUM UP

Aggression represents a range of interpersonal behaviours in our social
interactions that intends to produce harm on others; directly or indirectly,
physically or verbally, or by defaming the target person in the virtual world.
Several of theoretical approaches have attempted to explain the processes involved
in aggression and hostility. Biological theories conceptualise that aggression is
an outcome of an innate instinct that human being shares with other species.
Drive theories assume a strong drive to harm others as the source of aggression.
Social learning approaches, based on various learning theories, propose that
aggressive behaviours are learned either by direct experience or by vicarious
conditioning, observing aggressive social models. One of the most promising
explanations of aggression has been proposed byfrustration-aggression
hypothesiswhichassumes frustration as the most important cause of aggression.
Excitation transfer theoryhas taken the importance of affective processes and
arousal in aggression into account and has suggested that emotional arousal
persists over time and elevated excitement in one condition can transfer to
subsequent condition; leading to enhanced likelihood of aggressive reaction in
response to provocation, frustration or other factors present in the subsequent
178
condition. However, the most comprehensive explanation of aggressive behaviour Aggression and Social
Influence
has been presented by the general aggression model. GAM has proposed a three-
stage framework for understanding human aggression and appropriately considers
the roles of social, cognitive, developmental and biological factors in human
aggression. Social psychologists have delineated several factors that tend a person
in aggressive behaviours in various situations. These factors have been largely
categorisedas personal, interpersonal, social, cultural, situational and
environmental factors. The strategies suggested by social psychologists to reduce
or control aggressive behaviour largely focus on various psychological principles,
such as punishment, modelling, catharsis and cognitive strategies. Bullying, a
behaviour that is quite similar to aggression, is defined as a form of behaviour in
which one person repeatedly assaults one or more others who have little or no
power to retaliate. Two key motives behind bullying behaviour are: desire to
exercise power over others and desire to be part of a powerful (bully) group.
Furthermore, girls with higher tendency to be unhappy or depressed have been
found to be more inclined to engage in bullying behaviour. Many steps to reduce
bullying behaviour largely focus on environmental sensitisation and victim
education and awareness.

1) Define aggression and explain its various forms. Also describe biological
and drive theories of aggression.
2) Present an account of social learning approach and excitation transfer theory

of aggression.
3) Explain frustration-aggression hypothesis. Also discuss the reformulations

in the hypothesis proposed by Berkowitz.
4) Critically evaluate the general aggression model.
5) Describe various factors affecting human aggression.
6) Discuss various strategies used to reduce aggression.
7) Define bullying behaviour. Discuss the motives behind bullying behaviour
and also explain the steps to reduce it.
9.9 GLOSSARY
Aggression: Behaviour aimed at producing physical or psychological harm to
another person.
Instrumental aggression: Aggressive behaviour with some hidden goal and

intention to harm others in order to fulfil that goal.
Verbal aggression: Aggressive behaviours intended to emotionally hurt others

by using hostile language.
Thanatos or death instinct: Aninnate destructive instinct that is initially directed

against the self.
Vicarious conditioning: Conditioning of responses merely by observing models’

behaviours. 179
Social Influence Frustration-aggression hypothesis: An assumption that frustration
leadstoaggression and aggression is a consequence of frustration.
Frustration: An event that obstructs the attainment of the goal by any obstacle
to the goal directed behaviour.
Excitation transfer theory: An assumption that emotional arousal in one situation

persists over time and is transferred to the subsequent situation leading to increased
probability of aggression in the subsequent situation.
General aggression model: A three stage three-stage framework for

understanding human aggression by considering the roles of social, cognitive,
developmental and biological factors in human aggression.
The TASS model: An argument that some traits enhance the person’s sensitivity
by reducing threshold for responding to the situation.
Displaced aggression: Displaced expression of aggression from the original

target to an innocent or mildly offensivetarget.
Fight or flight response: Tendency to react to the stressful conditions either by

fighting or by running away from the situation.
Tend and befriend response: Tendency to react to the stressful situations by

nurturing others and by getting engaged in social relations.
Hostile cognitive bias: A tendency that inclines us to perceive others’ ambiguous

and largely neutral behaviours as hostile.
Catharsis: A psychoanalytic concept that believes that the consequences of a

strong emotion can be subdued if it is vented out at some displaced target in
milder form.
Cognitive deficit: Reduced availability of cognitive resources to process

information regarding the consequences of aggressive behaviour in an extremely
anger state.
Bullying behaviour: Repeated assaults by one person to one or more others

who have little or no power to retaliate.

QUESTIONS
1) human aggression
2) thanatos or death instinct
3) social behaviours
4) a behaviour that is aimed at producing physical or psychological harm to
another person.
5) persists over time and elevated excitement in one condition can transfer to
subsequent condition.
180
Self Assessment Questions II Aggression and Social
Influence
1) True
2) True
3) True
4) False
5) False

NY: McGraw-Hill.
Kassin, S., Fein, S.& Markus, H. R. (2017). Social psychology (10th ed.). Cengage
Learning.
References
Anderson, C. A. & Bushman, B. J. (2002). Human aggression. Annual Review of
Anderson, C. A. (2004). The influence of media violence on youth. Paper

presented at the annual convention of the Association for Psychological Science,
Los Angeles, CA.
Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2002). Human aggression. Annual Review

of Psychology, 53, 27-51.
Anderson, C. A., Bushman, B. J. & Groom, R. W. (1997). Hot years and serious
and deadly assault: Empirical tests of the heat hypothesis. Journal of Personality
Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A Social Learning Analysis. Englewood Cliffs,

NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W. H.

Freeman.
Bandura, A., Ross, D. & Ross, S. (1963). Imitation of film-mediated aggressive

models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 3-11.
Berkowitz, L. & LePage, A. (1967). Weapons as aggression-eliciting stimuli.

Berkowitz, L. (1989). Frustration-aggression hypothesis: Examination and

reformulation. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 59-73.
Book, A. S., Starzyk, K. B. & Qunisey, V. L. (2001). The relationship between

testosterone and aggression: A meta-analysis. Aggression and Violent Behavior,
6, 579-599.
181
Social Influence Bushman, B. J. & Anderson, C. A. (2002). Violent video games and hostile
expectations: A test of the general aggression model. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1679-1686.
Buss, A. H. (1961). The Psychology of Aggression. New York: Wiley.
Dabbs, J. M., Carr, T. S., Frady, R. L. & Riad, J. K. (1995). Testosterone, crime,
and misbehavior among 692 male prison inmates. Personality and Individual
Differences, 18, 627-633.
De Wall, C. N., Maner, J. K. &Rouby, D. A.(2009). Social exclusion and early-

stage interpersonal perception: Selective attention to signs of acceptance. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 729-741.
Dill, J. C. & Anderson, C. A. (1995). Effects of frustration justification on hostile

aggression. Aggressive Behaviour, 21, 359-369.
Dollard, J., Doob, L., Miller, N., Mowerer, O. H. & Sears, R. R. (1939).
Frustration and Aggression. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Harris, M. B. (1974). Mediators between frustration and aggression in a field

experiment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 561-571.
Lorenz, K. (1966). On Aggression. New York: Harcourt, Brace, & World.
Miller, N. E.(1941). The frustration-aggression hypothesis. Psychological Review,

48,337-342.
Olweus, D. (1999). Sweden. In P. K. Smith, Y. Morita, J. Junger-Tas, D. Olweus,

R. F. Catalano & P. Slee (Eds.), The Nature of School Bullying: A Cross-national
perspective (pp. 7-27). New York: Routledge.
Roland, E. (2002). Aggression, depression, and bullying others. Aggressive

Behavior, 28, 198-206.
Steffensmeier, D. & Allen, E. (1996). Gender and crime: Toward a gendered

theory of female offending. Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 459-487.
Taylor, S. E., Klein, L. C. Lewis, B. P., Gruenewald, T. L., Gurung, R. A. R.

&Updegraff, J. A. (2000). Biobehavioral responses to stress in females: Tend-
and-befriend, not fight-or-flight. Psychological Review. 107, 411-29.
Zillmann, D. (1994). Cognition–excitation interdependencies in the escalation

of anger and angry aggression. In M. Potegal & J. F. Knutson (Eds.), The Dynamics
of Aggression. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
182
Aggression and Social
UNIT 10 INTERPERSONAL ATTRACTION Influence
AND PRO-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR*

Structure
10.0 Objectives
10.1 Introduction
10.2 Interpersonal Attraction
10.3 Internal Factors Effecting Attraction
10.3.1 The Need to Affiliate
10.3.2 Influence of Affect on Attraction
10.4 External Factors Effecting Attraction
10.4.1 Proximity: Mere exposure effect
10.4.2 Observable Characteristics: Physical Attractiveness
10.5 Interpersonal Factors Affecting Attraction
10.5.1 Similarity
10.5.2 Reciprocity: Mutual Liking
10.6 Pro-Social Behaviour: Definition and Types
10.7 Motivation behind Pro-social Behaviour
10.7.1 Empathy-Altruism Hypothesis
10.7.2 Negative-State Relief Model
10.7.3 Empathic Joy Hypothesis
10.7.4 Competitive Altruism
10.7.5 Kin Selection Theory
10.8 The Bystander Effect: A Five Stage Model of Helping Behaviour
10.9 Factors Affecting Pro-Social Behaviour
10.9.1 Similarity with the Victim
10.9.2 Attribution about the Victim’s Sufferings
10.9.3 Pro-social Modelling
10.9.4 Gratitude
10.9.5 Interpersonal Relation and Connection with the Society
10.10 Let Us Sum Up
10.12 Glossary
10.13 Answer to Self Assessment Questions
10.0 OBJECTIVES
Explain the concept and process of interpersonal attraction;
Describe various factors of interpersonal attraction;
Define pro-social behaviour and explain its types;
Explain various motivational factors of pro-social behaviour; and
Discuss various factors affecting pro-social behaviour.
Social Influence
10.1 INTRODUCTION
Human beings have been defined as social animal. The term ‘animal’ has been
used because of the biological processes associated with us. But the term ‘social’
has a lot to say about nature of human beings. Have you ever thought if the
human were made to grow and live in isolation? Obviously, you cannot imagine
that how our life would have been if we didn’t have so many people around us.
Human infants are born with an inbuilt motivation and ability to seek contact
with their social world. Interaction with others is so essential that lack of it can
cause a lot of psychological disorder. Think about the punishment of kala pani.The
prisoners of kala pani suffered a state of social exclusion in the Cellular Jail of
Andaman and Nicobar Islands. This made them face many psychological
disorders. Some of them even died during it.
10.2 INTERPERSONAL ATTRACTION

Attraction is a step ahead of interaction. More than interpersonal relation, the
interpersonal attraction is prolonged relationship based on liking between two
persons. We cannot say that interaction is the necessary or sufficient condition
for developing attraction but for an attraction to develop into a fruitful relationship,
a healthy interaction is mandatory. In fact, all the motives of interaction can be
achieved only if there is some sort of attraction between the interacting partners.
10.3 INTERNAL FACTORS EFFECTING

ATTRACTION
10.3.1 The Need to Affiliate
The tendency to affiliate and associate with others has a biological basis (Rowe,
1996). In terms of social psychology, it is as basic to a human survival as hunger
and thirst. The latter ones being important for our physical survival but the former
one is important to our psychological well-being.
Individual Differences in Need to Affiliate

Different individuals have different intensity of desires to affiliate with others
and to form relations. You might find that some people around you are very
sociable and extrovert who always prefers to be in company of others; whereas
some people prefer to be alone. This difference might result from genetics of a
person or it may stem from his or her life experiences. This tendency forms a
relatively stable trait which remains more or less unchanged for the whole lifespan
of an individual. When this need is not fulfilled, an individual develops a feeling
of being ignored, social exclusion and lost control over one’s environment leading
to increased sensitivity to interpersonal information (Gardner, Pickett & Brewer,
2000). Alternatively, this tendency may vary within same individual from time
to time. We also may want to be alone some time. In fact, we maintain the social
contact to an extent which is optimal for us at a particular instance (O’Connor
&Rosenblood, 1996).
Social psychologists have been pondering upon the universality of the need to
affiliate and associate with other people. On one hand, some social psychologists
184
claim that need to affiliate is a very strong one and almost all people display Interpersonal Attraction and
Pro-Social Behaviour
them (Baumeister & Twenge, 2003). On the other hand, a different
viewpointclaimsthat there is no suchuniversal need to affiliate to others. Rather
they claim thatsomepeopleavoid close relationships; termed as dismissing-
avoidant attachment style (Collins & Feeney, 2000). However, some recent studies
(Carvallo & Gabriel, 2006) have supported the view that all the people have a
strong need to affiliate. They may hide it, claim otherwise, or display it in some
other ways depending upon their culture; but they cannot deny its existence.
Situational Influences on Need to Affiliate

Many external events may also influence the need to affiliate. For
example,affiliation, friendliness and cheerful behaviour have been found to
increase as a result of natural disasters. At such times, people tend to help,
cooperate and comfort one another. Schachter (1959) revealed that people facing
such troubles tend to interact with those who are facing similar problems rather
than interacting with those not facing such problems. One possible reason for
such affiliation with similar people may be that during troubled time people seek
social comparison. Such comparisonsprovide them ‘cognitive clarity’ (know what
is happening) and ‘emotional clarity’ (know how does it feel). With such
comparisons, they compare their perceptions with those of others which further
lead them to reduce uncertainty.
10.3.2 Influence of Affect on Attraction

Presence of specific emotions has very prominent effect on our evaluation of
other persons and things around us. A basic principle suggests that positive affect
leads to positive evaluation and negative affect leads to negative evaluation.
Emotions can affect our evaluation either directly or indirectly.
Direct Influence
In India, we frequently come across elections, either for central legislature,
provincial legislature or some other local body elections. During such periods,
various candidates visit us for canvass. No matter how ill named, rude and
notorious those candidates are in their real lives, but when it comes to elections
they talk nicely, behave gently and project themselves as your only well-wisher.
Similarly, the sales person in a showroom is very gentle to us or an insurance
agent talks very nicely to us. A general thumb rule is that we tend to like a person
who is nice to us and makes us feel good rather than those who is a contrary
(Ben-Porath, 2002).
Indirect Influence
One even more surprising influence of emotions on our likes and dislikes come
from the principles of classical conditioning. When we are in a positive mood
we evaluate a person or a thing present at that time in a positive way and when
we are in a negative mood we evaluate a person or a thing present at that time in
a negative way (Berry & Hansen, 1996). Application of this principle has been
frequently seen in the advertisements where a positive mood is induced before
presenting the target product.
These principles are more prominent with a stranger or with a person or a thing
we do not know very well, such as a guy from some other section of your class
185
Social Influence with whom you have a casual relation or a product you have not used before.
With a well acquainted person there is a pre-existing opinion whether you like
him or her or do not like. Also, these principles do not work in absolutism. There
are many other factors, such as your belief systems, cultural biases, stereotypes,
etc., which guide your likes and dislikes towards a person. For example, you will
never positively evaluate a stranger belonging to a community towards which
you have cultural biases and negative stereotypes; no matter how positive your
mood is or how nicely he or she is talking to you.
10.4 EXTERNAL FACTORS EFFECTING

ATTRACTION
10.4.1 Proximity: Mere exposure effect
Two persons are likely to know each other if their physical environment repeatedly
brings them into contact. Furthermore, persons who are physically closer are
expected to develop attraction towards to each other; presumably because repeated
exposure to any new stimulus results in positive evaluation of that stimulus
(Zajnoc, 1965). The mere exposure effect suggests that something seen multiple
time selicits positive response. A possible explanation for mere exposure effect
may be that unfamiliar and unknown stimuli are considered as uncomfortable
and possibly dangerous because of uncertainty about their behaviour (Zajnoc,
2001). However, repeated exposure reduces unpredictability about the stimulus
leading to enhanced positive emotions toward it (Lee, 2001). Moreland and Beach
(1992) demonstrated the mere exposure effect in a classroom setting. They
reported that the lab assistants who attended the class for more number of days
were rated higher on the liking scale by students than those who attended the
class for lesser number of days.
However, the phenomenon of repeated exposure fails to operate if your initial

response towards a stimulus is negative. In such a case, repeated exposure acts
contrary and elicits negative response (Swap, 1977). The principles of proximity
and repeated exposure also do not operate if you have some pre-existing beliefs,
stereotypes and attitudes towards the person in contact. Furthermore, in the present
scenario of virtual world and social media, these principles of proximity have
faded down and do not appear to be that much important; however, in the physical
and real world they still have their significance.
10.4.2 Observable Characteristics: Physical Attractiveness

Not only familiarity, evoked by repeated exposure, elicits positive affect but
positive affect may also elicit a perception of familiarity leading to increased
chances of interpersonal attraction (Monin, 2003). Sometimes you may feel
attracted towards someone at the first sight whom you do not know, neither have
you had any personal contact with that person. This increases the probability
that you will approach that person and thus the likelihood of developing attraction
is enhanced. Contrary to this, if you dislike a person at first sight, you tend to
avoid any further contact with that person. Such likes or dislikes at the first
sight, based upon your past experiences, beliefs and biases, are often inaccurate
(Andreoletti, Zebrowitz, Lachman, 2001). Physical appearance may be one of
the most misleading cues about someone’s inner personality; yet, it is a very
186
powerful factor to initiate relationship between two individuals and whether Interpersonal Attraction and
knowingly or unknowingly, your decisions are affected by such cues.
It has been found that people associate qualities like interesting, sociable,
dominant, exciting adjusting, skilled, successful, masculine/feminine, etc. with
attractive men and women (Dion & Dion, 1991). Although, these associations
may be incorrect, misguidingand illogical; yet, researchers have found that
attractiveness is usually associated with popularity, high self-esteem and good
interpersonal skills (Diener, Wolsic & Fujita, 1995). Though, attractiveness may
not have any direct influence on these qualities; the attractive people have usually
been treated well by others.
Just like the cues of physical attractiveness, there may also be some other
superficial and observable characteristics that influence the onset of
communication and attraction. The first one of them is clothing. Both neatness
and colour of the cloths have effects on attractiveness of the person leading to
attraction of other interacting persons. Furthermore, people react positively to
youthful walking style, firm handshake, animated behaviour and modest persons.
Person’s physique also triggers various emotional reactions and differential
attraction. For example, round and fat body indicates sad and sloppy person;
hard and muscular body indicates good health and lack of intelligence; thin and
angular body indicates intelligence and fearfulness (Ryckman, Robbins, Kaczor
& Gold, 1989). Apart from this, various other visible characteristics such as any
form of physical disability, mental illness, perceived age, beard and eyeglasses,
etc. influence attraction.
Since physical appearance has a significant influence on the initiation of

interpersonal communication and thus attraction; people are sensitive to their
appearance. However, the level of sensitivity may vary from person to person
and from time to time within the same person. Even the most attractive people
also have this feeling. This is what we call appearance rejection sensitivity,
worrying about one’s own appearance and fearing that others may ignore them
because they do not look good (Park & Pelham, 2006).
10.5 INTERPERSONAL FACTORS AFFECTING

ATTRACTION
10.5.1 Similarity
Suppose you go to some foreign country, you will be very glad to see some
Indian there and will readily befriend him or her, suggesting that we always
search for matches. When we are in out-group, we search for anyone who is in-
group to us. And when we are in our group, we search for someone who shares
beliefs and attitudes with us. Various studies conducted on friends and spouses
have revealed that great amount of similarity between them (Hunt, 1935). This
positive correlation could mean both ways, i.e. liking for each other in the pair
leads to the development of similarity or the similarity between them causes
them to like each other. Study published by Newcomb (1956) revealed that, it is
the similarity which is a good predictor of liking between two individuals. In his
experiment, he measured the attitudes of students on various issues before they
joined the university. Once the students joined the university, he assessed their
likings for each other. By the end of the semester, it was found that strength of
187
Social Influence their liking for each other was highly correlated with the initial similarity of their
attitudes.
Presumably, similarity evokes positive feelings and dissimilarity evokes negative

feelings. Similarity not only leads to attraction but also have many other effects.
We tend to evaluate similar people as more intelligent, better informed, high on
moral values and better adjusted than the dissimilar people (Byrne, 1961). This
consideration of similarity and dissimilarity in initiating attraction has not just
been a subjective phenomenon. Byrne & Nelson (1965) demonstrated proportion
of similarity and suggested that it is mathematical value obtained on dividing
the ‘number of topics on which two people have similar views’ by the ‘total
number of topics on which two peoples have communicated’. Higher the value
of this term, greater the liking is. The effect of this proportion is very prominent
and found to be true regardless of the number of topics on which views are
expressed or how trivial the topics are. Furthermore, it appears applicable across
gender, cultural age and educational differences.
However, the genesis of attraction between two individuals is not so simple that
in can be predicted by using a single mathematical formula. For example, if you
have a new classmate with the views similar to that of yours on sports, music and
religious practices. But the only difference you find that you love to be serious
and quiet most of the time; whereas he or she is extremely talkative. Considering
such situations, Rosenbaum (1986) proposed repulsion hypothesis which states
that similar attitude does not increase attraction. Instead, it is dissimilarity which
causes repulsion between two people. By considering a mathematical formula as
used above, it becomes impossible to segregate the effect of similarity and
dissimilarity.
Although similarity has been found to be a good predictor of attraction,

dissimilarity between two persons has not been as a repulsion factor in all
instances. For example, if you are a dominant person, you would naturally like
to befriend a submissive person. Here, dissimilarity will not causes repulsion
between two people. Some evidences have been reported that in case of interaction
between a female and a male, there are fair chances that dominating and
submissive partners may get attracted towards each other.
Social psychologists have been exploring that why similarity causes attraction
and dissimilarity causes repulsion. Why does similarity elicit positive feelings;
whereas dissimilarity evokes negative feelings? Various propositions have been
put forward to answer this question. Applying balance theory (Heider, 1958) to
friendship development, Newcomb (1961) has argued that people have a natural
tendency to organise their likes and dislikes in a symmetrical way. Similarity of
thoughts, ideas, attitudes, etc., between two persons constitutes a state of balance
which is emotionally pleasing to both the persons. Similarly, discovering
dissimilarity in some respect causes imbalance which is emotionally unpleasant.
An imbalanced state drives individuals to restore balance by any of the three
methods: causing one of them to change or to misperceive the dissimilarity or by
developing dislikes each other.
Festinger’s (1954) social comparison theory suggests that we tend to compare

our thoughts, beliefs and attitudes with those of others in order to validate them.
This may be a highly misleading way of verifying the authenticity of our decisions,
yet it is highly used. When we find someone else thinking like us, it enhances
188
our confidence in our beliefs. Contrary to this, if we find others holding an opposite Interpersonal Attraction and
attitude, we feel that we are not correct and tend to recheck our thoughts and
beliefs. It is argued that in order to ensure ‘accuracy’ of our thoughts, beliefs and
attitudes, we tend to socially adhere to the people who hold the thoughts, beliefs
and attitudes similar to us.
The third approach to explain the effect of similarity and dissimilarity on attraction
is adaptive response proposed by Gould (1996). This theory is evolved from
evolutionary perspective which presumes that anything that is not similar to us
is a potential danger to us. Thus, it is an inherent tendency in the human being to
accompany people with similarity and to stay away from dissimilar people.
10.5.2 Reciprocity: Mutual Liking

Sometimes, we like people just because they like us and are nice to us. You must
have encountered this technique several times in your life. Though reciprocal
liking is often taken in negative ways in terms of flattery, teacher’s pet or boss’s
pet, sometimes a person may genuinely like the other person and this compels
the second person to develop a liking for the first person. Research findings have
shown that this proves to be a powerful technique in gaining favours and likings
(Condon &Crano, 1988).
1) Not only familiarity, evoked by repeated exposure, elicits positive affect

but……………………………… may also elicit a perception of familiarity
leading to increased chances of interpersonal attraction.
2) Newcomb (1961) has argued that people have a natural tendency to organise
their likes and dislikes in a ……………………… way.
3) Two persons are likely to know each other if their ……………

……………………. repeatedly brings them into contact.
4) More than interpersonal relation, the ……………………………………..

is prolonged relationship based on liking between two persons.
5) The tendency to affiliate and associate with others has a ……………

……………. basis (Rowe, 1996).
10.6 PRO-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR: DEFINITION

AND TYPES
During the recent flood in Kerala, you might have seen various groups of people
visiting door-to-door to collect relief materials, such as food, cloths, medicines,
etc., from various parts of the country. Thousands of people from various parts
of the country rushed to the flood affected areas in Kerala and volunteered
themselves in rescue operations. You might have also seen certain people helping
a blind or old person to cross a busy traffic on road. All these behaviours are
examples of some most beautiful aspects of our social life: pro-social behaviour.
In general, pro-social behaviour is defined as an intentional act or behaviour of
189
Social Influence an individual which benefits some other person or society at the larger level,
despite that the behaviour does not provide any immediate benefit to the helper.
Psychologists have proposed a fine distinction between simple helping behaviour

and a specific act of altruism. Many times, we help others only to benefit him or
her and our only motive behind helping behaviour is to reduce the distress of the
person in need. Such behaviours which are merely motivated by the desire to
reduce the suffering of the person are called altruism. However, many times we
engage ourselves in helping behaviours in expectation of some reward in return.
Sometimes, this return may be intrinsic in nature; for example, personal
satisfaction and increased self-esteem.The expected return may be something
tangible as well, such as we donate to the Prime Minister’sNationalRelief Fund
so that we can get a tax deduction. Many times, we help others also because we
think that it will create our positive impression in public.Whatsoever the reason,
when the help is given in expectation of a reward, the behaviour is not truly
altruistic and such behaviours are simply known as helping behaviour.
Thus, the difference between altruism and helping behaviour is drawn from the
distinction in the motivation behind the behaviour and the mere outcome of the
behaviour is not that important. A person may get rewarded for a behaviour
entirely motivated to relieve the suffering of the victim. However, since the
behaviour was not executed in expectation of any reward in return, the behaviour
may be called altruism.
10.7 MOTIVATION BEHIND PRO-SOCIAL

BEHAVIOUR
In any given situation, only few people come across to help the person in need.
Moreover, all persons do not engage themselves in helping behaviour to the
same extent. Even a person who offers help to someone at sometime; fails to
offer help to somebody else or at some other occasion. Social psychologists
have proposed a number of hypotheses that explain the motives that govern our
pro-social behaviours.
10.7.1 Empathy-Altruism Hypothesis

Empathy-Altruism Hypothesis, as proposed by Batson, Duncan, Ackerman,
Buckley, and Birch (1981), assumes that we are engaged in a pro-social behaviour
because when we see someone in need an emotion of empathy is aroused. Empathy
refers to a state in which a person feels and understands the situation with other
person’s perspective. This leads the person to show a genuine concern for the
sufferings of the victim. Batson and colleagues have argued that when our helping
behaviour is motivated by empathic consideration, we render our help even in
situations where it involves dangerous and life-threatening activities. Gleason,
Jensen-Campbell and Ickes (2009) suggested that empathy is a complex
phenomenon consisting of emotional empathy (feelings and emotions with others’
perspective), empathic accuracy (perceiving others’ thoughts and feelings
accurately) and empathic concern (concern for another’s well-being). Batson,
Early and Salvarani (1997) demonstrated that thinking about a situation with
other’s perspective arouses empathic emotion which motivates us to help someone
in need.
190
10.7.2 Negative-State Relief Model Interpersonal Attraction and
Negative-state relief model (Cialdini, Baumann, & Kenrick, 1981), an approach

opposite to the empathy-altruism hypothesis, proposes that our pro-social
behaviour is motivated by our desire to reduce painful emotions. This model
hypothesises that others’ sufferings induce an unpleasant feeling in us and when
we do something good for others or by helping others, we reduce our own
unpleasant feeling and elevate positive emotions. Thus, without having empathy
for the victim, our own negative emotions can guide us to pro-social behaviour.
There have been some research reports indicating that the negative emotions
aroused by something unrelated to the victim, such as own suffering, can also
lead the person to pro-social behaviour (Fultz, Shaller, & Cialdini, 1988).
10.7.3 Empathic Joy Hypothesis

Another explanation of the motivational aspects of pro-social behaviour is
empathic joy hypothesis (Smith, Keating, &Stotland, 1989). Empathic joy
hypothesis assumes that helping others produces a positive impact on others and
the victim, whom we help, also reacts back with positive gestures. This positive
feedback for pro-social behaviour provides an empathic for the helper. Smith,
Keating and Stotland (1989) demonstrated that merely empathic emotion or
empathic concern could not lead the research participants to helping behaviour
when empathic joy did not follow the helping behaviour. However, the research
participants engaged themselves in helping behaviour when empathic joy was
anticipated.
10.7.4 Competitive Altruism

Apart from being motivated by empathic concern or by need to reduce our own
negative emotions or by our desire to have a positive impact on others in order to
get empathic joy; competitive altruism approach proposes that by being engaged
in the pro-social acts we are able to enhance our own significance, status and
reputation in the society. Furthermore, this enhanced significance, status and
reputation pays off the helper in many ways, such as importance in the society,
public recognition, etc. These gains may not be always in tangible forms; however,
they may motivate and lead a person to pro-social behaviours. For example, we
see various streets, buildings, awards, welfare schemes, etc. named after some
notable philanthropists, social workers and revolutionary personalities of our
society.
10.7.5 Kin Selection Theory

Kin selection theory explains pro-social behaviour from evolutionary perspective
that as the species we are motivated to get our genes transferred into the next
generation. Thus, this theory suggests that we are more likely to help those with
whom we are genetically closer and linked than those we are not related. Research
reports have indicated that participants were more inclined to help their close
relatives than those who were distantly related or not related at all (Burnstein,
Crandall & Kitayama, 1994). Results also indicated that relatives younger in
age, having more years of reproductive life, were more likely get help than those
who were older in age, having either no or very less years of reproductive life.
191
Social Influence
10.8 THE BYSTANDER EFFECT: A FIVE STAGE
MODEL OF HELPING BEHAVIOUR
Often we come across the situations where by standers help the victims who are
most of the time strangers to them. However, several stories in media are also
reported about incidences in which bystanders remain passive and do not
intervene. We find many incidences of road rage or molestation at a public place
in which the victims do not get help from the bystanders.
Latané and Darley (1968) proposed a model suggesting that in such emergency
situations, where immediate help is warranted, a bystander passes through five
different stages and at every step he or she has to take a decision before helping
the person in need. The model assumes that help is provided by the bystander
only when he or she notices something unusual in the situation; perceives,
interprets and construes the situation as an emergency and assumes responsibility
for helping. Bystander must understand that he or she has the knowledge and
skill required to give help and decides how to help and finally decides actually to
the victim. The model, as shown in Fig. 6.1, suggests that each stage of the
helping behaviour has a decision process and the bystander must take a ‘yes’
decision at each stage in order to help the victim. A ‘yes’ decision at one stage
does not guarantee that help will be provided; it simply allows the person to
move to the next stage of the model. However, a‘no’ decision at any of the five
stages will lead to failure to help.
No Yes
Decided to implement Help is provided
help
Yes
No
How to help is decided
Help is not provided
Yes
No
Responsibility to help is
assumed
Yes
No
Situation perceived as an
emergency
Yes
No
Something unusual in
the situation is noticed
Fig. 10.1: Five stage model of helping behaviour (Latané & Darley, 1968)
192
1) Noticing something unusual in the situation: First of the five stages of Interpersonal Attraction and
helping behaviour in emergencies is noticing that there is something unusual
or unexpected in the situation. For every social situation we generally have
some schemas or cognitive structures that contain broader expectations and
knowledge of the situation that help us systematically organise and process
the information. Any given situation is noticed as unusual when it there is
something remarkably distinguishing from our long held schema driven
expectation in the situation. Every day we see numerous motor vehicles
running on the roads. However, hearing somebody’s cry from a passing car
may lead us to notice something unusual in the situation. In case we fail to
notice unusual in the situation, we will not move to the next stage of the
decision process and help will not be provided.
2) Situation perceived as an emergency: Once the situation is noticed as

unusual, the next step is to correctly perceive and interpret the situation and
label it as an emergency that requires our intervention and help. Unless the
situation is perceived as an emergency, we will not move to the next stage
of the decision making process and help will not be provided. However,
whether the situation will be perceived and labelled as emergency is largely
determined by the level of ambiguity and uncertainty in the situation. If the
situation involves great amount of ambiguity and uncertainty we wait for a
while to collect some more information before we act. Ambiguity and
uncertainty in the situation becomes more significance in the presence of
multiple bystanders. Phenomenon of pluralistic ignorance suggests that an
early action in an ambiguous situation in the presence of multiple bystanders
may cause embarrassment to the person in case he or she misinterprets the
situation and acts inappropriately. Thus, in the presence of multiple
bystanders people hesitate to act and withhold the help.
3) Assuming responsibility to help: Noticing something unusual in the situation

at the first stage and perceiving and labelling the situation as an emergency
at the second stage do not guarantee that a bystander will intervene and
provide help to the victim. Darley and Latané (1968) demonstrated that in
the presence of multiple bystanders, people generally with hold help to the
victim. They termed this phenomenon as bystander effect and further
suggested that the likelihood of help being provided to the victim decreases
with the increasing number of bystanders. Darley and Latané (1968) also
demonstrated that reaction time to help the victim also increases with the
increasing number of bystanders. They argued that in the presence of multiple
bystanders, each bystander assumes that the action to help the victim will
be initiated by the other bystanders, leading to a state of diffusion of
responsibilityand with holding help to the person in need. However, some
recent evidences have suggested that the bystander effect does not occur
when the situation involves very high potential danger to the victim and a
clear violation of a social norm, such as sexual aggression (Fischer,
Greitemeyer, Pollozek, & Frey, 2006).
4) Deciding how to help: Even after assuming responsibility to help, we may

not initiate a helping action due to lack of knowledge, skill and competence
required to take action in the situation. Many emergency situations require
some specific knowledge, skill and competence in order to be helpful or the
victim. For example, if you see somebody drowning in the swimming pool;
193
Social Influence you will provide help to the person unless you are a swimmer. Similarly,
you will not help a person having a heart attack unless you are a medical
professional. Presumably, feelings of competence increase confidence in
one’s ability to help and to know that what requires to be done in an
emergency situation. Moreover, feeling of competence increases sensitivity
to the needs of others and empathy toward victims.
5) Deciding to finally implement help: Although the first four stages are
mandatorily required to pass through, they alone do not lead a person to
helping behaviour. The person has still to take the final decision whether he
will implement the helping behaviour or not. This final decision to execute
helping behaviour is dependent on the person’s evaluation about the rewards
and costs in helping. There are potential rewards for helping (gratitude from
the victim, monetary reward, recognition by peers, etc.) and for not helping
(avoiding potential danger, arriving for an appointment on time, etc.).
Similarly, there are costs for helping (possible injury, embarrassment,
inconvenience, etc.) and for not helping (loss of self-esteem). Presumably,
help is finally provided to the victim when the person finds that the rewards
owing to the helping behaviour are greater than the costs. However, in case
of greater costs involved in helping, likelihoodofpeople providing help to
the victim is reduced.
10.9 FACTORS AFFECTING PRO-SOCIAL

BEHAVIOUR
Although social psychologists have been more interested in explaining the
bystanders’ behaviour that in some emergency situations they provide help to
the victim, while at some other occasions they with hold help and do not take
any action; psychologists have also studied a number of factors that either increase
or decrease the tendency to help.
10.9.1 Similarity with the Victim

People are more likely to provide help to those who are close to them, such as
family members, friends; as compared to the strangers. Studies have been reported
indicating that an unknown victim is more likely to receive help if he or she is
similar to the bystander in terms of age, nationality, ethnicity, etc. Hodges, Kiel,
Kramer, Veach and Villaneuva (2010) have argued that we feel greater empathic
concern for those who are similar to us. They have further suggested that similarity
with the victim facilitates accuracy of understanding about the victim’s sufferings
and experiences; leading to increased likelihood of help being provided.
10.9.2 Attribution about the Victim’s Sufferings

When we see a victim, we initially try to make attributions about the victim’s
suffering. Help being provided becomes less likely when we attribute the victim’s
sufferings to his or her internal factors, such as the victim’s internal traits or
personal habits. However, we tend to provide help to the victims whose sufferings
are attributed to some external or environmental factors. For example, suppose
we witness a person’s car colliding into the road divider and when we approach
the person, we find a bad smell of alcohol from the car. We certainly attribute
that the accident was a case of drink and drive and therefore, the help being
194
provided becomes less likely. Thinking according to the just-world hypothesis, a Interpersonal Attraction and
belief that people get what they deserve and deserve what they get, often leads
us to lesser importance to the suffering of a person whom we think responsible
for his or her own suffering. Generally, we tend not to help to the victim we
perceive responsible for his or her own problems than to those we think innocent.
10.9.3 Pro-social Modelling

Consistent to the modelling of social learning approach, in the presence of a
bystander who provides help to the victim, we also tend to provide help. Not
only live pro-social models, research findings have suggested that playing pro-
social video games can also increase helping behaviour. Presumably, playing
pro-social video games arouses pro-social thoughts and schemas and,
consequently, activates attitudes and emotions leading to pro-social actions
behaviours.
10.9.4 Gratitude
When a person receives recognition and appreciation for his or her pro-social
act, it is more likely that he or she will help again to the same person, as well as
to other people at subsequent occasions. It is believed that being recognised and
appreciated enhances the helper’s self-efficacy and self-worth which further lead
the person to enhanced tendency of pro-social behaviours.
10.9.5 Interpersonal Relation and Connection with the Society

Research findings suggest that people with rich inter-personal relations and strong
connection with the society tend to be more involved in pro-social behaviours
than those who are socially excluded (Twenge, Baumeister, DeWall, Ciarocco &
Bartels, 2007). It is believed that people experiencing social exclusion have lesser
empathic concern for others’ sufferings leading to decreased tendency of pro-
social behaviour.

1) When we see a victim, we never try to make attributions about the victim’s
suffering. ( )
2) People are more likely to provide help to the strangers than to those who are
close to them, such as family members, friends. ( )
3) First of the five stages of helping behaviour in emergencies is noticing that

there is something unusual or unexpected in the situation. ( )
4) Such behaviours which are merely motivated by the desire to reduce the
suffering of the person are called altruism. ( )
5) When a person receives recognition and appreciation for his or her pro-
social act, it is more likely that he or she will not help again. ( )
195
Social Influence
10.10 LET US SUM UP
More than interpersonal relation, attraction is a prolonged relationship based on
liking between two persons. Though it is common among human being, different
people differ in their tendency to get attracted towards others and number of
internal, external and interpersonal factors affect interpersonal attraction. The
tendency to affiliate and associate with others is one important factor affecting
interpersonal attraction. Different individuals have different intensity of desires
to affiliate with others and for relations. Many external events, such as natural
disasters or other common threats, may also influence the need to affiliate.
Presence of positive affect has very prominent effect on our evaluation of other
persons and things around us, leading to have a facilitate development of
interpersonal attraction. Persons who are physically closer and have chance to
meet repeatedly are expected to develop attraction towards to each other;
presumably because repeated exposure to any new stimulus results in positive
evaluation of that stimulus. Furthermore, good and attractive physical appearance
also has a significant influence on the initiation of interpersonal communication
and attraction. Social psychologists argue that similarity and reciprocity evokes
positive feelings between people leading to develop interpersonal attraction.
Pro-social behaviour is defined as an intentional act or behaviour of an individual

which benefits some other person or society at the larger level, despite that the
behaviour does not provide any immediate benefit to the helper. Social
psychologists have proposed a number of hypotheses that explain the motives
that govern our pro-social behaviours. Empathy-Altruism Hypothesis assumes
that we are engaged in a pro-social behaviour because when we see someone in
need an emotion of empathy is aroused. Negative-state relief model proposes
that our pro-social behaviour is motivated by our desire to reduce painful emotions.
Empathic joy hypothesis assumes that helping others produces a positive impact
on others and the victim, whom we help, also reacts back with positive gestures.
Competitive altruism approach proposes that by being engaged in the pro-social
acts we are able to enhance our own significance, status and reputation in the
society. Kin selection theory explains pro-social behaviour from evolutionary
perspective that as the species we are motivated to get our genes transferred into
the next generation. Thus, we are more likely to help those with whom we are
genetically closer and linked than those we are not related. Afive stage model of
helping behaviour suggests that in emergency situations where immediate help
is warranted, a bystander passes through five different stages and at every step
he or she has to take a decision before helping the person in need. Social
psychologists have argued we tend to provide help to the victims whose sufferings
are attributed to some external or environmental factors. Consistent to the
modelling of social learning approach, in the presence of a bystander who provides
help to the victim, we also tend to provide help.When a person receives recognition
and appreciation for his or her pro-social act, it is more likely that he or she will
help again to the same person, as well as to other people at subsequent occasions.
Research findings also suggest that people with rich inter-personal relations and
strong connection with the society tend to be more involved in pro-social
behaviours than those who are socially excluded.
196
Interpersonal Attraction and
10.11 UNIT END QUESTIONS Pro-Social Behaviour
1) Elucidate the meaning of interpersonal attraction and discuss the factors

affecting interpersonal attraction.
2) Define pro-social behaviour and explain its types. Also discuss various
motivational factors behindpro-social behaviour.
3) Critically evaluate Latané and Darley’sfive stage model of helping behaviour

explaining the bystander effect.
4) Describe various factors that affect pro-social behaviour.
10.12 GLOSSARY
Interpersonal attraction: A prolonged relationship between two persons based
on liking for each other.
Need to affiliate: Tendency to affiliate with others and to form relations.
Mere exposure effect: Persons who are physically closer and have chance to
meet repeatedly are expected to develop attraction towards to each other.
Appearance rejection sensitivity: Worrying about one’s own appearance and

fearing that others may ignore them because they do not look good.
Proportion of similarity: A mathematical value obtained on dividing the ‘number

of topics on which two people have similar views’ by the ‘total number of topics
on which two peoples have communicated’. Higher the value of this term, greater
the liking is.
Repulsion hypothesis: Dissimilarity in terms of attitudes, values, beliefs and

opinions causes repulsion between two people.
Adaptive response: A presumption that anything that is not similar to us is a

potential danger leading to an inherent tendency to accompany people with
similarity and to stay away from dissimilar people.
Pro-social behaviour: An intentional act or behaviour of an individual which

benefits some other person or society at the larger level, despite that the behaviour
does not provide any immediate benefit to the helper.
Altruism: A type of pro-social behaviour which is merely motivated by the desire

to reduce the suffering of the person.
Empathy-altruism hypothesis: An assumption that we are engaged in a pro-

social behaviour because when we see someone in need an emotion of empathy
is aroused.
Negative-state relief model: Aproposition that our pro-social behaviour is

motivated by our desire to reduce painful emotions.
Empathic joy hypothesis: A hypothesis that helping others produces a positive

impact on others and the victim, whom we help, also reacts back with positive
gestures.
197
Social Influence Competitive altruism approach: An assumption that by being engaged in the
pro-social acts we are able to enhance our own significance, status and reputation
in the society.
Kin selection theory: An explanation of pro-social behaviour from evolutionary

perspective that as the species we are motivated to get our genes transferred into
the next generation and therefore, we are more likely to help those with whom
we are genetically closer and linked than those we are not related.
10.13 ANSWER TO SELF ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS

1) positive affect
2) symmetrical
3) physical environment
4) interpersonal attraction
5) biological
1) False
2) False
3) True
4) True
5) False

NY : McGraw-Hill.
Cengage Learning.
References
Andreoletti, C., Zebrowitz, L. A. & Lachman, M. E. (2001). Physical appearance
and control beliefs in young, middle-aged, and older adults. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 969-981.
Batson, C. D., Duncan, B. D., Ackerman, P., Buckley, T. & Birch, K. (1981). Is
empathic emotion a source of altruistic motivation? Journal of Personality and
Batson, C. D., Early, S. &Salvarani, G. (1997). Perspective taking: Imagining

how another feels versus imagining how you would feel. Personality and Social
198
Baumeister, R. F. & Twenge, J. M. (2003). The social self. In T. Millon& M. J. Interpersonal Attraction and
Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of Psychology: Personality and Social Psychology.
(Vol. 5, pp. 327-352). New York: John Wiley.
Ben-Porath, D. D. (2002). Stigmatization of individuals who receive

psychotherapy: An interaction between help-seeking behavior and the presence
of depression. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 21, 400-413.
Berry, D. S.& Hansen, J. S. (1996). Positive affect, negative affect, and social
interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 796-809.
Burnstein, E., Crandall, C. &Kitayama, S. (1994). Some neo-Darwinian rules

for altruism: Weighing cues for inclusive fitness as a function of the biological
importance of the decision. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67,
773-789.
Byrne, D. & Nelson, D. (1965). Attraction as a linear function of proportion of

positive reinforcements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1, 659-
663.
Byrne, D. (1961). Interpersonal attraction and attitude similarity. Journal of

Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62, 713-715.
Carvallo, M., & Gabriel, S. (2006). No man is an island: The need to belong and
dismissing avoidant attachment style. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
32, 697-709.
Cialdini, R. B., Baumann, D. J. & Kenrick, D. T. (1981). Insights from sadness:

A three-step model of the development of altruism as hedonism. Developmental
Review, 1, 207-223.
Collins, N. L. & Feeney, B. C. (2000). A safe haven: An attachment theory

perspective on support seeking and caregiving in intimate relationships. Journal
Condon, J. W. &Crano, W. D. (1988) Inferred evaluation and the relation between

attitude similarity and interpersonal attraction. Journal of Personality and Social
Darley, J. M.& Latane, B. (1968). Bystander intervention in emergencies:

377-383.
Diener, E., Smith, H. & Fujita, F. (1995). The personality structure of affect.
Dion, K. K. & Dion, K. L. (1991). Psychological individualism and romantic

love. Journal of Social Behavior& Personality, 6, 17-33.

7, 117-140.
Fischer, P., Greitemeyer, T., Pollozek, F. & Frey, D. (2006). The unresponsive
bystander: Are bystanders more responsive in dangerous emergencies? European
Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 267-278.
199
Social Influence Fultz, J., Shaller, M. & Cialdini, R. B. (1988). Empathy, sadness, and distress:
Three related but distant vicarious affective responses to another’s suffering.
Gardner, W. L., Pickett, C. L. & Brewer, M. B. (2000). Social exclusion and

selective memory: How the need to belong influences memory for social events.
Gleason, K. A., Jensen-Campbell, L. A. & Ickes, W. (2009). The role of empathic

accuracy in adolescents’ peer relations and adjustment. Personality and Social
Gould, S. J. (1996). Full House: The Spread of Excellence From Plato to Darwin.
New York: Harmony Books.
Hodges, S. D., Kiel, K. J., Kramer, A. D. I., Veach, D. &Villaneuva, B. R. (2010).

Giving birth to empathy: The effects of similar experience on empathic accuracy,
empathic concern, and perceived empathy. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 36, 398-409.
Hunt, A. McC. (1935). A study of the relative value of certain ideals. Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 30, 222-228.
Latane, B. & Darley, J. M. (1968). Group inhibition of bystander intervention in

emergencies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 10, 215-221.
Lee, A. Y. (2001). The mere exposure effect: An uncertainty reduction explanation

revisited. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1255-1266.
Monin, B. (2003). The warm glow heuristic: When liking leads to familiarity.
Moreland, R. L. & Beach, S. R. (1992). Exposure effects in the classroom: The

development of affinity among students. Journal of Experimental Social
Newcomb, T. M. (1956). The prediction of interpersonal attraction. Psychological

Review, 60, 393-404.
Newcomb, T. M. (1961). The Acquaintance Process. New York: Holt, Rinehart

and Winston.
O’Connor, S. C. &Rosenblood, L. K. (1996). Affiliation motivation in everyday

experience: A theoretical comparison. Journal of Personality and Social
Park, J.& Banaji, M. R. (2000). Mood and heuristics: The influence of happy
and sad states on sensitivity and bias in stereotyping. Journal of Personality and
Rosenbaum, M. E. (1986). The repulsion hypothesis: On the nondevelopment of

relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1156-1166.
200
Rowe, P. M. (1996, September). On the neurobiological basis of affiliation. APS Interpersonal Attraction and
Observer, 17-18.
Ryckman, R. M., Robbins, M. A., Kaczor, L. M. & Gold, J. A. (1989). Male and
female raters’ stereotyping of male and female physiques. Personality and Social
Schachter, S. (1959). The Psychology of Affiliation. Stanford, CA: Stanford

University Press.
Smith, K. D., Keating, J. P. &Stotland, E. (1989). Altruism reconsidered: The

effect of denying feedback on a victim’s status to empathetic witnesses. Journal
Swap, W. C. (1977). Interpersonal attraction and repeated exposure to rewarders

and punishers. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 3, 248-251.
Twenge, J. M., Baumeister, R. F., DeWall, C. N., Ciarocco, N. J. & Bartels, J. M.

(2007). Social exclusion decreases prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality
Zajonc, R. B. (1965). Social facilitation. Science, 149, 269-274.
Zajonc, R. B. (2001). Mere exposure: A gateway to the subliminal. Current
Directions in Psychological Science, 10, 224-228.
201
BLOCK 5
GROUP DYNAMICS
Group Dynamics
INTRODUCTION
The fourth block of this course consists of two units. In the first unit, you will
come to know about the concept of group and its various types. We will also
discuss the various stages of group formation. Further, the unit will also define
various elements of a group and how they affect behaviour in a group as well as
the various group processes. The unit will also explain decision making in a
group and describe cooperation, competition and conflict in a group.
The second unit discusses about the meaning, characteristics and nature of leaders.
It will also deal with the different types of leadership style and the role of leaders
in conflictual situation.
204
Group Processes
UNIT 11 GROUP PROCESSES*
Structure
11.1 Objectives
11.2 Introduction
11.3 Groups: Definition and Concept
11.4 Types of Groups
11.4.1 Perceived Bond among Group Members
11.4.2 Entitativity
11.4.3 Primary versus Secondary Group
11.4.4 Formal versus Informal Group
11.5 Components of Group
11.5.1 Status
11.5.2 Roles
11.5.3 Norms
11.5.4 Cohesiveness
11.6 Stages of Group Formation
11.7 Group Effectiveness
11.8 Group Processes
11.8.1 Social Facilitation
11.8.2 Social Loafing
11.8.3 Deindividuation
11.9 Group Decision Making
11.9.1 Group Polarisation
11.9.2 Group Think
11.10 Cooperation and Competition in a Group
11.10.1 Determinants of Cooperation and Competition
11.11 Conflict in a Group
11.11.1 Causes of Conflict
11.11.2 Outcomes of Conflict
11.11.3 Conflict Resolution Strategies
11.12 Communication
11.12.1 Types of Communication
11.12.2 Communication Style
11.12.3 Barriers to Effective Communication
11.13 Let Us Sum Up
11.15 Glossary
Group Dynamics
11.1 OBJECTIVES
Define Groups and its various types;
Describe various stages of group formation;
Define various elements of a group and how they affect behaviour in a group;
Define various group processes;
Explain decision making in a group; and
Discuss the concept and relevance of cooperation, competition and conflict
in a group.
11.2 INTRODUCTION
Living in a social world, we are rarely alone. At homes, we are surrounded by
our family members, in school we are surrounded by classmates/teachers, in
office we are surrounded by our colleagues,on the road we are surrounded by
our fellow travellers, in the park we are surrounded by our friends and strangers.
These people range from one whom we don’t know at all to those whom we
know very well. Few of them interact with us frequently, few of them sometimes
and few of them rarely. Whatsoever the level of interaction, they all influence
our behaviour. In this unit, we will be discussing about the persons whom we
know and with whom we have a considerable amount of interactions are somehow
connected to us and we are an intact part of group. Being intact suggests that we
are dependent on each other for fulfilment of some of our basic needs, like survival
needs, social needs, etc. Hence, these people are the ones who play a major role
in shaping our core personality and are the cause behind most of our actions.
11.3 GROUPS: DEFINITION AND CONCEPT

Groupscan be defined as a collection of people who perceive themselves to be
bonded together in a coherent unit to some degree (Brown, 2000; Dasgupta,
Banaji & Abelson, 1999). Characteristics of a group are:
A collection of two or more individuals who perceive themselves as the
members of group.
Members have common motives.
Members are interacting (either directly or indirectly) and interdependent.
Members influence each other.
Members’ behaviour governed by certain rules, roles assigned to them in
the group and their status in the group.
All the above mentioned characteristics differentiate a group from a crowd, which
is merely a collection of people, who happen to be at the same place at the same
time with or without any common purpose.
A group must be further differentiated from a team where the members have
complementary skills, affect each other’s activities, attain a positive synergy
by coordinated effort and are collectively responsible for the performance.
206
For example, ten students doing combined study is an example of group. Group Processes
Here each individual studies the syllabus separately. On the other hand, a
group formed in the company to complete a project is an example of team.
Here, the person analysing the data cannot do the job until the data has been
entered by the other person, who in turn is dependent on the person
responsible for collection of data. Moreover, in the second example whole
group is accountable for the completion of the project; whereas, in the first
Affinitive needs: Provided by the group through friendship between
individuals within it.
example, every student is responsible for her/his own performance in the

examination.
The groups can provide, with or without the conscious knowledge of their
members, a means of fulfilling many of the needs of the individuals in them,
such as:
Egoistic needs: Fulfilled through the development of self-esteem and status

as the result of membership in the group through opportunity for individual
contributions to group functioning.
Functional needs: Aid in daily activities help in adjustment to work routine

or even the avoidance of boredom can be met by the group.
Cognitive needs: Satisfied by establishing and testing reality through

developing consensus among group members, uncertain parts of social
environment can be made certain and parts of social environment can be
made “real” and “stable.” Each person can validate perceptions and feelings
best by checking them with others.
Thus, groups are instrumental in fulfilling the needs of individual members in

various ways. It is possible that these functions may not directly link to the group’s
primary goal; although, by fulfilling these secondary needs of members their
efforts toward achievement of group is facilitated.
11.4 TYPES OF GROUPS

Although various groups share the basic characteristics mentioned above, they
are categorised in different types based on some subtle criteria.
11.4.1 Perceived bond among Group Members

On the basis of Perceived bondamong group members, groups can be classified
into two types: common-bond and common-identity groups (Prentice, Miller
&Lightdale, 1994).
In a common-bond group, members have face to face interaction and also a strong
bond existsamong them. Players of a team constitute such a common-bond group.
In a common-identity group, members are associated with each other just by a

category with rare face to face interaction. Citizens of a country or students of a
University form such a group. In these groups, group members may not know
each other personally. However, their affiliation to a particular category designates
207
Group Dynamics them as the group member and all the members of such groups share the common
identity of the group.
11.4.2 Entitativity
Entitativity is the extent to which groups are perceived as a coherent whole
(Campbell, 1958). Low entitativity groups are a collection of people who happen
to be at same place at same time with a common purpose. Group of interviewees
for a particular job is an example of such group. A group which includes members
of a family is an example of high entitativity group. Groups high on entitativity
have following characteristics:
Frequent interaction among members (either face to face or virtually on
phones, internets, etc.).
Common goals.
Members are highly similar in some ways and are significantly different
from the non-members.
Group is a consequence of its members.
One thing that should be noted here is that, it is not the group size but the
behavioural features such as acceptance of authority, sharing of resources,
adherence to norms, etc. that affects the entitativity of a group (Lickel, Rutchick,
Hamilton & Sherman, 2006). High entitative groups are more stereotyped than
those low on entitative (Yzerbyt, Corneille & Estrade, 2001).
11.4.3 Primary versus Secondary Group

Primary groups are pre-existing formations whose memberships are conferred
to the individuals, such asfamily, caste, etc. These groups play a vital role in
developing a person’s values and ideals. A person does not have an option to
choose or relinquish the membership of a primary group. Whereas, an individual
joins a secondary groups by her/his choice in order to fulfil certain motives.
Here the membership is voluntary and the person has an option to relinquish the
group.
11.4.4 Formal versus Informal Group

A formal group has explicitly stated rules and functions,definite roles for its
members and clearly specified norms. These elements may be written or they
may be spoken but unanimously accepted by the members. In contrast, an informal
group does not have any explicitly stated rules and regulation. For example, a
school has specified rules for both students and teachers, has a definite purpose
of imparting quality education in the students and has clearly defined status and
norms. On the other hand,group of children of a colony gathered in a park is
anexample of informal group.
11.5 COMPONENTS OF GROUP

There are number of components in any group that facilitate smooth functioning
of the group. Although the groups may differ in terms of their size, types and
functions they share some common features, such as status, roles, norms and
cohesiveness, which affect behaviours of the group members.
208
Group Processes
Fig. 11.1: Components of Group
11.5.1 Status
When a teacher enters into the classroom, all students stand in the respect of the
teacher. No significant decision in the family is taken until the head of the family,
generally parents in the Indian families, approve the decision. These examples
characterise status of teachers and parents in their respective groups.
The status of a member may be defined by his/her physical attributes (Judge &
Cable, 2004), usefulness to the purpose of the group and behaviour in accordance
with the norms of group (Haslam, 2004). It may be an official position or rank in
a group or it may be an implicit feature such as elders and new entrants in a
group. Often, status is associated with many privileges in the group, such as
access to resources of the group, respect, salary, influencing other group
members,group responsibilities, making decisions in a group, etc. (Buss, 1999).
It has been found that people with low status are more conforming to the group
norms than those with high status (Jetten, Hornsey &Adarves-Yorno, 2006). By
being more susceptible to group influence, new members, having low status, of
the group attempt to increase their acceptability in the group.
11.5.2 Roles
Different members in a group are designated to perform different functions in
the group. For example, in a cricket team the captain is responsible to lead the
team on the ground, the coach arranges and manages smooth and strategic practice
to the team, the physiotherapist ensures physical fitness of the players and the
manager is assumed to be responsible for the issues pertaining to team travels
and its interaction with media. All these people actually play different roles for
the team or the group of players and officials representing a country at the national
or international level.
Roles define the expected set of behaviours from different members of a group
occupying specific positions in the group. Roles may be officially assigned to a
group member or they may be gradually acquired by a group member without
any formal assignment. A person may fulfil one role in a group while other role
209
Group Dynamics in some other group (Slater, 1955). Often the roles are internalised and gradually
become integral.
A clear recognition of one’s goals, or role clarity, helps to avoid chaos in the
group. Sometimes, however, members may be confused about the things that are
expected of them, such as their level of authority or their responsibility. This is
called role ambiguity and is typically experienced by new members. Some groups
that are pursuing very dynamic and uncertain tasks have very lower degree of
role differentiation and therefore, avoiding the situation of role ambiguity is
extremely challenging in such groups.
11.5.3 Norms
Norms are the implicit rules within a group, guiding how its members should or
should not behave. Norms are generally agreed-upon informal rules that guide
members’ behaviours. They represent shared ways of viewing the world. Norms
differ from formal rules in that they are not formal and written. However, norms
have powerful influence on group behaviour. If each individual in a group
separately decides how to behave in each interaction, no one would be able to
predict the behaviour of any group member and consequently, chaos would reign.
Therefore, norms function as a guide to members’ behaviours and reduce
ambiguity in groups. Groups do not establish norms about every possible situation
but only with respect to things that are significant to the group. Norms might
apply to every member of the group or to only some members. Norms that apply
to particular group members usually specify the role of those individuals. Norms
vary in the degree to which they are accepted by all members of the group: some
are accepted by almost everyone, others by some members and not others.
People are guided by the norms of a group only if they value being the member
of that particular group. In contrast, they may even act contrary to the norms ofa
group with which they do not identify themselves (Jetten, Spears & Manstead,
1997; Moreland & Levine, 2001).
In various cultures across the globe, a predominant norm which varies

considerably is collectivism versus individualism. A collectivistic group values
the maintenance of harmony among its members, even on personal costs. In
contrast, a group high on individualistic dimension values ‘standing out’ from
the group.In such groups, dissenters of the groups are seen as courageous and
disagreement among the group members is not discouraged. For example, Indian
society is considered to be a collectivistic society; whereas western counties,
such as USA, are considered to be individualistic societies.
11.5.4 Cohesiveness
Cohesiveness is the force that keeps a group intact (Ellemers, de Gilder &Haslam,
2004). Cohesiveness refers to how strongly group members desire to remain in
their groups. Highly cohesive groups are ones in which the members like one
another, accept the group’s goals, and work towards meeting them. In very un-
cohesive groups, the members dislike one another and may even work at cross-
purposes. In essence, cohesiveness refers to a “we” feeling, a sense of
belongingness to the group. Group cohesion tends to get strengthened under
conditions of high external threat or competition. Cohesiveness generally tends
to be greater when group members spend more time together. Lesser sub-
210
groupings are evident in high cohesive than in low cohesive groups.A group Group Processes
high on this dimension has following qualities (Hogg, 2007; Mullen & Cooper,
1994):
Perceived homogeneity.
More supportive and cooperative for in-groups than with the out-groups.
More oriented towards group goals than toward individual goals.
Have high morale.
Perform better that the groups low on cohesiveness dimension.
Highly adamant towards members of out-groups.
Display more intra-group attraction and commitment towards group goal in
presence of an out-group member.
Fill in the blanks-
1) ………………… are the needprovided by the group through friendship
between individuals within it.
2) ………………… is the force that keeps a group intact.
3) Norms are the ……………….. within a group, guiding how its members
should or should not behave.
4) A ……………. group has explicitly stated rules and functions,definite roles

for its members and clearly specified norms.
5) A person does not have an option to choose or relinquish the membership of

a ………………. group.
11.6 STAGES OF GROUP FORMATION

As stated earlier that a crowd is different from a group in a sense that crowd is a
mere collection of people; whereas a group is a homogeneous collection of people,
with some specific and shared purpose, having some rules and regulation to
guide their behaviours in various social situations. However, in the starting a
group is also just a collection of people. The various phases through which the
collection of people passes, differentiate it from crowd (Tuckman, 1965).
According to TuckMan there are five phases of group Formation These phases
are explained below:
Forming: The members of the group might be unknown to one another when
they meet for the first time.Therefore, initially the group is quite similar to a
crowd. This stage is marked by uncertainties regarding the group purpose, goals,
members, procedures, etc.
Storming: At this stage, there is a lot of conflict regarding various roles and
status of various members and the methods of achieving the group goals. By the
end of this stage some sort of hierarchy develops among the members and some
clarity is obtained regarding how the target has to be achieved.
211
Group Dynamics Norming: At this stage, group members finalise various norms which regulate
their behaviours and roles. Furthermore, division of responsibilities takes place
at this stage. Members devise some scale to measure their progress. Finally, by
the end of this stage the group gets a clear identity.
Performing: This is the execution stage of the group. Since the norms, status,
roles, etc. have been finalised, members fully devote their efforts to achieve the
group goals. For some groups with a single specific purpose this might be the
last stage.
Adjourning: Only few groups have this final stage. Here group is disbanded
after its purpose is achieved. For example,a committee of juries formed to
investigate any case of corruption gets disbanded after submitting its report.
The above mentioned stages are merely a general illustration for the sequential
functioning of a group and therefore, the sequence may be different for different
groups. In a political committee, norms and status of various members may be
pre-decided before the constitution of the group. Similarly, a group may undergo
two stages simultaneously or it may switch back and forth between various stages
or even it may skip any of the stages.
11.7 GROUP EFFECTIVENESS

The effectiveness of a group has to be viewed in terms of achievement of
productivity goals, ability to adapt to changes, satisfaction of personal needs of
the members, including a sense of status and socialized power and maintenance
of the required level of communication, co-operation and sense of
accomplishment, thereby sustaining the group as a team. Although these are the
broader criteria of group effectiveness, organizations and groups differ in their
specific criteria of effectiveness. Any group has its own particular environment
(socio-cultural and technological), group task and life-span. These specific given
circumstances interact with the internal dynamics of the group to produce a
particular degree of group effectiveness.
There is substantial agreement among psychologists working in the field of group

functioning about the classes of factors that influence group outcomes. Among
the most useful frameworks for thinking about groups and their effectiveness are
the input-process-output models summarized by McGrath (1984). The model
reflects that the success of a group (its outcomes) depends upon inputs or resources
which the group has to work with (e.g., the members and the task they have been
assigned) and the interaction among team members (e.g., communication, conflict,
conformity, socialization, leadership, status, in-group-out-group differentiation,
etc.).
By influencing the group process, inputs have both direct and indirect effects on
group effectiveness. Inputs include resources, such as personnel, task, tools and
time. Groups composed of more competent people, having appropriate knowledge,
skills, and motivation, will on average be more effective than groups with less
competent members. Work groups that are functionally diverse have a larger
stock of ideas to draw upon, and differences in assumptions that allow them to
generate more creative solutions. Members who have expertise in a wide variety
of disciplines have the potential to be highly creative, bringing together old ideas
212 in new ways (Hargadon & Sutton, 1997).
Group Processes
11.8 GROUP PROCESSES
How a person acts in presence of someone else may be completely different
from what he would have been doing, had he been alone. This ‘someone’ may be
a co-worker of her/his group, an audience or a mere stranger. For instance, while
dining out in some restaurant, you may refrain from doing many things which
you would have done when dining at home. There are several influences of group
on an individual called as group processes. Some of them have been mentioned
in the sub headings below.
11.8.1 Social Facilitation

Social facilitation is defined as a tendencyof a person to perform differently in
presence of an audience or with a co-actor.Presence of audience increases our
arousal which affects our performance. Thus other’s presence will improve
performance if the performer iswell learned and his/her dominant responses are
the correct ones in the situation. Furthermore, it will impair performance if
performer’s dominant responses are the incorrect ones and the less practiced
responses are correct ones. This view is known as Drive Theory of Social
Facilitation(Zajonc, Heingartner & Herman, 1969). Social facilitation fails to
occur if the performer does not pay attention to the other persons present there.
According to Distraction-Conflict Theory, a person is distracted when performing

in front of others because he or she tries to divide attention between the task and
the co-actor/audience. This produces cognitive overload on the performer and
therefore, forcing the performer to pay attention only to the essential cues/stimuli.
11.8.2 Social Loafing

While working in a group, often motivation is reduced resulting into reduced
efforts to achieve the group goal. This phenomenon is known as social loafing
(Karau & Williams, 1993). When working in a group for a common task, a general
feeling arises among the individuals that even though they will contribute a little
less, the group goal will be achieved. Hence they have lower motivation and
exert less effort to achieve the group goal. Instead, the individuals rely more on
the efforts of their co-members. This might have grim implications. In situations,
where each or most of the group members become victim of social loafing, the
group performance suffers seriously. Social loafing is observed in variety of
group tasks, such as cognitive, physical, verbal, etc. (Weldon & Mustari, 1988;
Williams & Karau, 1991).
Price, Harrison and Gavin (2006) observed that there are two factors which
contribute to social loafing: feeling of being dispensable to the group and feeling
of unfairness in the group. When a member feels that the contributions made by
her/him are not essential to the group, then she/he is more likely to loaf.
Conversely, if a member has skills and knowledge relevant to the performance
of group task, she/he is more likely to actively participate in the group activities.
Similarly, if a member feels that she/he may be treated unfairly, even after making
significant contribution, then she/he is more likely to loaf. Also, if a member is
dissimilar from the other members on factors such as age, sex, ethnicity, etc. she/
he is more likely to feel unfairly treated and thus more likely to loaf.
213
Group Dynamics Following techniques may be implied to reduce social loafing:
Reduced feeling of being dispensable in the group by making individual

efforts readily identifiable (Williams, Harkins &Latane, 1981).
Increasing individual member’s commitment to the successful task

performance (Brickner, Harkins &Ostrom, 1986).
Increasing the importance of the task (Karau& Williams, 1993).
Providing each member with some kind of standard performance, such as
their past performance or how others are doing (Williams & Karau, 1991).
11.8.3 Deindividuation
Deindividuation is a psychological state characterized by reduced self-awareness
and personal identity, brought on by external conditions such as being an
anonymous member of a large crowd. This leads the members of a crowd to
perform behaviours which they would have never performed when they were
alone.Deindividuation leads to greater obedience of the norms of the crowd
(Postmes & Spears, 1998).
Previously in one of the above section, you were informed about the differences
between group and crowd, where, crowd is merely a collection of people, who
happen to be at the same place at the same time with or without any common
purpose. But this does not mean that crowd cannot have a norm. Consider a
crowd gathered to watch a cricket match. Here the crowd norm is to cheer their
team. Being in a crowd makes a person anonymous and hence they feel less
responsible for their acts. Thus, they are more likely to resort to wild, unrestrained
and anti-social actions (Zimbardo, 1970). Hooliganismis a special case of
deindividuation, where the fans of English soccer team displayed extremely wild
and unsocial behaviour in the matches involving English team.
Deindividuation does not always lead to negative and anti-social behaviour. It

just increases the likelihood of obedience of crowd norms. In instances involving
some mishaps like stampede, road accident or fires in buildings, deindividuation
may elicit helping behaviour, too.

1) Storming is the stage of group formation in which the members of the group
meet for the first time. ( )
2) Deindividuation is a psychological state characterised by reduced self-

awareness and personal identity. ( )
3) Hooliganism is defined as a tendencyof a person to perform differently in

presence of an audience or with a co-actor. ( )
4) Social loafing is a process in which often motivation of an individual is

reduced resulting into reduced efforts to achieve the group goal. ( )
5) Any group has its own particular environment (socio-cultural and

214 technological), group task and life-span. ( )
Group Processes
11.9 GROUP DECISION MAKING
Group decision making is also known as collaborative decision making which
refers to the process of taking collective decisions by the members of the group.
The decision is taken as well as accepted by all the members of that group.
Basically there can be two processes involved in taking group decisions.
11.9.1 Group Polarisation

It is a general conception that decisions made by groups are better than those
made by individuals. However, it is not always true. Sometimes, decisions taken
by groups are more extreme than those taken by the individuals. This tendency
of a group to shift towards more extreme decisions than those initially held by its
members is known as group polarisation (Burnstein, 1983). More precisely,
during a discussion among group members the initial preference of the group is
strengthened leading to the final outcome beingamore extreme decision. Hence
group shows a phenomenon of risky shift, (if the initial preference of the group
members is towards a riskier decision) to ashift towards increased caution (if
initial preference of the group is towards a cautious approach).
There are two factors which contribute to this phenomenon of group polarisation.
First, in order to prove themselves a worthy and loyal, the members of group
hold a view which is in line with the group’s overall image and simultaneously
extreme than others. For example, in a terrorist group extreme ideas to create
chaos will be considered more worthy. Hence members will tryto hold views
which are more extreme than others. Second, due to persuasion, a group’s initial
preference gets strengthenedleading to extreme decisions.
11.9.2 Group Think

Another phenomenon observed in highly cohesive groups is group think.
Members of a highly cohesive group think that their decisions cannot be wrong
and all the members must support the decision taken by the group. Moreover,
they are also under pressure to reject any information which is in contrary to the
group’s decision. Once this tendency develops, group is highly resistant to change
its decision. It is the high cohesiveness among group members which is
responsible for developing such tendency among them. Members are so well
connected to each other that they think that any member of the group cannot be
wrong and even if any member of the group is wrong, it is their moral
responsibility to support him/her. Secondly, the norms of highly cohesive group
suggest that the group is superior and infallible.The group sometimes may also
fail to share the information relevant to the issue held by their members. This
may affect the quality of the decisions taken by the group. This is even more
problematic if the unshared information is critical to the decision.
11.10 COOPERATION AND COMPETITION IN A

GROUP
A group often works on tasks which are common for all members and a
coordinated group effort is needed to complete this task. However, sometimes
individual performance is also credited along with the contributions to the shared
215
Group Dynamics tasks. Suppose a cricket team is chasing a huge total and to achieve this total the
whole team needs to bat with a fast run rate. But here also, man of the match
award is given to only one player for individual performance. So an individual
may bat with slow run rate in order to complete his/her century.
Cooperation can be defined as a behaviour, in which, whole group works together

to attain the shared goal. Whereas, competition can be defined as behaviour in
which individual tries to excel his/her own performance and simultaneously
hindering others in completing their tasks. Cooperative goals of a group are such
that the group achieves them only if the other members of the groups achieve
their goal. While competitive goals of a group are such that an individual can get
them only if others fail to achieve their respective goals. A group can
simultaneously have competitive and cooperative goals, as seen in the example
mentioned above. Also, competition within group may lead to conflict and
disharmony among group members; whereas, cooperation between groups
increase cohesion and solidarity within group members.
11.10.1 Determinants of Cooperation and Competition

Group performance largely depends on the cooperation and competition among
group members. Social psychologists have studied various factors that determine
the level of cooperation and competition.
Reward Structure: A reward structure that considers only group effort, promotes
cooperation in the group. Such a reward structure endorses interdependence
among the members. Contrarily, if the reward structure considers only individual
efforts, it will promote competition among the members of the group. Suppose
in the above example of cricket match, if the condition is set in such a way that
the Man of the Match award will be given to the player of winning team only
then players will first try to achieve the team target instead of focussing on their
individual performance.
Interpersonal Communication: Healthy and ample communication among the

group members enhances cooperation among them. Due to healthy
communication among themselves, the members develop liking for each other
and they tend to cooperate rather than compete. Such a communication also
facilitates discussion and interchange of ideas. This leads the members to
understand each other’s stance and act in a more coordinated way.
Reciprocity: It is a tendency to return favours. If a member of the group has

shown initial cooperation towards other member(s) then the other member(s)
are also likely to respond in a similar manner. Same is applied for competition
also. Thus cooperation or competition among group members looks like a chain
reaction. If the group leader somehow manages initial cooperation among the
members then it will keep on going.
11.11 CONFLICT IN A GROUP

Conflict is a situation in which individual or a group of individuals perceive that
the others have taken or might take an action that is incompatible with their own
interest. Conflict is the recognition of incompatible interest between the members
which may or may not be true (DeDreu & Van Lange, 1995). Conflict is different
216 from competition in a way that conflict is just a perception; whereas, competition
includes a behavioural component as well. A conflict may lead to competition Group Processes
but not all competitive behaviours are result of conflict.
11.11.1 Causes of Conflict

In many cases a faulty attribution can lead to conflict (Baron, 1990). After a
failure to achieve one’s own interest people try to attribute this failure to
someone else. If somehow, they attribute this failure to other’s interference
then they are likely to develop conflict with the suspect interferer.
Faulty communication may also cause conflict among members. If someone

is criticised for his/her action then he/she may feel agitated and thus may
develop conflict with the person who has criticised (Cropanzano, 1993).
Faulty and improper communication may sometimes develop suspicion about
others’ interest which also consequently leads to conflict.
A tendency to consider our views as objective and closest to the reality

while that of others as biased and selfish leads to conflict (Keltner &
Robinson, 1996).
Initially the poor performance of the group followed by the negative feedback
may force the members to blame each other for the group failure. This
ultimately generates conflict among them. Studies have been reported
showing that more the amount of negative feedback received by the group,
higher the level of conflict reported (Peterson & Behfar, 2003).
A feeling of deprivation and discontentment is developed when any member

feels that he/she is not equally useful as the other members of the group are.
This may trigger conflict in them.
Perceived inequity with respect to work share and reward distribution also
leads to conflict among the group members.
Feeling that the other group does not respect norms of our group may also
lead to conflict.
11.11.2 Outcomes of Conflict

Just like competition and cooperation, conflict is also a chain reaction. Once it
seeds in the thoughts of one party, it becomes visible in their actions and thus
generating even more conflict in the mind of one or both the parties. Following
may be the possible outcomes of the conflict:
Poor communication, mistrust and suspicion among the group members.
Magnification and escalation of even the trivial differences.
An effort to increase own power and legitimacy over the other.
Formation of sub groups and factions leading to separation in the group.
11.11.3 Strategies of Conflict Resolution

Introduction of super-ordinate goal: The organization may introduce super
ordinate goals for reducing the conflict among members as well as groups.
Super-ordinate goals are those goals that both the parties having conflict,
217
Group Dynamics needs to achieve. These goals can be achieved only by the combined efforts
of both the parties. In real life, the super-ordinate goals are usually superior
to the conflict interest and are necessary for survival (Sherif, 1958).
Altering perceptions: Persuasions, education, media appeals etc. change the

perception about each other and thus can reduce the conflict.
Increasing intergroup contacts: Bringing together both the parties involved

in a conflict on a neutral ground (task other than conflict interest) may reduce
conflict. This gives them a chance to understand each other’s stand. Best
example of this type of conflict resolution strategy is frequent organisation
of friendly cricket matches between India and Pakistan. However, for this
technique to be successful the contact needs to be maintained.
Redrawing group boundaries: Creating conditions in which conflicting

parties perceive themselves as a part of common group can redraw the group
boundary and thus reduce the conflict.
Negotiations: Both parties undergoing conflict can be convinced to achieve

a mutually acceptable solution. Such negotiation can help in reducing the
conflict significantly. This strategy requires a mediator who allows them to
focus on the discussion on relevant issues.
Structural solutions: Redistribution of the resources according to various

principles of justice, viz. principle of equality (equal distribution), principle
of need (distribution according to need) and principle of equity (distribution
according to contribution) may reduce the feeling of injustice and therefore,
can ease the conflict.
Respect for other group’s norms:Manytimes conflict among various groups

arises from the feeling that the other group does not respect norms of our
group. If, somehow, we are able to instil respect for other groups this conflict
may be resolved.
11.12 COMMUNICATION
Communication is a process of interpersonal interaction in which thoughts, ideas,
emotions and understanding between sender(s) and receiver(s) are exchanged
(Guo and Sanchez, 2005). This simple definition of communication directs
attention to three important issues:
Communication involves transmission and reception of messages.
Communication involves people, at least two: one to transmit the message
(sender) and another to receive the message (receiver).
Communication is best described as a process because it is active, continuous,

reciprocal and dynamic.
11.12.1 Types of Communication

There are several forms of communication, the most important being verbal
communication. Verbal communication can further be divided into two forms:
oral and written. Most basic to the oral form of communication involves the
218
spoken word; as it is the quickest and most accurate because messages can be Group Processes
clarified through ongoing dialogue. Written form of communication involves
exchange of ideas, thoughts, understanding, etc. with the help of letters, memos,
office orders, e-mail, instant messaging, blogs, etc.
Another form of communication is non-verbal which consists of unspoken clues

that a communicator sends in conjunction with spoken or written messages.
Examples may include a person’s tone of voice, facial expressions, eye contact,
head nodding, posture, way of walking, etc.
Though verbal and non verbal communications are separate, both operate at the
same time. The verbal part of a message conveys content or information. The
non verbal component indicates how the verbal message should be interpreted
and thus it is meta-communication. Whenever verbal and non verbal messages
contradict each other, people are more likely to believe the non verbal.
11.12.2 Communication Style

Every individual has his or her own predominant communication style. People
with different communications styles use different verbal and non verbal
communication patterns. The communication styles can be broadly divided into
four types: passive, aggressive, passive-aggressive and assertive. Each
communication style conveys certain messages to listeners and leads to a specific
outcomes.
Passive communication: People with passive communication style are

considered as people pleasers, shy and they usually go along with others to
avoid conflict. They generally exhibit confused body language and avoid
eye contact, place their hands at or over mouth, often play with pen, pencil,
clips, paper, etc. during conversation and chew pen or pencil while listening.
Because of their body language they are perceived as individual with low
self-esteem weak, timid and indecisive.
Aggressive communication: Those who use this style of communication

often disregard the rights of others and force their own needs and opinions
onto other people. This form of communication can lead to shouting and in
some cases, physical aggression. Such people often use aggressive tone and
gestures to emphasis their point of view.
Passive-aggressive communication: In this style of communicating, a person

may use passive means of communicating that have an aggressive result,
because they often find it difficult to direct their thoughts and feelings. They
sometimes use manipulation to get what they want which apparently does
not look like manipulation.
Assertive communication: People with an assertive style of communicating

are able to respectfully express their thoughts and feelings clearly. They
consider and value their own needs, but also the needs of others. This form
of communicating can help to build strong, balanced, and respectful
relationships with others.
219
Group Dynamics 11.12.3 Barriers to Effective Communication
Anything that filters, blocks or distorts the message or the information during
the process of “encoding-sending-decoding” between the sender and the receiver
is considered as barriers of communication. Barriers of communication can be
broadly classified into two types (Longest, Rakich, & Darr, 2000):
Physical-environmental barriers: Environmental and physical barriers of

communication pertain to the physical-environmental components of the
communication process. These may include noise in the communication
channel, an improper time of communication, significant distance between
sender and receiver.
Psychological barriers: Psychological barriers are created due to poor

listening skills, biases, prejudices, mistrust, negative attitude, fear of failure,
evaluation anxiety, public embarrassment, obsessive thoughts of being judged
negatively by others, inferiority complex, etc.

State whether the statements are ‘True’ or ‘False’:
1) People with an aggressive style of communicating are able to respectfully
express their thoughts and feelings clearly. ( )
2) In negotiation, both the parties undergoing conflict can be convinced to

achieve a mutually acceptable solution. ( )
3) Cooperationcan be defined as behaviour in which individual tries to excel

his/her own performance and simultaneously hindering others. ( )
4) The tendency of a group to shift towards more extreme decisions than those
initially held by its members is known as group polarisation. ( )
5) A group can simultaneously have competitive and cooperative goals. ( )
11.13 LET US SUM UP

It can be summed up from the above discussions that, group is a collection of
people with common motives, who interact and influence each other. Groups are
distinguished from a crowd where people may not have a common motive and
also they do not interact. We, living in a social world, are part of many groups.
These groups may be of many types: common bond and common identity groups;
cohesive groups, formal and informal groups; primary and secondary groups,
etc. Whatever type of group we belong to, they all have a certain structure. They
have certain norms and statuses. Group members have some definite roles to
fulfil and also, they have a degree of cohesion among them.
A group passes through various phases of development which turn it into a full-
fledged functional entity. These phases are forming, storming, norming,
performing. Few groups are disbanded after the purpose of their formation is
solved. Such groups have an additional phase of adjourning.The effectiveness
of a group has to be viewed in terms of achievement of productivity goals, ability
to adapt to changes, satisfaction of personal needs of the members, including a
220
sense of status and socialized power and maintenance of the required level of Group Processes
communication, co-operation and sense of accomplishment.
Since, members of a group frequently interact with other members of the group;
their behaviour is quite different from what it would have been in isolation.
According to drive theory of social facilitation, presence of others when we
perform increases our arousal level which may either improve or impair our
performance. Similarly, distraction conflict theory of social facilitation states
that others’ presence leads to cognitive overload resulting into altered
performance. When group is involved in some task, a tendency among the
members is to rely on others’ efforts and contribute less. This propensity is known
as social loafing. This reduces the groups’ overall productivity.
Since groups are formed for some specific motives, they are frequently involved
in various decision-making processes. However, often we mistakenly consider
that the decisions taken by groups are always better than those taken by an
individual. Sometimes group may be victim of group polarization and thus they
may take highly extreme decisions. In this condition, the group members lean
towards group’s initial position so intensely that the final decision is an extreme
one. Another tendency of a highly cohesive group is to consider their group to be
always correct and hence they display a tendency of group think where they
think that the group’s decision can never be wrong. Other vulnerabilities in group’s
decision can be improper sharing of information.
Recurrent interaction among the group members may cultivate tendencies like
cooperation, competition and conflicts. Cooperation occurs when group works
in unison to achieve the common goal of the group. Competition in the group is
observed when members give priority to their individual interests over the group
goals. In the case of competition, one member can achieve the target only if the
other members fail to attain that. Conflict is a realisation of fact that others’
interests are incompatible to that of ours which may or may not be true.
Communication is a relevant process and affects the group interactions and
processes.

1) Define Groups and explain its various components.
2) Present an account of various types of groups.
3) Taking reference of various stages of group formation, differentiate between
crowd and group.
4) Describe the process of decision making in a group. How decisions taken

by a group can be different from that of an individual?
5) Describe cooperationand competition in a group. What factors are responsible

for cooperationandcompetition in the group? Explain them with example.
6) Explain various causes and outcomes of conflict in a group. How can conflict
be resolved?
7) Justify that cooperation, competition and conflict are chain processes in a

group.
221
Group Dynamics
11.15 GLOSSARY
Groups: Collection of people who perceive themselves as the members of the
group, have common motives, are interacting and interdependent, influence each
other and are governed by certain rules, roles assigned to them in the group and
their status in the group.
Common-bond groups: Members of the group having face to face interaction

and a strong bond among them.
Common-identitygroups: Members of the group associated with each other

just by a category with rare face to face interaction.
Entitativity: The extent to which groups are perceived as a coherent whole.
Primary and secondary groups: Primary groups are pre-existing formations

whose memberships are conferred to the individuals. Whereas, an individual
voluntarily joins a secondary groups in order to fulfil certain motives.
Formal and informal groups: A formal group has explicitly stated rules and
functions,definite roles for its members and clearly specified norms. In contrast,
an informal group does not have any explicitly stated rules and regulation.
Status: An official position or rank of an individual member in a group.
Roles: The expected set of behaviours from different members of a group

occupying specific positions in the group.
Norms: The implicit rules within a group guiding how its members should or
should not behave.
Cohesiveness: The force that keeps a group intact.
Group effectiveness: Viewed in terms of achievement of productivity goals,
ability to adapt to changes and satisfaction of personal needs of the members in
order to sustain the group as a team.
Social facilitation: A tendencyof a person to perform differently in presence of

an audience or with a co-actor.
Social loafing: Reduced motivation of group members resulting into reduced

individual efforts to achieve the group goal.
Deindividuation: A psychological state characterized by reduced self-awareness

and personal identity, brought on by external conditions such as being an
anonymous member of a large crowd.
Group polarisation: Tendency of a group to shift towards more extreme decisions

than those initially held by its members.
Group think: Assumption of the embers of a highly cohesive group think that
their decisions cannot be wrong and all the members must support the decision
taken by the group.
Cooperation: Behaviour in which whole group works together to attain the shared
222 goal.
Competition: Behaviour in which individual tries to excel his/her own Group Processes
performance and simultaneously hindering others in completing their tasks.
Conflict: A situation in which individual or a group of individuals perceive that

the others have taken or might take an action that is incompatible with their own
interest.
Super-ordinate goals: The goals, usually superior to the conflict interest, which
both sides in a conflict need to achieve.

QUESTIONS
1) Affinitive needs
2) Cohesiveness
3) implicit rules
4) formal
5) primary
1) False
2) True
3) False
4) True
5) True
1) False
2) True
3) False
4) True
5) True

Cengage Learning.

References
Baron, R. A. (1990). Attributions and organizational conflict. In S. Graha& V.
Folkes (Eds.), Attribution theory: Applications to achievement, mental health,
and interpersonal conflict (pp. 185–204). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
223
Group Dynamics Brickner, M., Harkins, S., & Ostrom, T. (1986). Personal involvement: Thought
provoking implications for social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social
Brown, R. (2000). Group Processes: Dynamics Within and Between Groups(2nd

Ed.). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Burnstein, E. (1983). Persuasion as argument processing. In M. Brandstatter, J.

H. Davis, & G. Stocker-Kriechgauer (Eds.), Group Decision Processes. London:
Academic Press.
Buss, D. M. (1999). Evolutionary Psychology: The New Science of the Mind.

Needham Heights, MA: Allyn& Bacon.
Buss, D.M. (1999). Evolutionary Psychology: The New Science of the Mind.
Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Campbell, D. T. (1958). Common fate, similarity, and other indices of the status
of aggregates of persons as social entities. Behavioral Science, 4, 14-25.
Cropanzano, R. (Ed.). (1993). Justice in the Workplace (pp. 79–103). Hillsdale,

NJ: Erlbaum.
Dasgupta, N., Banji, M. R. & Abelson, R. P. (1999). Group entiativity and group
perception: Association between physical features and psychological judgment.
DeDreu, C. K. W., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (1995). Impact of social value orientation
on negotiator cognition and behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
21, 1178-1188.
Ellemers, N., de Gilder, D., & Haslam, S. A. (2004). Motivating individuals and
groups at work: A social identity perspective on leadership and group performance.
Academy of Management Review, 29, 459-478.
Guo, L. C. & Sanchez, Y. (2005). Workplace Communication. In Borkowski, N.

(Ed.), Organizational Behavior in Health Care (pp. 77-110). Jones and Bartlett
Publications.
Hargadon, A., & Sutton, R. I. (1997). Technology brokering and innovation in a

product development firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(4), 716-749.
Haslam, S. A. (2004). Psychology in Organisations: The Social Identity Approach

(2nd ed.). London: Sage.
Hogg, M. A. (2007). Organizational orthodoxy and corporate autocrats: Some

nasty consequences of organizational identification in uncertain times. In C.
Bartel, S. Blader& A. Wrzesniewski (Eds.), Identity and the Modern Organization
(pp. 35–59). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Jetten, J., Hornsey, M. A., &Adarves-Yorno, I. (2006).When group members

admit to being conformist: The role of relative intragroup status in conformity
self-reports. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 162-173.
224
Jetten, J., Spears, R., &Manstead, A. S. R. (1997). Strength of identification and Group Processes
intergroup differentiation: The influence of group norms. European Journal of
Judge, T. A., & Cable, T. A. (2004). The effect of physical height on workplace
success and income: Preliminary test of a theoretical model. Journal of Applied
Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review

and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65,
681-706.
Keltner, D., & Robinson, R. J. (1996). Extremism, power, and the imagined basis
of social conflict. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 5,101-105.
Lickel, B., Rutchick, A. M., Hamilton, D. L., & Sherman, S. J. (2006). Intuitive
theories of group types and relational principles. Journal of Experimental Social
Longest, B. B., Rakich, J. S. &Darr, K. (2000). Managing Health Services

Organizations and Systems (4th ed.) (pp. 808-810). Baltimore, MD: Health
Professions Press.
McGrath, J. (1984). Groups: Interaction and Performance. Englewood Cliffs,

NJ: Prentice Hall.
Moreland, R. L., & Levine, J. M. (2001). Socialization in organizations and work

groups. In M. Turner (Ed.), Groups at Work: Theory and Research (pp. 69–112).
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Mullen, B., & Cooper, C. (1994). The relation between group cohesiveness and
performance: An integration. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 210-227.
Peterson, R., &Behfar, K. J. (2003). The dynamic relationship

betweenperformance feedback, trust, and conflict in groups: A
longitudinalstudy.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,
92,102-112.
Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (1998). Deindividuation and antinormative behavior:

A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 238-259.
Prentice, D. A., Miller, D. T., &Lightdale, J. R. (1994). Asymmetries in

attachments to groups and to their members: Distinguishing between common-
identity and common-bond groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
20, 484-493.
Price, K. H., Harrison, D. A., & Gavin, J. H. (2006). Withholding inputs in team
contexts: Member composition, interaction processes, evaluation structure, and
social loafing. journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1375-1384.
Sherif, M. (1958). Superordinate goals in the reduction of intergroup conflict.

American journal of Sociology, 349-356.
Slater, P.E. (1955), Role Differentiation in Small Groups.American Sociology

Journal, 20,300-310.
225
Group Dynamics Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental Sequence in Small Groups. Psychological
Bulletin. 63, 384-399.
Weldon, E., &Mustari, L. (1988). Felt dispensability in groups of coactors: The

effects of shared responsibility and explicit anonymity on cognitive effort.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 41, 330-351.
Williams, K. D., & Karau, S. J. (1991). Social loafing and social compensation:
The effects of expectations of co-worker performance. Journal of Personality
Williams, K. D., Harkins, S., & Latane, B. (1981). Identifiability as a deterrent

to social loafing: Two cheering experiments. Journal of Personality and Social
Yzerbyt, V. Y., Corneille, O., & Estrada, C. (2001). The interplay of subjective
essentialism and entitativity in the formation of stereotypes. Personality and
Social Psychology Review, 5, 141-155.
Zajonc, R. B., Heingartner, A., & Herman, E. M. (1969). Social enhancement

and impairment of performance in the cockroach. Journal of Personality and
Zimbardo, P.G. (1970). The human choice: Individuation, reason, and order versus
deindividuation, impulse, and chaos. In W.J. Arnold & D. Levine (Eds.), Nebraska
Symposium on Motivation (Vol. 17, pp. 237–307). Lincoln, NE: University of
Nebraska Press.
226
Group Processes
UNIT 12 LEADER AND LEADERSHIP*
Structure
12.0 Objectives
12.1 Introduction
12.2 Concept and Role of Leader
12.3 Characteristics of leader,
12.4 Styles of leadership,
12.5 Social categorization,
12.6 Role of a Leader in Conflict Resolution
12.7 Let Us Sum Up
12.9 Glossary
12.0 OBJECTIVES
After reading this Unit, the learner will be able to :
Describe the Characteristics of leader;
Explain types of leadership;
Summarize the social categorization; and
Explain role of a leader in conflict resolution.
12.1 INTRODUCTION
Imagine that you were living in the 18th century, when social issues such as the
Sati system troubled the entire India, then how would you have enacted to stop
the system? That was the time when Raja Ram Mohan Roy retired from the East
India Company and was always interested in reforming the society. He worked
very hard to improve people’s conditions and did a great job in the field of social,
religious and educational work. His active contribution and leadership skills
towards prohibiting the Sati system is best recalled.
Who do you consider are really great leaders? The names that always come to
your mind are all political leaders: Nelson Mandela, Mahatma Gandhi, Indira
Gandhi and Narendra Modi. Some names such as Adof Hitler and Kim Jong-un
also come to our mind.
Many leaders are visionaries, some use their power of authority and others force
us to do as they want. It is not difficult to see the burden in all of this for making
enormous changes in our lives. It is interesting fact that the study of leader and
leadership has held a central role for over 75 years in social psychology.In unit
11 you have learned about Group Dynamics. In this unit, you will learn about the
characteristics of leader, types of leadership, social categorization and role of a
leader in conflict resolution.
* Dr. Mohsin Uddin, Consultant, Discipline of Psychology, IGNOU, Delhi 227
Group Dynamics
12.2 CONCEPT AND ROLE OF LEADER
The leader is the person who has the greatest impact on the group actions and
beliefs. She or he is the individual who initiates action, gives orders, makes
decisions, addresses conflicts between group members, provides inspiration,
serves as a model, and is at the heart of any of the operational activities.
Formal or Informal Groups differ in whether they have formal/informal leaders.

Large organisations have uniform organisational charts showing the official chain
of command and providing instructions on decision-making, problem solving
and supervisory patterns, such as companies, cooperative societies, schools,
colleges or universities. In small groups, such as Housing society, Rotary clubs
etc. there may be elected leader with special duties.
On the other hand, within certain groups, there is no formal leader at all.
Friendship/ Board or Commotions groups show a trend of informal leadership.
In group discussions, one member may be more fluent and convincing than others
and may therefore have more effect on decisions making and conflicts resolution.
Many tasks in the group are handled by a leader. The fundamental roles of the
leader differ from the form of formal or informal group being headed. If we go
through the different opinions expressed by the various social and organizational
psychologists, we will certainly infer that leaders typically perform any or all of
the following roles in group decision making and during conflicts resolution.
To encourage the members for better communication.
To inspire the members of the group to obey the law.
Acting as a bridge between the group and other formal and informal
institutions.
Monitoring and enhancing the efficiency of the group.
To cultivate interpersonal relationships between group.
To settle disputes between members of the group.
To give the group strategic direction.
In different locations and places to represent the groups.
Expressing and engaging with the group goal.
Secure productivity of group effort.
Recruit new members and trained the members in core competencies.
Developing team spirit.
12.3 CHARACTERISTICS OF LEADER

When you think about some of the leaders in society, whether it is your supervisor,
boss at workplace or the politicians for whom you vote, you might find yourself
wondering exactly what makes them fit for a leadership position. Social scientists
and psychologist have attempted to identify some of the characteristics of a leader.
The attributes required to be a leader vary from group to group, place to place,
time to time, and situation to situation. The key psychological characteristics of
a leader are as follows:
228
i) Integrity and Honesty Leader and Leadership
A leader must possess the characteristic of honesty. The importance of honesty

should be obvious. Although it may not necessarily be an assessment in member
reviews, integrity is essential for the leader and the group. It is incredibly necessary
for leader who plan the group’s direction and make countless other useful
decisions.
ii) Communication
Leadership and successful communication are intertwined. Leader need to be
able to communicate in a variety of ways, from transmitting information to
coaching the group members. In addition, through occupations, social identities,
and more, a wide range of member must be able to listen to, and communicate
with others. The quality and efficacy of communication within group directly
affects the effectiveness of group cohesiveness, groupthink and plan, too.
iii) Drive and Motivation

This involves desire, enthusiasm, high energy and strategies for achievement.
Many leaders have a strong sense of mission, aim, concentration and dedication.
iv) Self-esteem
To the degree to which a person is at peace with himself and has a good overall
assessment of her or his self-worth and skill, any individual is considered
appropriate to be a leader. Leaders with high self-esteem respect their followers
more.Higher levels of self-confidence can affect those with high self-esteem and
this affects their image in the eyes of their followers. Self-esteem can also explain
the correlation between certain physical attributes and the emergence of leaders.
v) Intelligence
Either aleader is appointed or elected, intelligence is one of the important attribute
of leadership.
vi) Empathy
A leader has enough open-mindedness to understand their followers’ motives,
dreams, expectations, and challenges so that they can build a profound emotional
touch with them.
vii) Maturity
A leader should have a high degree of emotional quotient. She or He needs to
maintain her/his temper of calmness. She or He must be highly tolerant. She or
He should be open minded to explore fresh ideas. She/ He should be able to look
at situations logically.
viii) Physical Features

A leader must have an image that is pleasing. For a good leader, physique and
fitness are very important.
ix) Sense of responsibility

To bring a sense of power, responsibility and accountability for the work of a
person is very important. A leader must have a sense of accountability for group
objectives and only then, in a real sense, will he get full potential exploited. She
229
Group Dynamics or He has to motivate himself and arouse and urge herself or himself to give the
best of her or his skills for this. Only then can the members motivate the best.
x) Vision and foresight

If leader shows that she or he is forward thinking, a leader can not retain power.
Leader needs to imagine scenarios and so logical programmes have to be framed.
xi) Passion
Leaders should feel a passion for their work and show it. The buy-in of members
would be stronger if their leader indicates that they care for the job they do.
xii) Influence
Great leaders will positively affect their workers. Earn the organisation ‘s
confidence and appreciation so that you can inspire them to work hard, stay
optimistic and show ingenuity.

State whether the following are True or False
1) Self-esteem can also explain the correlation between certain physical
attributes and the emergence of leaders.
2) Leaders with low self-esteem respect their followers more.
3) A leader has enough open-mindedness to understand their followers’ motives.
4) For a good leader, physique and fitness are not important.
12.4 STYLES OF LEADERSHIP

1) Autocratic Style
“Do as I say” is the most illustrative expression of an autocratic leadership style.
An autocratic leader usually assumes that she or he is the best individual at any
context and better than anyone. With no input from group members, they make
all the decisions.
2) Participative Style
Participative leadership is a form of leadership in which all group members
working together for taking decisions. Participative leadership is also known as
democratic leadership, where everyone is supposed to participate.
3) Laissez -fair Style

A laissez-faire leader does not directly apply power over its members under this
model of leadership. Since members are highly experienced and require minimal
guidance, under her or his supervision, a laissez-faire leader fails to provide
members with continuous input. This style of leadership is also related to leaders
who do not track their group members, who have not given ongoing input resulting
in high costs , poor service, failure to meet deadlines, loss of control and
production.
4) Narcissistic leadership Style

Narcissistic leadership is a form of leadership in which the leader only thinks for
230 herself/ himself. At the detriment of their people / group participants, their focus
is themselves. This leader displays the characteristics of a narcissist: arrogance, Leader and Leadership
superiority and aggression.
5) Toxic leadership Style

A toxic leader is a person who is responsible for a member of or a federation and
exploits the relationship between the leader and member by leaving the group or
foundation in a worse position than when they first found them.
6) Charismatic leadership Style

In this type of leadership, The charismatic leader shows her or his revolutionary
authority. Charisma does not mean sheer change in actions. Currently, it requires
a transformation of the ideals and convictions of members.
Charismatic leaders appear to have positive personalities and to attract enormous

followers. Mahatma Gandhi, Indira Gandhi, Narendra Modi, Medha Patkar are
examples of such leaders.
7) Transformational leadership
Transformational leadership, unlike other leadership types, is more about
facilitating change in organisations, groups, oneself and others. Transformational
leaders inspire others to do more than they initially expected and sometimes
much more than they considered feasible. They set more difficult goal and
generally achieve a higher result. Statistically, transformational leadership tends
to have more committed and satisfied followers. This is mostly so because
followers are motivated by representatives of change.
8) Transactional Leadership
Transactional Leadership is a theory or style first explored by sociologist Max
Weber in 1947 and subsequently extended by Bernard M. Bass, who also played
a leading role in the growth of Transformational Leadership.It is leadership that
requires an exchange process in which members receive immediate, benefits
for carrying out the instructions of the leader.
9) Bureaucratic Leadership
Bureaucratic leadership refers to organisational leadership through a highly
formalised set of procedures, protocols, and systems. Laws , policies and
hierarchies here set up a straightforward set of objectives as well as an explicit
chain of command. At each level of a bureaucracy, organisational members are
obliged both to their immediate subordinates and to a wider ecosystem of rules
and procedures. Through channelling defined laws, implementing current systems,
and ruling over particular parts of the hierarchy, bureaucratic leaders lead.
10) Consultative Leadership

Consultative leaders regularly ask members for input and take members
complaints seriously. They also have an open-door policy that allows members
to share in the group what is and is not working. Although leader consult with
members, they inevitably maintain supreme decision-making authority.
231
Group Dynamics 11) Socio-emotional Leadership
A socio-emotional leadership style involves a leader, who, by driving away fears,
reducing tension, resolving conflicts, and settling arguments and disagreements,
is concerned with raising the morale of his or her group at a high level.
12) Paternalistic Leadership

Paternalistic leadership is a management strategy involving a dominant
authoritative personality that acts as a matriarch or patriarch and treats partners
and staff just as they are members of large extended families. The leaders, in
turn, expect the staff to have confidence, obedience, and loyalty.
13) Sociocratic Leadership

The sociocratic leader tries to run the group, like a Social Club. Leader gives
less significance to development and more significance to friendship. Leader
wants to make her or his members really satisfied, in other words. Therefore,
leader provides a warm and good social atmosphere.
14) Situational Leadership

In different situations, the situational form of leader uses different types. That is,
according to the case, leader alters his or his style. Leader may be autocratic, or
consultative, or participative often, etc. Most leaders now-a-days use this form
of leadership.
15) Neurocratic Leadership

This style involves a task-oriented leader who is highly neurocratic. At any
expense, they needs to get the job done. If there is some loss, they becomes very
agitated. Leader is really emotional, sensitive and eccentric. In decision-making,
leader does not consult her or his members. Leader take her/his own decisions.

1) An autocratic leader usually assumes that leader is the best individual at the
situation.
2) Laissez -fair style of leadership is related to leaders who track their group
members.
3) The charismatic leader does not shows her or his revolutionary authority.
4) Consultative leaders regularly ask members for input.
12.5 SOCIAL CATEGORIZATION

Social categorization such as gender, race and social category, influences our
perceptions as well.
For instance, when we meet a new teacher, we could classify his as men, a middle-
aged man, an Asian, an academic, and so on. Social categorization is a natural
feature of social cognition; it provides a mental shortcut in that it helps us to
infer an individual’s properties based on the properties of others in the same
community.
232
Social categorization is the distinction between oneself and others and between Leader and Leadership
one’s own group and other groups, and it is such a natural and spontaneous
phenomenon that we are not aware of it often.
A third perspective on the origins of stereotyping and prejudice begins with this
basic fact that people generally divide the social world into two distinct categories
Us and Them–social categorization Ingroup is US and the Outgroup is THEM
(Charles Sumner, 1906, Page 12). Persons in the Ingroupare perceived favorably
while those in the latter are perceived more negatively. This tendency to make
more favorable and flattering attributions about members of one’s group than
members about the other group is known as the ultimate attribution error.
Evidence from research suggests that by identifying with certain special classes,
people seek to boost their self-esteem. And so the final outcome is inevitable, as
each group seeks to see itself better than the rivals. Thus, dividing our group into
two opposing groups is one of the significant causes of stereotyping and
discrimination.
12.6 ROLE OF A LEADER IN CONFLICT

RESOLUTION
Leaders who use conflict management skills can provide support and direction
towards conflict resolution. A common trait of leaders is they are able to build
groups that work well together and help to set the tone for the group.
The resolution of conflicts is conceptualised as the techniques and procedures

involved in facilitating the peaceful end of conflict. Committed group members
or Leader also strive to overcome group conflict by openly sharing information
to the rest of the group members (e.g. intentions; reasons for maintaining those
beliefs) about their contradictory motives or agendas and by participating in
collective bargaining.
At work and in groups, nobody likes conflict. It can fester and affect group morale,
interpersonal relationships , and work efficiency if not addressed properly and in
due time. A lot of research has been done to identify measures for better dispute
resolution that are time-efficient and impactful.
Researcher Kenneth Thomas and Ralph Kilmann developed a model for conflict
resolution in the 1970s. Following them, it was called the Thomas-Kilmann model.
The word ‘conflict’ is defined as the situation under this model in which the
concerns of people can not be contrasted with others. If two or more individuals
or groups care about items that are conflicting with each other, then conflict is
the result.
When selecting a mode of behaviour in a situation of confilict, this model defines

the two main dimensions:’ assertiveness’ and ‘cooperativeness.’ The degree to
which you strive to resolve and resolve your desired results is assertiveness.
Thomas-Kilmann’s five modes for resolving conflicts.

Thomas-Kilmann gave us the following five ways to deal with the conflicts posed,
based on the similarity of these two and the degree of implementation:
233
Group Dynamics 1) Competing
The first Thomas-Kilmann conflict mode, which is competing, is assertive and
non-cooperative. It refers to answering only one’s own issues at the detriment of
the other’s concerns. It is a power-oriented mode that uses whatever dynamic of
power seems necessary to achieve a desirable outcome for itself.
The willingness of a person to argue, their place in the hierarchy, or their financial
power matter the most. It strictly means standing up for your own convictions
and actually striving to win. Competing is defensive.
2) Accommodating
According to the Thomas-Kilmann model, the Accommodating Mode is both
accepting and cooperative. That’s the opposite of being competing. While
welcoming, the individual in question neglects their own interests or values to
tackle the issues of the other party. The self-sacrifice element is emphasised in
this mode. Usually, accommodating requires selfless comprehension, generosity,
or charity. At times, accommodating would require you to obey the instructions
of the other person if you would not like to do so, or adhere to the opinion or
decisions of the other person.
3) Avoiding
Avoiding is both unassertive and uncooperative in the Thomas-Kilmann model.
The person does not want to tackle his or her own problems or others’ problems.
This essentially suggests that they do not want to participate in the dispute at all.
At times, avoidance may be seen as a diplomatic move involving bypassing or
ignoring the issue. It may also mean putting the problem away until the time is
right, or simply standing back from an unpleasant or unsafe situation.
4) Collaborating
In the Thomas-Kilmann conflict model, working together is the most
advantageous outcome. It is assertive as well as cooperative. The complete
opposite of avoiding is this mode. Collaborating requires a voluntary attempt to
work together with the opposition to find a perfect solution that solves the
collective issue entirely. Collaborating requires deep-diving into a dilemma to
define the critical criteria of the members or group involved. A desire to understand
the ‘why’ of the dispute could take the form of collaborating between two or
more individuals. It means trying to look for interesting solutions to interpersonal
problems and enriching yourself from the experiences of the other members.
5) Compromising
In the Thomas-Kilmann conflict model, the last outcome falls on both the
assertiveness and cooperativeness scales on the average point. The aim here is to
find a mutually satisfactory and robust solution that satisfies both individuals in
some way.
Midway between competing and welcoming, it comes. It tackles a problem more

explicitly than ignoring it, but it falls short of analysing it with as much depth
and rigour as working together. Compromising can include finding middle-ground
solutions in some cases, making compromises, or seeking a fast solution that
offers a path forward from the impasse.
234
To sum up the modes of conflict resolution: Leader and Leadership
Competing with the objective of winning

Accommodating: “to yield” is the purpose
Avoiding:’ delaying’ is the goal
Collaborating: the aim is to find a win-win solution.
Compromising: ‘Finding a middle ground’ is the aim.
1) Social categorization is a natural feature of social cognition.
2) Kenneth Thomas and Ralph Kilmann developed a model for conflict
resolution.
3) Accommodating Mode is both accepting and cooperative.
4) Avoiding is both unassertive and uncooperative in the Thomas-Kilmann
model.
12.7 LET US SUM UP

It can be summed up from the above discussion that leader is the person who has
the greatest impact on the group actions and beliefs.The Characteristic of
leader:Integrity and Honesty, Communication, self esteem, empathy,
maturity, physical features and influence. The various type of leadership
are:Autocratic, Participative, Narcissistic Bureaucratic, Consultative, Social
categorization etc.

1) Describe the various functions of leader.
2) Name ten leadership type.
3) Explain the characteristics of leader.
4) What do you mean by Laissez –fair?
5) How does Autocratic differ from Participative type of leadership?
6) Write a short note on Social categorization.
7) Describe Thomas-Kilmann’s five modes for resolving conflicts.
12.9 GLOSSARY
Leader: The leader is the person who has the greatest impact on the group actions
and beliefs.
Autocratic: An autocratic leader usually assumes that she or he is the best

individual at the situation and better than anyone.
Participative: Participative leadership is a form of leadership in which all group

members working together for taking decisions.
235
Group Dynamics Narcissistic: Narcissistic leadership is a form of leadership in which the leader
only thinks for herself/ himself.
Bureaucratic: Bureaucratic leadership refers to organisational leadership through

a highly formalised set of procedures, protocols, and systems.
Consultative: Consultative leaders regularly ask members for input and take
members complaints seriously.
Social categorization: Social categorization such as gender, race and social

category, influences our perceptions as well.

QUESTIONS
1) True
2) False
3) True
4) False
1) True
2) False
3) False
4) True
1) True
2) True
3) True
4) True

Baron, R.A., Byrne, D. & Bhardwaj. G (2010). Social Psychology (12th Ed).New
Delhi:Pearson.
References
Allport, F.H. (1924). Social Psychology, Houghton, Mifflon.
Chadha, N.K. (2012). Social Psychology. MacMillan: New Delhi
Deaux.K&Wrightsman, L. (2001). Social Psychology. California: Cole Publishing
Kassin,S., Fein, S., &Markus,H.R. (2008). Social Psychology. New York:
Houghton Miffin.
David, H. (1968). Social Psychology, Harper and Row, New York.
236
Davis, L. E., Galinsky, M.J. and Schopler, J. H. (1995). RAP : A framework for Leader and Leadership
leading multiracial groups, Social Work, 40 (2), 155-165.
Dawson and Gettys, Introduction to Sociology.
Deutsch, M. and Gerard, H. (1955). A study on normative and informational
social influence upon individual judgement. Journal of Abnormal and Social
Dollard, J. (1939). Frustration and Aggression, Yale University Press. Eldredge

and Merrill, Culture and Society, p. 483. Gillin and Gillin, Cultural Sociology, p.
488.
Gish, N.P., Fundamentals of Sociology, p. 63. Green Arnold, Sociology, p. 71.

Green, A.W., Sociology, (5th edition) p. 60.
Hopps, J.G. and Pinderhughes, E.B. (1999). Group work with overwhelmed
clients, New York : Free Press. Krech, Crutchfield and Ballachy (1962). Individual
and Society, McGraw Hill, New York.
Krech, Crutchfield and Ballacy (1962). Individual and Society, McGraw Hill,
New York.
Kuppuswamy, B. (1980), An Introduction to Social Psychology, 2nd revised

edition, (reprinted, 2004), Asia Publishing House, Mumbai.
Kuppuswamy, B. (1980). An Introduction to Social Psychology, Asia Publishing

House, New Delhi. Kuppuswamy, B.(2002), Elements of Social Psychology, 7th
Revised Edition, Konark Publishers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi.
Macgowan, M.J. (2000). Evaluation of a measure of engagement for group work,

Research on Social Work Practice, 10(3), 348-361. MacIver, R. M., Society, p.
521.
MacKenzie, K.R. (1983). The clinical application of a group climate measure. In

R. Dies and K.R. MacKenzie (Eds.) Advances in group psychotherapy: Integrating
research and practice (155-170). New York: International Universities Press.
Misra, G. (2009). Psychology in India, Volume 4: Theoretical and Methodological
Developments (ICSSR survey of advances in research). New Delhi: Pearson.
Myers, D.G. (2008). Social Psychology New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill.
Taylor,S.E., Peplau,L.A. &Sears,D.O. (2006). Social Psychology (12th Ed). New

Delhi:
Pearson.
Shetgovekar, S(2018) An introduction to Social Psychology, Sage publication
India Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi.
237

BPCC 107 Full Textbook

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BPCC 107 Full Textbook

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

BPCC 107 Full Textbook

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

bPCC - 107

School of Social Sciences

BLOCK 1 INTRODUCTION TO SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 7

BLOCK 2 SELF IN SOCIAL CONTEXT 39

BLOCK 3 SOCIAL COGNITION 85

BLOCK 4 SOCIAL INFLUENCE 147

BLOCK 5 GROUP DYNAMICS 203

1.2 DEFINITION, NATURE AND SCOPE OF

1.2.1 Definition of Social Psychology

1.2.2 Nature of Social Psychology

1.2.2.1 Social Psychology Applies Scientific Methods of Study

1.2.2.3 Social Psychology Studies Individuals’ Behaviour in Social

BOX 1.1: KURT LEWIN’S CONTRIBUTION TO SOCIAL

Kurt Lewin (9th September, 1890-12th February, 1947) was a German-

1.2.3 Scope of Social Psychology

People generally express feelings of approval and disapproval, favourability

One of the emerging areas of social psychology is social cognition, which

Social influence is a traditional, core area of study in social psychology

Social psychologists are also interested in the question of why people

Social psychologists have vastly studied various phenomena related to social

Box 1.2: CONTRIBUTIONS OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGISTS

WHAT DO SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGISTS STUDY?

Social psychologists study both the benefits of having good relationships

2) How can you say that social psychology is a science?

3) Describe the nature of social psychology.

4) Give an account of scope of social psychology.

1.3 HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL

1.3.2 Formational Years of Social Psychology

1.3.3 Expansion of Social Psychology

1.3.4 Social Psychology in 21st Century

1.3.5 Social Psychology in India

Social psychologists further explored the areas of intergroup relations (Singh,

Self Assessment Question II

1.4 LET US SUM UP

Social psychologists investigate human social behaviour at various levels.

2) Present an account of historical development of social psychology.

1.7 ANSWERS TO SELF ASSESSMENT

3) The following three major components characterise the nature of social

1.8 SUGGESTED READINGS AND REFERENCES

Baron, R. A., &Branscombe, N. R. (2016). Social Psychology (14th ed.). Boston:

Adinarayan, S.P. (1957). A study of racial attitudes in India. Journal of Social

Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliff s, NJ: Prentice-

Bartlett, F. C. (1932). Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social

Berkowitz, L. (1962). Aggression: A Social Psychological Analysis. New York,

Darley, J. M., &Latané, B. (1968). Bystander intervention in emergencies:

Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations,

Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row,

Haney, C., Banks, C., & Zimbardo, P. (1973). Interpersonal dynamics in a

Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1963). Communication and

Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of Groupthink: A Psychological Study of Foreign

Kelley, H. H., & Thibaut, J. W. (1978). Interpersonal Relations: A Theory of

Murphy, G., & Murphy, L. B. (1931). Experimental Social Psychology. New

Pandey, J. (1986). Social-cultural perspectives on ingratiation. In B.A. Mahar &

Pavlov, I.P. (1927). Conditioned Reflexes: An Investigation of the Physiological

Sinha, D. (1952). Behaviour in a catastrophic situation: A psychological study of

2.2 SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY AND OTHER

Social psychology is related to other disciplines in the family of social sciences

2.2.1 Social Psychology and Other Social Sciences

Social Psychology and Anthropology

Social Psychology and Economics

A third mechanism is observational learning. People often learn social attitudes