## Forming Impression and Social Schema :one: <!-- Put the link to this slide here so people can follow --> **Rizqy Amelia Zein** Department of Personality and Social Psychology Universitas Airlangga slides: https://hackmd.io/@ameliazein/kogsos-2 ---  To download the slides (.pdf), swipe down and click :printer: icon. ---  --- ## Social cognition :brain: <div style="text-align: left"> * We tend to use thought and cognition interchangeably; however, the two terms are **==very different==** accroding to social psychologists. * ==*Thought*== is the internal language and symbols we use – it is often ==**conscious**==, or at least something we are or could be aware of. </div> --- ## Social cognition :brain: <div style="text-align: left"> * Cognition is broader; it also refers to ==**mental processing**== that can be largely **==automatic==**. - Cognition acts a bit like ==**a computer program**== or operating system. </div> --- ## Social cognition :brain: <div style="text-align: left"> * Social cognition :point_right: an approach in social psychology that focuses on how **==cognition is affected==** by wider and more immediate **==social contexts==** and on how cognition **==affects our social behaviour==**. </div> --- ### Let's start with finding out how we form an impression of others:exclamation:  --- ## Asch's Configural Model (1946) <div style="text-align: left"> * We tend to see others as a whole rather than the sum of its parts ([Gestalt](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gestalt_psychology)). * We combine ==*central* and *peripheral* traits==, in which central traits play a significant role in configuring the final impression of others. </div> --- ## Asch's Configural Model (1946) <div style="text-align: left"> * **==Central trait==** :point_right: Traits that have a disproportionate influence on the configuration of final impressions. * **==Peripheral trait==** :point_right: Traits that have an insignificant influence on the configuration of final impressions. </div> ---  --- ## Bias in forming impression :zap: <div style="text-align: left"> * ==**Primacy & recency effect (Asch)**== - **Primacy** :point_right: the traits **==presented first==** massively influenced the final impression. Early information acts as a central cues. - **Recency** :point_right: **==later information==** has more impact than earlier information. Happens when we are distracted or less motivated to pay attention to others. </div> --- ## Bias in forming impression :zap: <div style="text-align: left"> * In the absence of information to the contrary, people tend to ==**assume the best of others**== and form a positive impression ([Sears, 1983](https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1983-25616-001)). * However, any ==negative information attracts our attention== and looms large in our subsequent impression – we are biased towards negativity ([Fiske, 1980](https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1981-12764-001)). * We are extremely ==**sensitive to negative information**== and this is difficult to change. </div> --- ## Bias in forming impression :zap: <div style="text-align: left"> * ==**Physical appearance**== could affect how we perceive others. * Appearance-based impressions can be surprisingly accurate ([Zebrowitz & Collins, 1997](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15327957pspr0103_2)). * Research confirms that we tend to assume that ==**physically attractive**== people are ‘good’ ([Dion, Berscheid, & Walster, 1972](https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1973-09160-001)) – they are interesting, warm, outgoing, socially skilled, and moral. </div> --- ## Cognitive algebra :1234: ([Anderson, 1974](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0065260108600350)) <div style="text-align: left"> * ...is an approach to the study of impression formation that focuses on **==how we assign positive and negative valence to attributes==** and how we then **==combine==** these pluses and minuses into ==**a general evaluation**==. * There are three principal models of cognitive algebra: *summation*, *averaging*, and *weighted averaging*. </div> ---  --- ## Social schemas :inbox_tray: <div style="text-align: left"> * .. is '**cognitive structure** which represents ==a concept or type of stimulus==, including attributes and relations between these attributes' ([Fiske & Taylor 2017](https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/social-cognition/book250299)). - Schema is formed via **==previous experience==**. * When schema is activated, it facilitates a *top-down*, *concept-driven*, or *theory-driven* information processing model. </div> --- ## Social schemas :inbox_tray: <div style="text-align: left"> * Simply put, the social schemas are... * Patterns of thought and behavior that are **==organised==**. * A mental framework that focuses on **==a specific theme==**, that helps us to **==organise information==**. * Schemes tend to **==persist==**, although we are faced with different situations. </div> --- ## Schemas types :one: <div style="text-align: left"> * ***Person schema*** - Knowledge structure of ==specific== people. * ***Role schema*** - Knowledge structure about specific ==roles== (e.g. wife, husband, father, teacher, student, etc.). </div> --- ## Schemas types :two: <div style="text-align: left"> * ***Scripts*** - Schemas regarding ==situation/context==. * ***Self-schema*** - Schemas about ==self-concept==. </div> --- ## Schemas types :three: <div style="text-align: left"> * ***Content-free schema*** - This schema does not contain specific information, but contains ==rules regarding information processing==. - e.g. if Paijo likes Siti, while Siti thinks Kasino is annoying, then Paijo must stay away from the Kasino so that Siti likes him. </div> --- #### Social categorisation and prototypes :dolls: <div style="text-align: left"> * Schemas help individuals to organise information by: - Providing a 'container' for ==**categorising new information**==. - Providing information to form ==**prototypes**==. * Categories are organised **==hierarchically==** - So that a very specific category is part of a category that is more inclusive. </div> ---  --- #### Social categorisation and prototypes :dolls: <div style="text-align: left"> * In abstracting prototypes, an individual usually uses ==**concrete information that he experiences himself**== (or *exemplars*, [Smith & Zarate 1992](https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037/0033-295X.99.1.3)). - E.g. when asked to describe "an American", individuals tend to describe an American who they have met as a prototype. </div> --- #### Social categorisation and stereotypes :one: <div style="text-align: left"> * Stereotype is a ==*shared generalization*== on a social group. - Represents ==**schemas for certain social groups**==, tends to ==**simplify and be derogatory**==, especially when the stereotypes are about the outgroups. - We usually rely on the most visible ==**differences**== between groups. </div> --- #### Social categorisation and stereotypes :two: <div style="text-align: left"> * Stereotypes are mental *templates* that individuals often use to ==**reduce complexities**== especially when ==**other information is not available**==. - It is dangerous if it leads to prejudice and discriminatory behavior. </div> --- ### Perceptual accentuation principle ([Tajfel](https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2003-06658-015)) :accept: <div style="text-align: left"> * The categorisation of stimuli produces a perceptual accentuation of ==**intra-category similarities**== and **==inter-category differences==** on dimensions believed to be correlated with the categorisation. * The accentuation effect is **==enhanced==** where the categorisation has **==importance==**, **==relevance==** or **==value==** to the individuals. </div> --- ### Why we develop stereotypes? :floppy_disk: <div style="text-align: left"> * Forming a coherent picture of the social context and ==**reduces uncertainty**== ([Hogg 2007](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0065260106390028)). * Justifying **==social roles==** ([Eagly 1995](https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1995-21141-001)) and ==**power imbalance**== ([Fiske 1993](https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037/0003-066X.48.6.621)). * Explaining the roots of **==intergroup conflicts==** ([Jost & Banaji 1994](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1994.tb01008.x)). * ..and contributing to entice **==positive feelings==** from being affiliated to a certain social group ([Ho & Sidanius 2010](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1368430209340910)). </div> --- ### What have we known? :fire: <div style="text-align: left"> * People are remarkably tend to characterise **==large human groups==** in terms of **==a few fairly crude common attributes==**. * Stereotypes are **==slow to change==**, but it's possible to modify it through **==[social contact](https://academic.oup.com/sf/article-abstract/71/3/781/2232624)==**. * Stereotypes **==generally change==** in response to wider social, political or economic changes. </div> --- ### What have we known? :fire: <div style="text-align: left"> * Stereotypes become **==more pronounced and hostile==** when there is **==social tension and conflict==** between groups, and then they are extremely difficult to modify. * Stereotypes are **==not inaccurate or wrong==**; rather, they serve to make sense of particular intergroup relations. </div> --- ### What have we known? :fire: <div style="text-align: left"> * Stereotypes are acquired at **==an early age==**, often before the child has any knowledge about the groups that are being stereotyped (but other research suggests that some stereotypes **==crystallise later in childhood==**, after age 10; ([Rutland 1999](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1348/014466699164031)). </div> --- ### *Stereotype content model* ([Fiske, 2018](https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417738825))  --- ### Individual differences in using schemas :three_button_mouse: <div style="text-align: left"> * **==Attributional complexity==** – people vary in the complexity of their explanations of other people ([Fletcher, et al., 1986](https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037/0022-3514.51.4.875)). * **==Uncertainty orientation==** – people vary in their interest in gaining information versus remaining uninformed but certain ([Sorrentino, et al., 2001](https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2001-01507-009)). </div> --- ### Individual differences in using schemas :three_button_mouse: <div style="text-align: left"> * **==Need for cognition==** – people differ in how much they like to think deeply about things ([Cacioppo & Petty, 1982](https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1982-22487-001)). * **==Need for cognitive closure==** – people differ in how quickly they need to tidy up cognitive loose ends and move to a decision or make a judgement ([Kruglanski & Webster, 1996](https://psycnet.apa.org/journals/rev/103/2/263/)). </div> --- ### Individual differences in using schemas :three_button_mouse: <div style="text-align: left"> * **==Cognitive complexity==** – people differ in the complexity of their cognitive processes and representations ([Crockett, 1969](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1969.tb01763.x)). * **==Accessibility and salience==**. </div> --- ## Changing schemas :arrows_counterclockwise: <div style="text-align: left"> * **==Bookkeeping==** – slow change in the face of accumulating evidence. * ==**Conversion**== – sudden and massive change once a critical mass of disconfirming evidence has accumulated. * ==**Subtyping**== – schemas morph into a subcategory to accommodate disconfirming evidence. </div> --- ### Thank you! :tada: Should you have any questions, drop them in: - [Spreadsheet](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LqcvLnfamGoE3rxKFg9eVtttMbmkPfcF7OxMY1yVGYM/edit?usp=sharing); or - [Drop-in session (every Friday at 11-12)](https://meet.google.com/iis-oxiz-emc); or - [Email](mailto:amelia.zein@psikologi.unair.ac.id)