## Dual-process model of social cognition :twisted_rightwards_arrows: <!-- 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-6 ---  To download the slides (.pdf), swipe down and click :printer: icon. --- ## Dual-process model :repeat: <div style="text-align: left"> * A large body of research in social cognition has been shaped and guided by a class of theories that are generically described as **==dual process theories (DPT)==**. - Dividing the mental processes underlying social judgments and behavior into **==:two: general categories==** depending on whether they operate *automatically* or in a *controlled* fashion. </div> --- ## Dual-process model :repeat: <div style="text-align: left"> * The distinction between **==automatic and controlled==** processes has become a central component in virtually all areas of social psychology. * DPT is rooted in the assumption that the universe of mental processes can be divided into :two: general classes: - Those that operate **==automatically==** and those that operate in a **==controlled==** fashion. </div> --- ## Dual-process model :repeat: <div style="text-align: left"> * The earlier development of DPT theories **==focuces on specific phenomena==**, while the last decades DPT theories focuses on **==integrative, domain-independent==** mental model. </div> --- ## Dual-process model :repeat: <div style="text-align: left"> * Early DPT focused on domain specific phenomena, such as: - [Persuasion](https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4612-4964-1_1) - [Attitude–behavior relations](https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2F0033-295X.107.1.101) - [Prejudice and stereotyping](https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037/0022-3514.56.1.5) - [Impression formation](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0065260108603172); and - [Dispositional attribution](https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=HT6ddclz6EAC&oi=fnd&pg=PA189&dq=gilbert+1989+attribution&ots=df1RKRpavj&sig=8QbytHN-sJRs89l8rm3r9Tog8sA) </div> --- ## Automatic processes :robot_face: <div style="text-align: left"> Automatic processes are typically characterized in terms of :four: operating conditions: * :one: are elicited *unintentionally*; * :two: require *little amounts* of cognitive resources; * :three: *cannot be stopped* voluntarily; * :four: occur *outside of conscious* awareness </div> --- ## Controlled processes :control_knobs: <div style="text-align: left"> Controlled processes are characterized as: * :one: are initiated *intentionally*; * :two: require *considerable amounts* of cognitive resources; * :three: *can be stopped* voluntarily; and * :four: operate *within conscious* awareness </div> --- ## Outline :pencil: <div style="text-align: left"> * DPT of impression formation (Brewer) * Continuum model (Fiske & Neuberg) * System :one: and :two: theory (Kahneman & Tversky) * Heuristic-systematic model (HSM) and Elaboration-likelihood model (ELM) </div> --- ### Impression formation ([Brewer, 1988](https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1988-98192-001)) <div style="text-align: left"> * Brewer’s DPT argues that impression formation may take either a **==top-down==** or a **==bottom-up==** route. * Both routes are assumed to start with an automatic identification of salient features of the stimulus person. * **==Automatic processes==** :point_right: identification * **==Controlled processes==** :point_right: personalisation (*coherent*) or individuation (*systematic integration*) </div> ---  --- ### Continuum model :japanese_goblin: #### ([Fiske & Neuberg, 1990](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0065260108603172)) <div style="text-align: left"> * The processes by which people form opinions of other individuals **==operate along a continuum==** that reflects the degree to which perceivers utilize **==category-related==** versus **==person-specific==** information. * Unlike Brewer's model, continuum model attributes a *==dominant role to category-based==* processing. </div> --- ### Continuum model :japanese_goblin: #### ([Fiske & Neuberg, 1990](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0065260108603172)) <div style="text-align: left"> * The *==basic assumption==* of the model is that **==category information enjoys general priority==** because the processing of such information does not require substantial amounts of cognitive resources. </div> --- ### Continuum model :japanese_goblin: #### ([Fiske & Neuberg, 1990](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0065260108603172)) <div style="text-align: left"> * The continuum model assumes that perceivers attempt to maintain the impression implied by their **==initial categorization==** while processing individual attributes of the target. * [See the flowchart](https://i.imgur.com/Wrsdw1T.png) </div> --- ### System :one: and :two: theory #### ([Kahneman & Tversky](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/kahneman-excerpt-thinking-fast-and-slow/))  --- ### System :one: and :two: theory #### ([Kahneman & Tversky](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/kahneman-excerpt-thinking-fast-and-slow/)) <div style="text-align: left"> * **==System :one:==** (*intuitive impression*) :point_right: fast, parallel, automatic, effortless, associative, slow learning, and emotional. * **==System :two:==** (*judgements*) :point_right: slow, serial, controlled, effortful, rule governed, fast learning, and emotionally neutral. </div> --- ### System :one: and :two: theory #### ([Kahneman & Tversky](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/kahneman-excerpt-thinking-fast-and-slow/)) <div style="text-align: left"> * Information processing in the :two: systems **==differs from basic perceptual processes==** - Both intuition and reasoning can be evoked by verbal information, involving conceptual representations of the past, the present, and the future. - Perceptual processes relies on current stimulations. </div> --- ### System :one: and :two: theory #### ([Kahneman & Tversky](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/kahneman-excerpt-thinking-fast-and-slow/)) <div style="text-align: left"> * An important function of System :two: is *==to monitor==* the activities and inputs of System :one:. * The intuitive responses generated by System :one: are determined by the *==accessibility of mental contents==*. * The mental processing in System :two: is guided by the application of *==logical rules of inference==*. </div> --- ### System :one: and :two: theory #### ([Kahneman & Tversky](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/kahneman-excerpt-thinking-fast-and-slow/)) <div style="text-align: left"> * If *==no intuitive response==* is generated by System 1, judgments and behavior are *==exclusively computed==* by System 2. * If System 1 *==provides an intuitive response==* as input for System 2, System 2 may either: - (1) endorse this response - (2) adjust the response for other features that are recognized to be relevant </div> --- ### System :one: and :two: theory #### ([Kahneman & Tversky](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/kahneman-excerpt-thinking-fast-and-slow/)) <div style="text-align: left"> * (3) correct the response for a recognized bias, or * (4) block the response from overt expression if it is identified to violate a valid rule of inference. </div> ---  --- ### Heuristic-systematic model (HSM) :symbols: #### ([Chaiken, 1987](https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=eGMAAwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA3&dq=Chaiken,+1987&ots=ixsjVvIxnZ&sig=PQb7FD3u--L7BHmT0ig_m4688dg)) <div style="text-align: left"> * HSM (and ELM) describes two basic persuasion processes that may guide an individual’s response to persuasive message. * **==Systematic processing==** involves *==comprehensive consideration==* of object-relevant information, which requires high levels of motivation and ability to engage in effortful processing. </div> --- ### Heuristic-systematic model (HSM) :symbols: #### ([Chaiken, 1987](https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=eGMAAwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA3&dq=Chaiken,+1987&ots=ixsjVvIxnZ&sig=PQb7FD3u--L7BHmT0ig_m4688dg)) <div style="text-align: left"> * **==Heuristic processing==** relies on the *==activation, accessibility, and applicability==* of *==learned heuristics==* that require relatively few cognitive resources (e.g., I agree with people I like ). </div> --- ### Heuristic-systematic model (HSM) :symbols: <div style="text-align: left"> * The likelihood that an individual engages in systematic processing is guided by **==the sufficiency principle==**: - The motivation to engage in **==systematic processing==** *==increases==* when an individual’s desired level of confidence falls below his or her actual level of confidence. - ..and when the *==difference between their desired and their actual levels of confidence is high==*. </div> --- ### Heuristic-systematic model (HSM) :symbols: #### ([Chaiken, 1987](https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=eGMAAwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA3&dq=Chaiken,+1987&ots=ixsjVvIxnZ&sig=PQb7FD3u--L7BHmT0ig_m4688dg)) <div style="text-align: left"> * People are more likely to engage in **==heuristic processing==** when *==the difference between their desired and actual levels of confidence is low==*. * Importantly, systematic processing may not necessarily lead to unbiased judgments because systematic processing can be influenced by *==defense motivation==* and *==impression management==*. </div> --- ### Heuristic-systematic model (HSM) :symbols: #### ([Chaiken, 1987](https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=eGMAAwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA3&dq=Chaiken,+1987&ots=ixsjVvIxnZ&sig=PQb7FD3u--L7BHmT0ig_m4688dg)) <div style="text-align: left"> * **==Defense motivation==** refers to the desire to defend preexisting attitudes. * **==Impression management==** refers to the desire to hold attitudes that satisfy specific social goals. </div> --- ### Elaboration-likelihood model (ELM) #### ([Petty & Cacioppo, 1986](https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4612-4964-1_1)) <div style="text-align: left"> * Attitude change occurs along **==an elaboration continuum==** whereby persuasion is determined by **==how motivated and able==** an individual is to engage in effortful information processing. * The basic assumption is that **==the higher an individual’s cognitive elaboration==**, the *more likely* he or she is to **==process all object-relevant information==**. </div> --- ### Elaboration-likelihood model (ELM) #### ([Petty & Cacioppo, 1986](https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4612-4964-1_1)) <div style="text-align: left"> * **==Central route==** :point_right: individuals - Assess *==all of the available object-relevant==* information (e.g., strength of the presented arguments); and - *==Integrate==* this information with their stored knowledge in order to obtain a carefully considered (although not necessarily unbiased) evaluation. </div> --- ### Elaboration-likelihood model (ELM) #### ([Petty & Cacioppo, 1986](https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4612-4964-1_1)) <div style="text-align: left"> * **==Peripheral route==** :point_right: at the low end of the elaboration continuum, people *==engage in considerably less scrutiny==* of object-relevant information. </div> --- ### Elaboration-likelihood model (ELM) #### ([Petty & Cacioppo, 1986](https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4612-4964-1_1)) <div style="text-align: left"> * When **==elaboration is low==**, attitude change can be effected from: - A cursory examination of the **==available information==** (e.g., by examining only a subset of the available information); or - The **==use of heuristics==** and other types of information processing shortcuts (e.g., I agree with people I like ). </div> ---  --- ## ELM and HSM :twisted_rightwards_arrows: <div style="text-align: left"> Both models maintain that attitude change can occur through either: * **==Systematic/central processing==** that requires some degree of motivation and capacity; or * **==Heuristic/peripheral processing==** that is assumed to require little motivation or capacity. </div> --- ## ELM and HSM :twisted_rightwards_arrows: <div style="text-align: left"> The **==two models differ==** in their treatment of heuristic and peripheral processes: * ELM assumes **==an inverse relationship==** between central and peripheral processing along the elaboration continuum. - ELM holds that there is a trade-off between peripheral and central processing. </div> --- ## ELM and HSM :twisted_rightwards_arrows: <div style="text-align: left"> * HSM assumes that systematic and heuristic processing **==may occur simultaneously==** with either independent or interactive effects. </div> --- ## Criticism :zap: <div style="text-align: left"> * How many processes actually there? - [Single process](https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2006-01885-004); or - [Multiple processes](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15327965pli1703_3)? * The existence claims—such as claims about the existence of one, two, or multiple processes—are **==ontological in nature==**. * In other words, we **==cannot test empirically==** if there are one, two, or multiple processes. </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)