Wednesday, May 1, 2013

The Sexy Ones

Social Psych Extra Credit
5 Sexiest Theories

Fundamental Attribution Error: This is one of my favorite theories of all time. I see this all time and it frustrates me to a certain point, but it also amuses me. After learning about this theory, I try to figure the situational reason for why someone is acting in a certain way, and often find myself less aggravated and quick to judge than my friends. Or at the very least less vocal and quick about it.

Ingroup bias: This is something, that I see all the time and that I also participate in. Especially in APO (Service Fraternity), where we have are little individual families, I see this ingroup bias quite often and most of the time it’s harmless in APO, and just good fun, but I can see the areas where it can be harmful.

Self-Perception Theory: I like this theory a lot and I think it is very true, if not a bit over simplified. I think we really do come to understand ourselves in the same way we come to understand other people; by observing our behavior. I also think this theory can work well with Taylor’s self-serving cognition and positive allusions theory, in the idea that we are certainly bias in how we view ourselves and our behaviors.

Self-Enhancement Theory: This theory makes a lot sense in many ways. I often see this theory with people I know and of course myself. In my opinion it is hard to deny that people do this, and I overall I think this is something that is good for people to do, but also problematic when certain allusions are very unrealistic.

Social Facilitation: This theory makes so much sense in so many ways. When we were learning about this theory, all I kept thinking about  when I was younger and I was practicing (goofing off) shooting hoops in my driveway. I would make 20 straight in a row when I was all by myself, but the second someone started watching I missed, I could barely make one. This frustrated me to no end when I was younger.

5 Sexiest Psychologist

Robert Zajonc: Honestly I really like his name. When I was studying or reading, it was rather fun watching my friends try to pronounce his name. I also like his theories as they were in my opinion easy to understand. 

Shelly Taylor: I liked the rivalry between her and Swan, it was helpful in remembering their theories. I also liked her positive allusions theory, as it makes a lot of sense. 

Stanley Milgram: Milgram’s electrical shock experiment, is one experiment that is always taught in beginning/principles of psychology classes and it’s one of the most memorable and terrifying. I personally really liked the experiment, though I am disturbed by it, but I think it was a beyond useful experiment.

Daryl Bem: I liked a lot of Bem’s work. Overall though his self-perception theory was one of my favorite theories to learn about and was easy to remember. 

Hazel Markus: I overall really liked her Self-Schema theory. It tied in well with a lot of general human behavior, other theories, and it personally helped explained a lot of things about myself and people I know.

Wednesday, April 24, 2013

The Mere Exposure Effect



The Mere Exposure Effect is part of the whole entire idea that we are more likely to be attracted/like someone/something that we have seen and become familiar with. Both proximity and exposure are basic and necessary factors for attraction.

Robert Zajonc did a series of experiments, where they found that the more exposure to a novel stimulus people had, the more the people came to like the novel stimulus. This was true for a foreign word, a geometric form, and even a human face. This observation was later coined the mere exposure effect and has been observed in more than 200 experiments since then (Zajonc, 1968; Bornstein, 1989).

People do not even have to aware of the exposure for the mere exposure effect to occur. In a typical study, participants are shown pictures of several different stimuli, for only one to five milliseconds, making it impossible for the participant to be register awareness and even too quick for the participants to realize that different stimuli that are flashed are flashed more often than others. After the exposure, participants are then shown each of the stimuli and as two questions: (1) Do you like it? (2) Have you seen it before? As expected the more the stimuli that were frequently shown, were the ones people liked more, even though when asked if they’ve seen it before they said no. These results demonstrated that the not only is the mere exposure effect can influence us without us being aware, but the effect is strong under those conditions (Kuntz-Wilson & Zajonc, 1980; Bornstein & D’Agostino, 1992; Zajonc, 2001).

Personal Example: Pottery
                I am a proctor at the Studio Arts Building and every now and again, so many ceramic students make so much pottery that they either have too much or simply forget about certain pieces. So the left over pieces get thrown away and sometimes the proctors can pick certain pieces that they like if the student doesn’t want that piece anymore. 

                So last semester, I was going through the pottery and I absolutely loved several pieces. They were just as nice as the others, but for some odd reasons I couldn’t help, but like these pieces more than the rest. I learned that the student had heavily based most of her pottery designs off her sketches and paintings she did for painting/draw classes last year. I also later learned that, that student was my old roommate from last year. I use to see her designs, drawing, sketches, and doodles all the time. I would see them out of the corner my eye, maybe just looking over at her side of the room, or just glancing at her sketchbook that was opened on her desk.

I don’t recall any specific designs or drawings and before I knew the pieces were my old roommates’, I would have sworn I had not seen anything like the pottery pieces I had picked out.
I feel like I was exposed to my old roommates designs or at least her style all of last year, but never registered it consciously, but due the exposure I came to like her pottery, more than the other pottery pieces. 

Word Count-527

*~*~*~*~*~
References
Bornstein, R. F. (1989). Exposure and affect: Overview and metaanalysis of research, 1968-1987. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 265-289.
Kuntz-Wilson, W., & Zajonc, R. B. (1980).Affective discrimination of stimuli that cannot be recognized. Science, 207, 556-558.
Bornstein, R. F., & D’Agostino, P. R. (1992).Stimulus recognition and the me4e exposure effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 545-552.
Zajonc, R. B. (1968).Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Monograph Supplement, 9(2), 1-27.
Zajonc, R. B. (2001). Mere exposure: A gateway to the subliminal. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10, 224-228.

Wednesday, April 17, 2013

The Escalation Effect



The Escalation Effect also known as an Entrapment, is basically when a commitment to a failing course of action is increased to justify the previous investments that have already been made to the commitment (Haslam et al., 2006; Keil et al., 2007; Staw, 1997). 

It has been shown in experiments that groups are more likely to escalate commitment to a failing project and are likely to do so in more extreme ways than are individuals (Dietz-Uhler, 1996; Seibert & Goltz, 2001). Groups such as businesses or even the government have been shown to incur huge costs for the simple fact that they continue to invest more money, time, and other resources into a projects that honestly should have been terminated (Ross & Staw, 1986). 

Personal Example: Personal Finance

In my Personal Finance class in my senior year of high school, we created a somewhat legit ‘company’ (putting our own money into the product and actually selling it). Our company was known as Booty Bands and basically the main product was these bands one could wear on top of their sweatpants or leggings (because sweatpants already had that has part of the style at the time) and there were different patterns and colors and people could alter the bands. We even had headbands as well.

This was probably the dumbest product we could have thought of or one person thought of and that the majority voted for. The product was bad, we weren’t selling more than we were having be made, in others words the amount of money we had put in was not worth the product and we weren’t getting our money back.

Yet for some odd reason we kept ordering new designs and we kept producing more. Each girl in the class had to put their own money into getting the bands produced. We had to sell a significant amount or in my case buying some for myself for ‘advertisement’, but mostly so I wouldn’t get a bad grade.
We even ended up joining a real competition for real businesses created by high school students in the area. This was an idea so that we could increase awareness of our product and increase sells, so the plan was to send a few girls there, win or at the very least get the product noticed. So to be equal, the whole entire class had to spend more of our own money to send the girls to this two day competition. 

Eventually the company of Booty Bands ended when the class ended, though a few girls tried to keep it going afterwards. Honestly the whole entire idea in my opinion was a stupid one, but what really got me was the continuing spending of money and time into this project and the fact that the more money and time we spent on it, the more we had to keep giving. 

I honestly felt and still feel like we could have just declared the project/business a failure and maybe right a paper on why it failed. Instead of spending everybody’s money and time on something that should have ended long before it ever did. 

It was personal finance class, but honestly that project didn’t teach us anything, other than the whole entire idea “of giving your money if you want your business succeed”. Though it was the original intent of the project, it did actually turned out to be lesson in Escalation Effects

Word Count-571

 *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
References 

Dietz-Uhler, B. (1996). The escalation of commitment in political decision-making groups: A social identity approach. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 611-629.  
Haslam, S. A., Ryan, M. K., Postmess, T., Spears, R., Jetten, J., & Webley, P. (2006). Sticking to our guns: Social identity s basis for the maintenance of commitment to faltering organizational projects. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 607-623.
Keil, M., Depledge, G., & Rai, A. (2007), Escalation: The role of problems recognition nd conitive bias. Decision Sciences, 38, 391-421.
Ross, J., & Staw, B. M. (1986). Expo 86: An escalation prototype. Adminstrative Science Quarterly, 31-274-297.
Seibert, S. E., & Goltz, S. M. (2001). Comparison of allocations by individuals and interacting groups in an escalation of commitment situation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 134-156.
Staw, B. M. (1997).The escalation of commitment: An update and appraisal. In Z. Shapira (Eds.). Organizational decision making Cambridge series on judgment and decision making (pp. 191-215). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Friday, April 12, 2013

Rediscovering Willpower



Rediscovering the Greatest Human Strength: WILL POWER
By: Roy F. Baumeister & John Tierney
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
 


I chose this book, because the title caught my interest. Though I do not remember specifically why, I know that willpower was actually on my mind at the time; so the whole entire idea of rediscovering willpower in humans intrigued me. I think this book was an excellent choice and I genuinely am glad I chose it and read it. It was not just a boring text book of all this factual information, this book was interesting to read; as it combined popular media with known celebrities with interesting stories and ideas with actual research.

The authors of the book are Roy F. Baumeister & John Tierney. Baumeister is a psychology professor and a well-known social psychologist who has done work involving the self, social rejection, self-control, self-esteem, and overall I feel he is an expert on human self-control and willpower.  He has written mostly academic books designed for the academic minded and for academic purposes. Tierney is Baumeister's co-author and is a journalist for the New York Times as well as an author, coauthoring in a few parody 'self-help books). In my judgment this book is credible. I feel it is well-written and enjoyable and understandable for everyone who is interested in reading it. I would not consider this book a strict academic or scholarly book though, I feel it is well researched and well backed up, but is not a pure academic book. If someone wanted to read a purely research or scholarly book on willpower this book will be a great gateway toward those readings (through its references-which were very well organized based on chapter). It is a great read, very informational and powerful, bu not what I personally consider and academic book. I think this book could be read by anyone though and will be enjoyable and useful; I think having some psychology background information would be useful, but not necessary to understand the book.
 
History

I liked how the book started out with the short history of the ideas of will-power; and how the idea of willpower has been thought of as nothing more than avoiding public disgrace, to a moral virtue, to a kind of force, and even to an energy. The idea of willpower started to decline (due to the ideology of willpower in Nazi Germany) and the fact people were more concern about what their neighbors thought they did, rather than what they actually did or were capable of. The ideology of ‘believe it, achieve it’ became quite popular and the beginning of self-help or guru books of willpower began. Eventually popular culture began idealizing self-indulgent behavior in the 1970s and ideas of what people thought of willpower was mostly a thing of the past. People were more interested and more comfortable with looking for external factors rather than human ability to consciously control themselves, which most psychologists have been rather suspicious of. 

Baumeister in the 1970s was working on research involving self-esteem and discovered that people who had higher self-worth and a self-image were happier and more successful, though that seems rather obvious now, it started a wave in popular culture of bestselling books talking about improving self-esteem and self-empowerment. It was not until the 1980s when some researchers became interested in an idea of self-regulation-which led to Baumeister’s own work. 

Though to be honest this little short history in the first few pages was not necessary to the overall book, I really did enjoyed it and I thought it was a great way to start the book, as I never really thought of the history of the idea of self-control or willpower, nor have I ever thought that what I think or what people think today about it, is completely different than what has been thought of it. 

Unconscious Self-Control


Self-Control is very useful and is a vital key for success in life. This book shows that self-control is  a better predictor of college grades than the student’s IQ or SAT score.  
                Why? Students who had visible self-control went to class, did their homework, started their homework earlier, watched less TV…… I mean I’m a college student and though before reading this book I never thought of myself as having great self-control, but I have a decent GPA of 3.22 and I go to class regularly, do my homework-though not early, and know when I have to shut of the TV or computer to do my work.


One thing this book brought to my attention, was how many things that I and so many other people don’t do things out of social norms, but yet we never really consider not doing things as a form of self-control. I mean before reading this book I always saw self-control or willpower as a conscious effort of doing something. 

I consciously try do my homework, but find myself watching my favorite TV show, going on Tumblr, listening to music, or going on walks, instead of doing my homework. I never really saw the fact that I actually at one point stop procrastinating and do my homework and hand it on time some form of self-control. 

I always look at the fact that when I set up my alarm early I don’t wake up until the third alarm, not the fact that I set my first alarm earlier than I actually have to wake up-because I know I will shut my alarm off a few times before I actually wake up. 

I feel that this is applicable to everyone. We always focus on the stuff we consciously fail at and never the stuff we unconsciously do all the time-that are actually acts of some daring degrees of self-control. 

I go to class even when I don’t want to and never go over the above allowed absences. I do my homework, I hand it in on time, and overall I do fairly well. 

Everyone focuses on the fact that if there was cake in the room we would eat it (‘losing our self-control'), but we never focus on the fact that most adults have a means of transportation, ten dollars to spare, and quite literally as adults have the ability to walk into a bakery and order a birthday cake anytime we want and eat it by ourselves. I mean that’s completely possible and most people love cake, but no one does that (or at least I don’t do it and the people I know don’t do it).
So why not?

Because we never have thought of doing it
Well clearly I have thought about it and I have yet to buy a cake other than for a special occasion and I  have certainly not eaten it by myself.
Health Conscious
                I know I’ll get sick if I eat  whole entire cake, but I mean it’s not like I can’t save it. And even if it’s just the whole entire idea of I don’t want to eat a whole entire cake because it’s so many calories, and though that it is true, it certainly doesn’t stop me when I’m a near a cake.
Social Norms
                I mean honestly who is going to know other than me. So why would that matter?

Despite all of that and how many times I can rationalize to myself of how I can go and get a cake any damn time I want to, I’m still not going to do it. It’s not a difficult choice for me to make-but does that make it any less self-control?

Does that fact that going to class is habitual and natural for me-make the fact I get up to go to class any less self-control? Does it show that I have no self-control, that right before writing this sentence I was on Tumblr, or does it show that I actually do have self-control by the fact instead of staying on Tumblr I left to continue working on this. 

I feel like a lot people will not see me continuing to write this paper/blog as self-control, because it’s something I have to do. But really is anything we really do, really something we HAVE to do. I mean sure there are consequences if I don’t write this blog, but my life is not on the line here. I still conceivably could pass the class (though that’s debatable)-but yet I’m still writing this blog and aiming to do a good job on it.

For example let's take something where there is no consequence, or no loss of money, grade, or ect.
Take Saturday, April 6, 2013—It was the Big Event

                Though I signed up for the afternoon shift, I was assigned the morning shift, but I still went. I went to bed at a reasonable time of 12:30am and I officially woke up at 8:00am, went to register in and I went-whacked some weeds, painted a sign, and cleaned up the yard area of a community center for three hours. Is that self-control?

                I mean I wanted to continue catching up on my favorite TV-show that I’ve been missing since of all my homework, but I stopped and went to bed. I set my alarm around 7:30, because I knew it was going to take me awhile to get up. Yet, even at 8:00am I was still tired and didn’t want to leave my warm bed-I still physically got up and got ready. I went to the community center and that was it.
No one forced me to go and there would have no severe or even little consequences of me not going.
I still went, yet 3 out of the 7 people who were supposed to go to the community center didn’t show up. One who I know went to a party the night before and though he set his alarm still didn’t get up. So I feel there is some self-control and will power for the people who (two of the girls in the group-were the hosts of the little party) physically got up and went, despite not wanting to.

One thing I love about this book, is it it makes me feel good about all the stuff I have never really thought of. I think in many ways this book really inspirational and motivational, because it doesn’t put fault for you not doing something, it encourages you to reset your goals and try harder, and it also praises you for the stuff you have done.

I mean if I have chips in my room, I am going to eat them, and yes that is something I should work on and reset my goals from not eating the chips to measuring out a cup of chips and then putting the chips away (Which I actually did when my roommate offered me chips and it worked out.

But I should also commend myself for the fact that I go pass the chips aisle in the grocery store all the time, but never buy any. In fact I rarely buy any junk food while in the grocery despite having the ability to do so, so though that may not seem like a big thing for some people it is something to note and think about.


Positive Procrastination

Is basically a very successful technique in avoiding doing something in the promise you will do it later. It overall works better, because you are not completely denying yourself. I never really thought of this technique as having self-control, as I do it all the time, but I always thought of it as a ‘cheap’ trick to get my self to do something.

I generally promise myself after I write a page or two pages of a paper I can watch Community or Psych afterwards. Or I tell myself after I complete these two things for tomorrow, I can catch up on Game of Thrones. 

Overall this technique works for me, but sometimes I reward myself more than I deserve. So I should definitely work on that, by setting myself more realistic goals and goals I know that I can do.

People

 One thing I really liked about this book was how it related famous people (all of who I knew and most of who I liked) to research. One person I like was Amanda Palmer

A musician who I enjoy, but when she was brought up in the beginning of the book, my first thought was not will power or self-control, but her music video of Runs in the Family



Which honestly doesn’t give the image of a self-control. But I like how the book went into her days as a living statue and how the act of doing nothing was more difficult than anything. The book related Amanda's story to the Radish Experiment, where college students had to resist the urge to eat chocolate chip cooking after they had been fasting (which just seem impossible), but no one had any. Some smelled or were close, but no ate the chocolate chip cookies. The college students then had to solve puzzles (insoluble) and they were observed to see how long until they gave up. The students who were suppose to resist the cookies had less energy to do the puzzles than the students who were allowed to have the cookies.

This showed that will-power is like a muscle, it gets weary after it's been in  a conscious, heavy work out, but like any muscle it can be worked on and it can be strengthened.

Overall

I really did enjoy this book. I thought the techniques, stories, and research all worked together and I could apply them to my studying techniques and even in my attempts to lose some weight. This book while your reading it really does make you want to do something and be active, which in my case was bad because I had to read the book so doing something else was my procrastination.

One thing that inspired me from this book was procrastinating with other work. Which I have actually done before, but I have never really focused on. The basic idea is while I'm procrastinating doing work, I can focus on other work that is less demanding, but still work. Even though I am not doing what I am supposed to be doing, I am still get work done.

I think the best thing about the book is that it is realistic. It recognizes doing stuff and putting conscious effort is sometimes really difficulty, so the book emphasizes on working up to big goals and setting realistic and small goals at first and build yourself up.

Another good thing about this book is it does show you all the stuff you don't do out of laziness or whatever, but at least for me it never made me feel bad about it. It also makes you realize all the stuff you can do and have actually done, and it makes you feel good about them

One thing I did not like about the book was at times, though rarely, it did kind of come off as another cheesy self-help book. Once or twice in the book I thought it was honestly going to list me 10 top ways do 'this' or 'this', or the 15 top reasons why you don't do 'this ' or 'this'. Overall though the book never did that, or if it did,  I clearly overlooked it and it was well done, because I tend to notice those cheesy lists.

I think the take home from this book is that willpower and self-control is real and it is a usable 'muscle'. It is there and you do you use it, like all your muscles,  but you need to work on it and put effort into it so you can easily 'lift 50 pounds'. You need to build yourself up slowly and realistically so you can accomplish what you want, it's pointless to start off with pointless giant goals you know you're not going to do, and it is better to start with small goals you add to your daily life and are doable and continually add upon until you are doing that big goal that was once impossible.

We are all capable of having self-control and will power, because it is a human aspect, and it is important to us in our everyday lives.

Rating: 4/5 Stars
 Word Count-2709

*~*~*~*~*~

References:

Baumeister, F. R., & Tierney, J. (2011). Rediscovering the greatest human strength: Willpower. Penguin Group, New York City, NY.

Images/Video Links

http://aminaalhalawani98.wordpress.com/

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/willpower-roy-f-baumeister/1100482735

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5i0o3JRaF2g