Download Sociology 530 – Fall 2006

Sociology 319
Sociological Approaches to Social Psychology (Carr)
January 27, 2009
Social Psychological Theories (cont’d)
B. Cognitive theory. KEY ASSUMPTION: A PERSON’S BEHAVIOR DEPENDS ON THE
WAY HE OR SHE PERCEIVES THE SOCIAL SITUATION.
1. Core assumptions:
a. Individuals actively construct their world. Cognitive theories share a focus on how we
mentally structure and process information coming from the environment. Whereas
reinforcement theory emphasizes EXTERNAL influences on behavior, cognitive theory
maintains that the link between stimulus and response is not automatic or mechanical. It says that
individuals not only actively interpret the meaning of stimuli, but also select the actions to be
made in response to stimuli. There are two main “themes” that we’ll cover - cognitive
consistency, and gestalt approaches to cognitive theory.
2. Cognitive consistency:
What these theories share is the assumption is that people seek consistency or balance in their
world. Cognitive consistency says that ideas and behaviors in one’s surroundings must be logical
and cohesive. A “mismatch” of attitudes causes distress and must be resolved.
a. Balance theory (Heider): This says that in any interaction, there are generally three
things present: a Perceiver (P), an Other (O), and an attitude object (X). We need to maintain a
consistent balance (positive or negative) between each element. Three +s are okay; 1 + is okay;
two +s show an imbalanced relationship.
EXAMPLE: You have a new friend that you like very much. (P–>O is +). You and this new
friend are discussing politics and you discover that your friend’s political heroes are
conservatives like John McCain (O–>X is +). You, however, support political leaders such as
Barack Obama and vehemently dislike these conservative political candidates (P->X is -). Now,
our “triangle” is imbalanced. According to cognitive consistency, we need balance. What can we
do to maintain balance? We can become Republican supporters, we can persuade our friend to
become a Democrat, or we can ditch our new friend. Another strategy is “trivialization,”
meaning that we choose to diminish in importance political attitudes, or may choose not to attend
to that piece of information about our friend. Generally, we do whatever is easiest. If one
relationship is weaker than the other two, the easiest way to restore balance is to change the
weaker relationship.
b. Cognitive dissonance theory (Festinger): While the P-O-X model focuses only on
cognitions, or attitudes towards people and objects, cognitive dissonance theory focuses on
individual thoughts and behaviors. The premise is that an individual will try to keep their
cognitions and behaviors consonant with one another. Cognitions (or thoughts and feelings) that
are dissonant with each other produce distress. This generally occurs in one of two ways: (1)
after a decision; or (2) when one behaves in a way that is inconsistent with his or her beliefs.
i. In order to reduce the dissonance, a person may change their behavior, or change their attitude,
acquire new “consonant” information, deny or try to negate undesirable cognitions, or engage in
“trivialization.” The latter means that they would downplay the importance of the inconsistent
attitudes or behaviors. The option adopted by most people is the one that requires least effort, or
the least drastic change.
EXAMPLES: (1) Post-decision dissonance. You thought long and hard about where to go to
graduate school, but in the end, you decided to go to Columbia because it you believed it had the
#1 program in your field of study. Now, after you’ve accepted, you see an article in a magazine
claiming that Columbia has dropped to #20 in the rankings, and the school that you almost went
to – Harvard - is now #1. You might experience “post-decision dissonance.” What can you do?
You can change either your behavior or your attitudes, using strategies described above.
Behavioral change (e.g., transferring) is costly, so you would like engage in trivialization or
acquire new consonant information.
(2) Attitude-behavior discrepancy, or when one acts in a way that is inconsistent with
his/her beliefs. For example, you’re a vegetarian who - out of hunger - eats a slice of pepperoni
pizza at a party. This causes dissonance, because the behavior violates your beliefs about eating
meat. The dissonance is resolved by either altering one’s attitudes or altering one’s behavior in
the ways described above. The important theme is that attitudes and behaviors result from one’s
efforts to reduce dissonance. You may trivialize the event, or increase your behavioral efforts at
vegetarianism (e.g., volunteering for a vegan organization, etc.).
2. Cognitive structure and schemas: This subfield of cognitive psychology has its origins in
Gestalt psychology. As many of you may know, a theme of Gestalt psychology is the claim that
“the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.”
a. Guiding assumptions are that: (1) the brain often takes bits and pieces of information
and transforms them into a “whole” that makes sense; (2) because people cannot possibly attend
to all the complex stimuli that surround them, they select only those stimuli that are important or
useful to them, and they ignore the others; and (3) people selectively control what categories they
use to interpret the stimuli in the environment. One implication of this is that several individuals
can form dramatically different impressions of a complex situation in the environment.
b. Key concepts
i. Schemas: A schema is a cognitive structure that represents past experiences, beliefs,
and knowledge about types of persons, events, roles, or causal relationships including its
attributes and the relations among those attributes. The schema, as organized prior knowledge,
shapes what is perceived and remembered.
ii. Schemas come in various types:
a. Person schema (e.g. the Long Islander, the physics major)
b. Role schema (e.g., prisoner, student, father)
c. Event schemas, or the things that happen in a given event (e.g., attending class, going
to dinner at a restaurant).
iii. Implications of using schemas. The fact that our schemas mold our perceptions and
judgments has important ramifications for criminal justice. If people’s perceptions of situations,
or how one fills in the blank are based on schemas, then “eyewitness” accounts may be
questionable. The data that is being “filled in” might not be correct.
c. Critiques of cognitive theory?
1. It oversimplifies how people process information.
2. Cognitive phenomena are not directly observable. They must be inferred from what
people say and do. Thus, it is often difficult to make predictions or assess hypotheses.
C. Role theory.
1. Core assumptions
a. This theory is based on a theatrical metaphor. Behavior is viewed as the result of persons
carrying out roles A role is a set of prescriptions that define the desired behavior of a position
occupant.
b. We behave in accordance with the social expectations of the roles we hold.
i. Roles can be associated with demographic characteristics such as age and sex. Roles
often link an individual to a social institution such as family, economy, educational system, or
government (e.g., roles of mother, worker, student, or citizen).
c. Behavior that does not comply with the normative expectations that accompany a role is often
sanctioned. Normative expectations are the expectations held by others for the appropriate
behavior that ought to be exhibited by the person holding a given role.
i. Often the sanctions are subtle, such as the sanctions for violating traditional gender
roles. These sanctions are typically in the form of social disapproval.
d. Roles can determine our behavior, but they can also influence our attitudes. That is, we can
“become” the role much like a method actor submerges themselves completely in a role
i. An excellent example of how attitudes, behaviors, and even emotions are linked to
roles is the Zimbardo “Pathology of Imprisonment” study. We will be discussing this again when
we talk about research ethics next week, too.] This was a study of prison life. The researchers
recruited well-adjusted, middle class college students (from Stanford) to participate in a study of
prison life. They randomly assigned some students to play the role of prison guard, and randomly
assigned others to play the role of prisoners. NEITHER PRISONERS NOR GUARDS WERE
TOLD HOW TO FULFILL THEIR ROLES.
The guards became abusive to prisoners, often subjecting them to arbitrary punishment,
depriving them of food, and forcing them into hard labor. Their attitudes matched their
behaviors; they viewed the prisoners as lazy, uncooperative and deserving of ill treatment. The
prisoners were initially rebellious but soon became docile, demoralized and subservient, with one
becoming seriously depressed. What does this study say that speaks to role theory? Enacting a
role can have a powerful consequence on people’s attitudes. What begins as just a role can
become more than just a part we play. It can modify our very view of the world and our attitudes
towards others and ourselves.
4. Critiques of role theory
a. It is not appropriate for understanding behavior that defies roles (e.g., deviance)
b. It does not explain how role expectations arose in the first place.
c. It does not explain when and how role expectations change. For instance, role theory does not
offer an adequate explanation of why gender roles have shifted drastically in the past 30 years.
d. Like reinforcement theory, it does not allow for human innovation.