Birds of Familial Feathers Flock to Polish Reunions...? (help i cannot title things)

I googled "birds of a feather flock together" and this showed up.

Hey all! This week in class was perhaps the first week I was flooded (hahaha) with ideas of what to write about for my blog. It was all so difficult to remember all of my brilliant ideas, but I managed to recall one very prominent example. From what you have gleaned from the picture (er, just the caption, actually) it is about BIRDS OF A FEATHER FLOCKING TOGETHERRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!! [/ancient wisdom] Also here is what I am listening to today:

The saying "birds of a feather flock" together is supported by many social findings! Mostly relevant is that we DO tend to befriend and enjoy those most similar to us (Montoya et al., 2008). One reason for this is that people who are similar to us are more like us and since we like ourselves SO much these relations tend to work out very well (Bryne, 1997). I feel as though I bring all of my post back to me being a particularly awkward middle schooler, but alas! I must do it again. It was a cold and lonely winter when I made my first appearance at the annual Polish New Year's party. My extended Utahian family was gathered and everyone was yelling in Polish and drinking and hugging everyone and asking me to dance and effectively scaring the shit out of me. I retreated, awkward thirteen year-old style, to the only empty room in the house and buried myself under a pile of coats on the couch in what was perhaps the epitome of my awkward phase.

Then suddenly, a stranger entered the room.

INTRUDER

In my cave of coats I held my breath and stayed still for what seemed like an infinitely long time. After hearing no further noise, I poked my head out of my coated-cover. Surprisingly, the stranger was still there, just staring out of the window. Hearing me he turned, looked at me, and asked "are you hiding from people too?" in a manner that suggested no judgment at finding me buried under coats in a dark room on a New Years Eve Polish party. We introduced ourselves and realized that we were cousins who had never met who hated social gatherings in equal amounts.

And we talked for four hours in that dark room where we bonded over Eragon and his ability to play Linkin Park songs on the piano and everything else imaginable. I was ecstatic; I had found someone with interests, mannerisms, and life views incredibly similar to mine. As such, I thought this person who bore so many similarities to me was incredibly likeable since he was so much like ME! What a wonderful moment of recognition in finding such companionship.

This example stuck out because about a month after this interaction I was told that shortly after our night of bonding and self-sharing he had been "finally" put in a psych ward. Apparently he had been mentally ill for some while, but his schizophrenia and bipolar disorder had finally become so disruptive and unsafe that he had to be removed from high school and placed into said psych ward.

Did not see that one coming. Probably should have.

Now even before I knew anything about social psychology I was able to realize that being able to find so many similarities between me and a person who was apparently in an extremely unstable mental state was not a thing I wanted. So when in class today we learned that liking similar people was not applicable when said similar person was "socially undesirable" (Rosenbaum, 1986).

And that, dear reader, is a clear example of how similarity can quickly foster a sense of connection that reaffirms one's identity AS LONG AS we are comfortable being similar to the other individual. Now, just because I no longer felt better about myself as a result of my similarities with my cousin did not in any way mean that I was unable to continue a positive relationship with him. It did, however, mean that my positive view of the relationship did not solely hinge on finding comfort on likening my behaviour to an individual with severe schizophrenia.

Also, on a lighter note, now that I am older I am able to fully enjoy these Polish New Years Eve parties without hiding in the coat closet with strangers! Hooray for growing out of horribly awkward phases and learning to enjoy experiences now that I was more similar in attitudes (/drunkedness) to the people at these parties!

Surrounded by sequins and Polish-speaking strangers but OKAY WITH IT.

Word count: 757

Bryne, D. (1997). An overview (and underview) of research and theory within the attraction paradigm. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 14, 417-431.

Montoya, R. M., Horton, R. S., & Kirchner, J. (2008). Is actual similarity necessary for attraction? A meta-analysis of actual and perceived similarity. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 25, 889-922.

Rosenbaum, M. E. (1986). The repulsion hypothesis: On the nondevelopment of relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1156-1166.

Family Relations and Groupthink

Short and awkwardly phrased post today since I am infinitely and terribly tired! (okay actually it turned out to be long AGAIN but it is definitely awkwardly phrased so i kept half of my bargain.) But here is a jazz-y song to pump me/you up while I power through this!

So as many of you learned from reading the chapter and going to class, GROUPTHINK is a concept we need to learn for the test! Groupthink is an occurrence in which a group is predisposed to seek a common opinion and seemingly incapable of voicing a deviant opinion (Janis, 1982). Irving Janis argued that three factors influenced the presence of group think: group cohesion, group structure, and situational stress. To illustrate these factors of group think, I will use a very large group I have a lot of experience with: my boyfriend's family! My boyfriend's entire familial clan consists of eight immediate family members plus three significant others for a grand total of eleven beautiful people! Surely with such a large number of people, some instances of groupthink would be evident! We will soon seeee!

Only half of the full clan.

The first factor that influences groupthink is group cohesion, that is, how focused the group was on excluding deviant opinions. So, for example, a group with high-cohesion would have low tolerance for anyone with a dissenting opinion. This high-cohesion would encourage groupthink. However, my boyfriend's family is very accepting of opinions that deviate from the norm. In fact, there are so many different opinions on things that sometimes it is hard to tell what the norm is. While they do share several strong core beliefs, dinners are usually filled with exciting things from playful banter to stern discussions to passionate arguments as this particular large group overflows with diverse opinions. This is a particular trait I love about this family, because it actively inhibits groupthink by having such strong deviations that a norm is hard to find! Therefore, I can express whatever opinion I want without feeling afraid of being looked down on as someone "different" from the group when they ask me whether I believe in things such as the death penalty.

SO MANY DEVIATING OPINIONS!!!

The second factor, group structure, is also very influential in predicting group think behaviour. This family is fairly traditional in their core beliefs (such that the father is the head of the household and the final word). The father reaffirms this status by lightheartedly saying "I am the gosh durn paterfamilias of this here family!" This sort of focus on a single leader is the type of group structuring that would lead to strong groupthink. However, this factor does not seem to influence this family under most circumstances. Although they consider the father to be "the final word," they rarely get to the point where they think it necessary for the word to be finalized. That is, this family and their many dissenting opinions typically find solutions and plans throughout open (and often confusing) discourse. While the father certainly has a say in what is going to happen, all members are the group are equally open to (and equally prejudiced against) other's suggestions.

I have been negligent about posting cat pictures, so here
is their youngest child modeling their kittens!

HOWEVER, the third factor, situational stress, is the factor that for this family allow the other two factors to matter. In situations that are low stress (er, as "low stress" as you can have in a family this large), the family is able to operate and find functionality in constantly negotiating and intertwining their opinions. But while dinner discussions and party planning is able to unfold without much evidence of groupthink, this rapidly shifts when the family enters a high stress situation. Having seen this family on vacation, marrying off one of their own, and preparing for several funerals, I can safely say that their overall loose family dynamic becomes much more groupthink-esque during these high stress situations. While the family members are each responsible for different tasks during these high stress situations, the nature of these tasks and the oversight of their completion is almost solely dictated by the parents. In situations like these, time is often urgent and emotions rampant. The shift to groupthink makes a lot of sense in these situations, since an opinion consensus will increase the group support and cohesion felt within the group members. So when this family is in stressful situations, the quickness to which they change to and focus on a common opinion becomes a strong coping mechanism in their lives.

OPINIONS RAPIDLY APPROACHING GROUPTHINK.

And that, dear reader, is how different factors affect the extent to which a group may be influenced by groupthink! In general, less groupthink is better, because a high amount of groupthink will prioritize consensus over accuracy and can set groups on faulty and dangerous paths with every member in the group afraid to speak out against the group. So next time you are with your family, make sure that you think about what they are doing instead of just going along with it! While group unity and support is important, it is even MORE important to not sacrifice that comfort for blindness.

A post high-stress situation picture! Que guapos!

(Word count: 817)

Janis, I. L. (1982). Groupthink. (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Tradebook Blog (The Happiness Hypothesis)

I apologize in advance, but this is going to be an absurdly long post about an absurdly long book.

JUST KIDDING I TOTALLY READ IT
IT WAS NOT THAT LONG ACTUALLY

For my tradebook, I picked "The Happiness Hypothesis" by Jonathan Haidt. This book had been recommended to me by my close friends and I had been meaning to read it for about a year, so reading it for a grade was sufficient motivation to actually do it. The premise of the book is that it attempts to apply social psychology concepts to old adages (usually religious teachings). The book is subdivided into ten sections, with each section devoted to one "ancient wisdom." The sections are prefaced with a couple of quotes from diverse origins that say essentially the same thing. The author then analyzes the validity of these ancient claims and either supports, invalidates, or qualifies these quotes using many studies. The tagline for the book ("finding modern truth in ancient wisdom") does as accurate job in succinctly stating the book's purpose.

In case you did not believe me.

The ten issues addressed are as follows: the divided self, changing your mind, reciprocity with a vengance, the faults of others, the pursuit of happiness, love and attachments, the uses of adversity, the felicity of virtue, divinity with or without God, and happiness comes from between. The author, Jonathan Haidt, was a professor of psychology at Virginia University for 16 years before transferring to serve on the NYU-Stern's School of Business Board. Haidt also conducts research that focuses primarily on morality (Haidt, 2007). He is also active in the positive psychology field and references a large amount of positive psychology wisdom in his book. Not only does he reference many specific studies, he provides ample citations for most claims he makes. (I was surprised when I finished the book, because the end of the book is fifty pages of references away from the end.) All in all, this book was exceptionally scholarly while presenting ideas in a easily-readable manner making it an accurate source of information that experts would enjoy and that the average person could understand.

This book was much more straight-forward than this
man's illusions.

The cover of the book is a depiction of a person riding an elephant (in an ocean? in the sky? to the moon?) This image is addressed in the first chapter "The Divided Self," which posits that Freud's superego, ego, and id metaphor is a less effective metaphor than a rider and an elephant. This assertion is best illustrated by a Benjamin Franklin quote Haidt uses "If passion drives you, let reason hold the reins."

YES IT DOES; I WILL EXPLAIN.

Haidt compares the mind to the elephant and the rider in that the elephant is a giant and largely unconscious force that dictates our actions. The rider, in turn, is the rational and cognizant component of our self that attempts to control the elephant. Haidt points out an obvious observation: a human cannot jump on a wild elephant and expect to control it. Rather, the rider must slowly train the elephant in order to work together as a team. This theme of conscious efforts helping to develop a wholesome and healthy lifestyle permeates the book as his "happiness hypothesis." One thing I disliked about this book is that this metaphor became increasingly stretched as the book continued; I feel that the flow would have been better if he had not felt the need to describe every concept with this metaphor.

This claim that fulfillment and happiness come from a continual effort to work with the elephant to improve your life is best summed up in a positive psychology "happiness formula" Haidt utilizes (Sheldon, Schkade, and Seligman CITATION).

H(appiness) = S(etpoint) + C(onditions) + V(oluntary activities)

This formula, rather than the rider and elephant metaphor, accurately sums up the "take away point" of this book in a manner that I can easily and readily apply to my life. To give brief (lolnotreally) explanations of each of the components of this formula, I will apply them to real life examples! From my life! THE MOST INTERESTING LIFE!!!

Pictured: an interesting life

The first component of the happiness formula is the setpoint. Haidt describes the setpoint as a biological baseline of existence. Twin studies show that genetics can influence attitudes and outlooks (Olsen et al., 2001). As such, it is not unreasonable to conclude that these genetic makeups can predispose individuals to certain positions on a happiness continuum. That is, biological makeups place individuals at certain positions on this imaginary happiness continuum. From this position on the continuum, individuals can move up or down, but their genetic predisposition dictates their potential, whether they fill it or not. One related concept is affective forecasting. Affective forecasting is a phenomena in which individuals overestimate how much an event will affect them (Wilson & Gilbert, 2003). One reason events fail to have an effect longer than about three months is that individuals subconsciously utilize a plethora of coping mechanisms that typically bring an individual back towards their setpoint. As such, if a person is genetically predisposed to be naturally happy then after a horrendous event they will soon return to their high baseline rate of happiness. Conversely, is a person is genetically predisposed to be naturally depressed, a stupendous event will make them temporarily happy, but eventually they will regress back to their baseline state of depression.

This, to me, was a very profound part of the equation. I have historically been plagued by insistent melancholia and have had to work hard to be functional in spite of my tendency to mope around and lay in bed all day. Halfway through college, my efforts to bring up my baseline by sheer willpower proved to be increasingly futile, as my genetic baseline refused to budge. Luckily, since baselines are often genetic, my mother (who is also predisposed to a low baseline on the happiness continuum) recognized this struggle and helped me get on mood stabilizers. This helped artificially shift my setpoint higher up on the happiness continuum which in turn made the other two factors of happiness (conditions and voluntary activities) have more impact. Even though it took me all too long to realize that it is possible to shift your happiness setpoint, it seems very important to have a stable setpoint in order to achieve happiness.

FOR HAPPINESS, THAT IS.

The next component of the happiness formula is the conditions of one's life. Conditions is a fairly broad term that can apply to nearly anything in the external environment. Conditions are important because for all the self-regulation one can commit too, we are all influenced by our environment as summed up by John Donne: "No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, and part of the main." Conditions can include things such as socioeconomic status, physical environment, self-perception, perceived control, and relationships. I am going to focus on the last two.

The effect of perceived control of ones conditions is best illustrated in one of my favourite studies. In 1976, Langer and Rodin gave one floor of nursing home residents a plant to care for and more freedom of choice in their weekly movie nights. On the other floor, they were given no plants and no influence over their weekly movie night. Astonishingly, the results of this study revealed a profound impact on the happiness and death rates of the residents. From this, one can conclude that increased perception of self-efficacy can in turn move an individual up on the happiness continuum (and give long-term health benefits!).

The results from that study were so clear and gripping that I, in my search for a higher level of happiness went out and bought a plant to care for. At that same time, I found a providential caterpillar in a bell pepper I was eating. Whether it was an act of God or a negligent pesticide company, I was bestowed with another thing to keep alive, even though I knew nothing about the upkeep of caterpillars or peace lilies

If a dog can golf, I can keep a caterpillar alive. Right?

.
Even though neither a caterpillar or a plant are particularly important individual figures, taking care of these things provided me with a feeling of importance and a motivator to take charge of things in my life (even things as simple as putting a couple of ice cubes in the plant's pot. Naming both the caterpillar and the plant also helped.

Batman and me!

As time passed without me killing either Batman or the plant (which I named Chase), I began to understand how taking care of a plant could keep nursing home residents in a better mood. When before I would sit around not wanting to do anything, I was motivated to care for my charges in often ridiculous ways. An important takeaway for me was learning not to judge people who are overly attached to their pets, as they might be reaping great benefits from the manifestation of control over their conditions.

I took Chase sunbathing with me. It was adorable.

Even though buying a plant and raising a caterpillar until it turned into a moth and died were very simple things that required no imagination to steal from the nursing home study, I was/am exceptionally proud that I was able to take a simple study from social psychology and apply it so effectively to my life.

It is me! I am the genius!

Another important condition in one's life is the presence of relationships. As we recently learned, individuals can experience physically painful responses to rejection and social exclusion (Williams et al., 2002). Therefore, the presence of meaningful, inclusive, and stable relationships can have positive physical effects on an individual. Romantic relationships provide the best example of these physical benefits from relationships. In most instances, romantic relationships have some sort of skin-to-skin contact (often in sexual forms). These interactions evoke a hormonal response in both men and women: the release of oxytocin (Fisher, 2004). Oxytocin is a hormone that when secreted promotes bonding and affection. Oxytocin is the hormone released in birthing and breastfeeding to promote bonding and protective feelings of a mother towards her child. Oxytocin is also released in large quantities during sexual intercourse, bringing about a physiological comfort that solidifies a relational bond.

Just looking at this image triggers the unstoppable release of oxytocin.

Unfortunately, romantic relationships are often unstable. By having so much emotional investment in them, most people can identify with the horrible ache at the end of a romantic relationship. When I broke up with my boyfriend of four years, I experienced a painful physiological separation. Not only was I deprived of regular skin-to-skin contact, but someone I had grown to rely on for so long was suddenly absent from my life. During this period, I was definitely less happy than normal. Even though, as mentioned before, I would eventually trend back towards me setpoint of happiness it was still an unpleasant experience. I realize now how people often stay in relationships longer than they know is good; the physical and psychological side effects of breaking up profoundly manifest in our happiness.

Even though I broke up with you, you are still
responsible for my pain.

However, it is important to note that romantic relationships are only a part of the relationship condition! A good portion of our external environment is made up by friendships and platonic relationships. A mesmerizing study in this book was prompted by the finding that Protestants had a much higher suicide rate than Catholics and Jews had an even lower suicide rate (Durkheim, 1951/1898)! After analyzing the data, Durkheim concluded that this was a result of "social constraints." He posited that the more social constraints an individual had, the less likely they were to commit suicide. Now, social constraints sounds like too harsh of a term to be beneficial, so I am going to refer to this as social connections. Jewish and Catholic faiths typically embody a deeper culture than Protestants--a culture that permeates many aspects of the members' lives. By creating deep and meaningful social connections that were heavily embedded into people's identities and ever-present in their external environment, individuals were less likely to commit suicide.

Another interesting finding in regards to platonic relationships and social connections was the correlation between extensive social connections and various health benefits(Cohen & Herbert, 1996)! The profound psychoneuroimmunology benefits were outstounding! (I included that sentence just so I could use the word "psychoneuroimmunology.") From anxiety to depression to heart attacks to stronger immune systems, social connections could predict the quality of one's life and their consequent happiness. Cohen proposed that people need the structure and meaning provided by social connections to achieve more happiness.

This emphasis on interpersonal and social connections was also prominently evident during my break-up. Although I was suffering from a romantic withdrawal, I was immensely comforted by the presence of my friends in my life. Although I was temporarily floundering in my identity and long-term plans, my social connections in both my church and my schoolmates provided a basis and structure for me to assembly my life around and cope in an appropriate manner. So next time your friends reveal embarrassing facts of your pants, try to keep in mind that although they may have faults, these social connections that far out-weigh the transient trauma.

Me, when my friends show other people pictures of
my bowl cut.

And finally, I have come to address the third component of the happiness formula: voluntary activities. Although physiological pleasures (such as oxytocin) provide an immediate pleasure response, it is important to ensure that one remembers to engage in activities that ensure a longer lasting happiness.One study showed that by performing random acts of kindness or even taking moments out of one's day to "count ones blessings" providing individuals with an overall and long-lasting sense of happiness (Emmons 2003). In my introduction blog I mentioned my involvement with an organization called Spirit Reins. Spirit Reins is a non-profit outpatient therapy center that provides trauma-informed therapy to a client base focused primarily on children. I have been volunteering and interning with Spirit Reins for the past two or three years, and I can testify to the profound impact it has had on my overall happiness. By devoting an absurd amount of time to provide kind acts to other individuals I have learned to become a person with a long-lasting sense of happiness.

I used to volunteer a lot in high school, but fell out of the practice my freshman year of college. My freshman year of college was not an experience I would like to repeat, and I believe that part of this was because I was solely selfishly motivated. By relying on momentary pleasures I failed to give my life long-lasting meaning by engaging in gratifying behaviours directed towards other. When I joined APO (a service fraternity) and began volunteering at Spirit Reins, I quickly realized that my overall happiness increased as I learned to once again serve my community.

Me being helpful FOR FREE.

Another voluntary activity discussed extensively in the book is the concept of "flow." Flow is described to be found when one engages in an activity that thoroughly engages an individual in a challenge that is both enjoyable and possesses the ability to be accomplished (Csikszentmihalyi, 1997). By immersing oneself in a task that meets one's abilities, a sort of feeling of "getting in the zone" occurs. Flow is often found in physical activities such as running, painting, or playing sports. This regular engagement of oneself in an activity that is both pleasurable, challenging, and compatible with our skill set provides many of the long-term happiness benefits as discussed above.

For me, I learned to find flow in physical activities. By taking more than the required amount of FRAs I forced myself into situations where I could increase my skill set to a point where I could engage myself in a challenging way where I could still find accomplishment in my efforts. Running became an important source of flow, especially when accompanied by music. By relaxing and giving in to the monotonous, difficult, and patterned movement I was able to achieve this flow state. Additionally, I recently became decent at volleyball. By developing appropriate reflexes and skill sets, I am able to focus completely on the game and be swept away into this pleasurable activity. After playing volleyball and running both, I am relaxed and covered with a sense of accomplishment that is longer-lasting than the immediate gratification of eating an entire tub of ice cream. So, if you have not yet found a flow activity, go out and try some, not matter how odd it may be!

I AM IN MY FLOW ZONE. NOBODY CAN STOP ME NOW!

Although this seems like a lengthy retelling of a novel, the explanation of this formula is merely half of a chapter in an amazing book. Why I chose to focus on this happiness formula was because, to me, it seemed that most other components of the book fit nicely into different aspects of this formula. By providing clear and helping steps towards improving one's general state of well-being and happiness, I would recommend this book to most people--particularly ones who are looking to improve their quality of life. In the end (SPOILER ALERT) Haidt concludes that the most accurate "happiness hypothesis" is that happiness comes from without, within, and all of the spaces in between. I hope now you are equipped with enough epiphanies and skills to go out and live a happy and successful life!

Pictured: you, exploding with knowledge.

Pictured: you, leading a happy and successful life.

Word count: 2973

Cohen, S., & Herbert, T. B. (1996). Health psychology: psychological factors and physical disease from the perspective of human psychoneuroimmunology. Annual Reviews of Psychology, 47, 113-142.
Csikszentmihaly, M. (1997). Finding flow. New York: Basic Books.
Durkheim, E. (1951/1898). Suicide. (J. A. Spalding & G. Simpson, Trans.) New York: Free Press)
Emmons, R. A. (2003). Personal goals, life meaning, and virtue: Wellsprings of a positive life. In C. L. M. Keyes & J. Haidt (Eds.), Flourishing: Positive psychology and the life well-lived (pp. 105-128). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
Fisher, H. (2004). Why we love: The nature and chemistry of romantic love. New York: Henry Holt.

Haidt, J. (2007). The new synthesis in moral psychology. Science, 316, 998-1002.

http://people.stern.nyu.edu/jhaidt/home.html

Langer, E. J., & Rodin, J. (1976). The effects of choice and enhanced personal responsibility for the aged: A field experiment in an institutional setting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 191-198.
Seneca, L. A. (1917-1925/c. 50 CE). Moral epistles. Vol 1, The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Williams, K. D., Govan, C. L., Croker, V., Tynan, D., Cruikshank, M., & Lam, A. (2002). Investigations into differences between social- and cyberostracism. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6, 65-77.

An Abhorrent Lack of Fashion (Also, a Steampunk Video)

Here is a video of people not conforming to how most singers look/act!

I am having a very relaxing evening in my house, glad to be free of the norms of school that require me to wear pants. Despite hating pants with a passion, I have never failed to show up to school in either pants or shorts. Why do I inflict such pain upon myself? No one ever asked me to wear pants to school; no one monitors me in the morning and tells me to put on pants before I leave. This adherence to tacit (or explicit) social behaviours with no direct request is called conformity. And, much to my rebellious teenage self's disdain, conformity seeps into a surprising amount of my behaviours. There are two reasons for which we conform: informational influence and and normative influence (Crutchfield, 1955; Deutsch & Gerard, 1955).

Conformity from informational influence occurs when an individual believes that because a group holds one belief that the group has made a correct judgment. Believing that the consensus is right, the individual agrees with the group for fear of showing an incorrect opinion. This type of conformity occurs commonly in situations when the individual feels that they lack enough knowledge or competence to express a different opinion than the consensus. For me, this is very apparent in my fashion knowledge. Growing up, I cared not about anything fashion-related. When my friends spent their time pouring over fashion-relevant magazines and television shows, I was outside playing in the mud or something. This only became a problem later in life, when I realized that my appearance played a large part in how others perceived me. Suddenly struck with the conundrum of wanting good clothes but crippled by an inability to distinguish nice-fitting pants from mom jeans, I began to pay attention to when my friends talked about fashion.

FASHION!

By engaging myself in a world I had virtually no knowledge of, I felt entirely incapable of proffering my opinion and having it be adequate. As a result, when fashion was discussed I agreed with the general consensus. Luckily, having talked over fashion for years among themselves, my friends all had a very similar opinion in regards to fashion. As such, I did not have to pick what side I wanted to align myself with, as all sides were in consensus. This extended over to when we went shopping together. Incapable of distinguishing good fashion from bad fashion, I agreed with whatever they said looked good on me and what did not, regardless of what I felt. Interestingly, I internalized their opinions and carried them with me for a long time. Years after being exposed to their fashion opinions, I went shopping with my boyfriend. I tried on a pair of shorts and immediately commented that the pockets were too high. He said that he enjoyed high pockets and I stared at him in disbelief and said "but...but EVERYONE knows that high pockets are bad!"

 This example of conforming to the group's opinion and the perseverance of this opinion is demonstrated very clearly in a study conducted by Sherif in 1936. Sherif had individuals estimate how much a point of light moved in an otherwise pitch black room. The light, however, never moved. What the participants were experiencing was the autokinetic effect; that is, in a dark room a light will appear to move around. When placed in a group and asked to estimate how much the light moved, participants gravitated towards a mean consensus of how far the light moved, rather than holding on to their initial guesses. In addition to establishing in-group norms, participants continued to hold onto those norms even when tested individually later on. Similarly, I adapted to the group norms and upheld those beliefs in the absence of the group!

There was a time when the group agreed
that I should be more androgynous. I had no opinion.

The other reason people conform, for normative influence, is a result of people not wanting to deviate from other members of the group. While this is the reason I most often conform, I do not have as many interesting examples! However, for Christmas my family all received "redneck tank tops"; that is, underwear with a headhole cut into them. My parents wanted a picture of all of my siblings wearing this gift to put on the internet. I was (understandably) opposed to this idea. However, my parents pulled out their cameras and my other siblings lined up for the photo. However, science says that if I were to be excluded from a group activity I would experience many physically painful symptoms associated with rejection (Williams et al., 2002). Therefore, I conformed to a behaviour I would not have otherwise displayed. It is important to note that my parents or siblings at no point asked or commanded me to take this picture; the picture assembly was a tacit understand that I nevertheless conformed to.

At least one of us did not want to be in this picture.

Crutchfield, R. S. (1955). Conformity and character. American Psychologist, 54, 821-827.

Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (19955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 629-636.

Sherif, M. (1936). The psychology of social norms. New York: Harper.

Williams, K. D., Govan, C. L., Croker, V., Tynan, D., Cruikshank, M., & Lam, A. (2002). Investigations into differences between social- and cyberostracism. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6, 65-77.

Making Lemonade from Accidental Lemons

Cognitive dissonance is the physiological and psychological distress that arises from when one's actions or behaviours do not correlate with their attitude or beliefs (Festinger, 1957). Although our attitudes often lead to behaviours, when we exhibit behaviours that conflict with our attitudes we then, as a result of cognitive dissonance, change our attitudes to explain our external situation (Festinger, 1957). Cognitive dissonance is often divided into three types: induced compliance (Festinger & Carlsmith, 1959), effort justification (Aronson & Mills, 1959), and post-decision dissonance (Brehm, 1956).

SCIENCE!

The first of these, induced compliance, is when your behaviour goes against your attitude and cannot be justified by other means (as in the Festinger & Carlsmith study where some participants were paid a lot of money to lie). For some unknown and godforsaken reason, my mom signed me up to do swimteam the summer of my freshman year. Even though my friends would be there, I would not be interacting with them much (because I would be ideally swimming). Being on the summer swim team involved many things I did not enjoy. For starters, my ideal summer did not include waking up before the sun six days a week. Additionally, in high school I had a lot of body image issues and wore fairly conservative clothing. Therefore, being in a swimsuit six days a week (in front of boys, no less!) was an incredibly nerve-racking thought. Lastly, I was not a fit person and did not particularly enjoy being active, so joining a swim team so late in life was a horrendous fate that would force me to be in a social situation being impressively inept at something I did not particularly enjoy. However, my mom signed me up for swim team. Swim team, as expected, went semi-poorly. I was uncomfortable, tired, inept, and smelt of chlorine for most of my summer mornings.

Pictured: me, hating my life.

The summer passed and I escaped swim team. It had some good moments, but overall I was displeased with the experience. Never again, I swore to myself, never again will I be tricked into doing swim team! Until the next summer, when I signed up for swim team again. This time, I was very troubled. Not forced to do swim team, my behaviours belied my attitude when I willingly signed up for swim team! Stuck in a conundrum of not always acting according to my attitudes, but having already forced myself into a conflicting behaviour, I had no choice but to change my attitude! Well, I thought, swim team was not awful. After all, I had grown more athletic, and had even discovered that I was good at the butterfly! Oh man, how had I never seen what a marvelous emotional growth experience that had occurred that summer?! Such friendship was to be had, such comradeship! I was presented with an ocean (regulation-sized pool) of opportunities to explore different things about myself! Oh boy! I was pumped and blessed to be able to participate in a thing that I had SUCH A GREAT ATTITUDE ABOUT BECAUSE CLEARLY I NEEDED A GOOD ATTITUDE TO JUSTIFY MY BEHAVIOURS!!!

Happiness brought to you today by induced compliance!

Brehm, J. W. (1956). Post-decision changes in desirability of alternatives. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 52, 384-389.
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Standford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Festinger, L., & Carlsmith, J. M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced compliance. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58, 203-210.

On the Fight for Peer Attitude Shaping Rights

"I have a question that I want to ask SU students. My intent in this is not to be sarcastic or start fights, surprisingly; I really am interested and clueless to what a good answer might be. Conservative students of Southwestern, why did you come here? How do you feel being here? How does it feel being so different from the rest of Southwestern students?"

About a month ago, a facebook friend (and real world stranger) posted the above status*, and I felt such a relation to the underlying point that I had no choice to respond. Even though I would not identify myself of conservative, I am an individual fairly moderate in her views and thereby one of the more conservative students at Southwestern (at least in the humanities department--those in the business field tend to be less liberal). As a moderate individual that both attends Southwestern and an evangelical fundamentalist church (which I even hesitate to mention on this SU blog), I am constantly aware of the peer influences on my attitude.

So what do I do with this polarization of attitudes? Before I answer that question, we need to explore what effects peer have on my attitude formation. But before we look at THAT we need to first define what an attitude really is. An attitude is an individual's position when evaluating what they feel (and how strongly they feel!) about a person, thing, or concept. Attitudes are learned and shaped through exposure to persuasion and influence. There are three main determinants of attitudes: genetics, personality, and peers. The last option is the one I will be focusing on.

The best study that illustrates the effect of peers on attitude shaping is a study done in 1943 by Theodore Newcomb. Newcomb studied the specific population of Bennington College in Vermont. Bennington College was a girls-only school whose students came from middle-class conservative families. However, Newcomb noticed that the girls at Bennington College were fairly liberal. When surveying different students of different age groups in the population, Newcomb realized that as the students progressed in their education at Bennington College they quickly became more liberal. The explanation for this discovery was that the exposure to a culture of liberal students and faculty shaped the views of the incoming conservative girls to a more liberal stand point. Thus, peers play an important role in attitude formation.

Humans are social beings. We seek out relationships and have strong desires to fit in. However, unfortunately, there are a lot of divisions withing social groups. These subdivisions often possess conflicting attitudes and ideals, making in-group attitude formation very apparent to those who differ in viewpoint. All in all, to be able to completely relate to a peer group one must have similar attitudes to those within that social subdivision. Here is an old song about subdivisions, proving that they have existed for a long time!

One of the reasons this peer attitude shaping is so salient to me is my unique membership to two wildly different subdivisions of peer groups. For me, liberal and conservative attitudes are both actively present in and (to some extent) shaping my own attitudes. One on hand, my liberal group of friends are very vocal about their attitudes towards things such as drugs,sex, and rock 'n roll! Here are some pictures from a phallic food party we had recently:

There were also breasts in the ice cubes. SUBLIMINAL JOKE.

Boob cupcakes and a pubic hair mound...cake? Thing?

My other group of friends are equally vocal about their attitudes of these same things; however, their attitudes run in the other direction. I am frequently exposed to many heated proclamations of traditional conservative values. There are not really any interesting pictures to go along with that.

So where do I fit into all of this? How are my attitudes changing if I am struggling to fit in to two radically different peer groups? One thing that has been helpful while negotiating these social differences is that attitudes have two different components: direction and intensity. Direction becomes much less important in groups if the intensity is low. If I had high intensity attitudes, there would be quite a lot of clashing of my moderate viewpoints with both of my peer groups (even more than there is now).

However, the most noticeable affect my peers have had on shaping my attitudes has not been so much on WHAT attitudes I hold (since I am being "shaped" in both directions at one, they seem to cancel each other out), but more HOW my attitudes are persuaded by my peers. John Cacioppo and Richard Petty proposed a dual-process model in 1986 that neatly describes how I am subject to attitude formation under these circumstances. Cacioppo's and Petty's dual-process model says that there are two ways that lead to persuasion: the central route and the peripheral route. The central route to persuasion is described as when people's attitudes are persuaded to change by mostly factually-based arguments and content scrutiny. The peripheral route to persuasion is described as when people's attitudes are persuaded to change by mostly superficial cues such as emotion and heuristics.

Since I am being supplied with two opposing arguments for different attitudes, I cannot use the mindless peripheral route as often as I would like to. While it would be nice to be able to listen to my peer's attitudes and engage in a tacit understanding of acceptance, this mutual understanding would not carry over to my other peer group. Therefore, I must summon all of my cognitive resources and scrutinize attitudes for persuasive content and factual integrity before I decided to adopt it into my attitude.

So while peer influence on attitudes may be less obvious or less painful for others, my burden for intentional attitude shaping has given me a plethora of experiences to draw from as we learned about attitude formation and shaping. And it is all not a cognitively-loaded balancing act of attitudes as I may have made it seem. Sometimes there are attitudes, beliefs, likes, and religious songs performed by artists loved by liberals that combine elements of both and are agreeable to all parties (and me!).

Caciappo, J. T.; Petty, R. E.; & Morris, K. (1983). Effects of need for cognition on message evaluation, recall, and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 805-818.
Newcomb, T. M. (1943). Personality and social change: Attitude formation in a student community. Ft. Worth, TX: Dryden Press.

Word count: 1032

Capstone (Or, the Hatred Egotism Brings (also THRIFT SHOP))

One of the reasons I am able to fully enjoy this social psychology class is that my workload this semester is comparability light compared to last semester. One of the most arduous tasks of last semester was completing my business capstone. The capstone for business is easier than psychology capstone in that is only requires one semester However, this benefit is completely nullified by the fact that the entire semester is a group project. I am sure that many fellow students will echo the sentiment of begrudging as I trudged to class on the first week and was forced to integrate myself into a team of four. Luckily, I was close friends with another person in the class, Geddy*, and as such had a sure partner for the group. Another member of our class was a loose acquaintance (Demon Harlot Spawn III**) and we huddled together in a group and asked a semi-stranger (Kitty Cat Adorable Pants*) to join us. Blinded by optimism, we began our semester-long project.

Majorer of business, conjurer of peppers, and possessor
of unwarranted optimism.

Over the course of the class, our group was responsible for turning in several lengthy memos. The memo content was divided into sections, which we divided among the four individuals. Two nights before each memo was due, we each sent our parts to Geddy who was in charge of assembling them into a cohesive memo. However, the work of Demon Harlot Spawn III was aggravatingly sub-par and Geddy and I would have to spend the day and night before the assignment was due slaving away over her unsubmittable work. There were at least four large projects due over the semester, so both Geddy and I spent a good amount of our time fixing Demon Harlot Spawn III's errors and endlessly kvetching about how we were both having to do essentially double our workloads. [/rant]

At the end of the semester, our group was asked to rate each other's performance and contribution to the group's work as a whole. In addition to rating each other, we had to rate our own performance in relation to the group. It was in the midst of this rating process that I began to fully embody the egocentric bias. The egocentric bias is an attribution bias in which an individual overestimates their contribution to something they are a part of (Ross, M. & Sicoly, F., 1979). In my specific case, this was caused by two things: extensive knowledge of my own efforts and the lack of insight to Demon Harlot Spawn III's efforts. My painfully awareness of the late nights and massive amounts of editing I had undergone made me more prone to overestimate my efforts in relation to the other members of my team. Similarly, I was basing my self-ratings on incomplete knowledge; that is, I had not the knowledge of how much effort my teammates had put in so was limited in my perception of their work. It is entirely possible (and outstandingly probable) that I was judging Demon Harlot Spawn III all too harshly on incomplete information. It could be the case that she had spent immense amounts of time and effort researching and drafting her portion of the memos! Unfortunately, I was not wielding the sword of the science of social psychology at the time of the peer review and, not considering this as an option, rated my effort in relation to the group high (perhaps to an unwarranted degree). The most important effect of the egocentric bias, however, is that EVERYONE in my group was, in all likelihood, prey to it. That is, each individual in the group probably overestimated their effort because, like me, they were operating under egocentric and biased information.

NO, CAT, YOU ARE JUST NOT THINKING OF OTHERS!!!

I am running over on length due to my vainglorious (EGOCENTRIC???) indulgences in personal detail, but I also wanted to write about another attribution bias: the false uniqueness effect, a corollary to the false consensus effect. The false consensus effect states that people are more likely to believe that other people share the same beliefs that they do (Ross, L. 1977). However, this typically only occurs for important matters such as beliefs and important thoughts. For arguable less important traits, many people conform to the false uniqueness effect, which is where they believe themselves to be incredibly distinct from the general populace and maintain a "one-of-a-kind" self perception (Ross, L. 1977). Southwestern University students provide a very salient example of both of these biases. While most students at SU share common (mostly liberal) beliefs, they struggle vainly to distinguish themselves from other students through eccentric styles and music from bands "you have probably never heard of before." Below is an example of a band I listen to that makes me feel distinguished from the rest of the general masses.

So next time you look at the SU students and wonder why their style deviates from general norms, just know that their oddly-fitting pants and thrift shop wonders are part of a grand bias (delusion?) that allows them to feel like an individual that is entirely separate and unique from everyone else. (THERE IS A REASON THE THRIFT SHOP SONG IS SO POPULAR AND RELEVANT TO OUR LIVES.)

*Names have been changed
**Name has been changed to utilize a literary technique known as foreshadowing(!!!)

(Word count: 878)

Ross, L. (1977). The" False Consensus Effect": An egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13(3), 279-301.

Ross, M. & Sicoly, F. (1979). Egocentric biases in availability and attribution. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 469-477.