Social psychology · 社会心理学
| English | 中文 | Pinyin · 拼音 |
|---|---|---|
| conformity/kənˈfɔːmɪti/ | 从众 | cóng zhòng |
| obedience/əʊˈbiːdɪəns/ | 服从 | fú cóng |
| situation/ˌsɪtʃuːˈeɪʃn/ | 情境 | qíng jìng |
| attribution/ətrɪˈbjuːʃn/ | 归因 | guī yīn |
| disposition/ˌdɪspəˈzɪʃn/ | 内在特质 | nèi zài tè zhì |
| group behaviour/ɡruːp bɪˈheɪvjə/ | 群体行为 | qún tǐ xíng wéi |
Agreement can hide different reasons
- A student agrees with a group to avoid rejection; another follows a teacher’s instruction. The similar outward action can involve different social processes.
- Conformity 从众 concerns matching a group, while obedience 服从 concerns an authority’s instruction. Ask about the situation rather than assuming a motive.
Match each term to its definition. · 将每个术语与其定义匹配。
A group exerts pressure without instructing; an authority instructs. · 群体施加压力却不下达指令,权威则会下达指令。
Keep attribution provisional
- Attribution 归因 explains behaviour through disposition 内在特质 or situation 情境. Calling a stranger rude is a dispositional account.
- An impatient reply might also reflect time pressure. Attribution biases are tendencies whose strength depends on context; they do not describe everyone on every occasion.
A stranger is short with you and you decide they are rude. What is this? · 一个陌生人对你态度生硬,你判定他没礼貌。这属于什么?
Calling the stranger rude proposes a personal disposition. Situational alternatives remain possible.
Look for evidence of group effects
- Group behaviour 群体行为 can include polarisation or suppressed dissent. Neither is inevitable merely because several people meet.
- Compare initial views with later views before claiming polarisation. Invite independent views and review alternatives, then check whether the process helped.
Suggest one structural way to stop a cohesive group suppressing dissent. · 提出一种结构性办法,防止高凝聚力的群体压制异议。
Example: "Assign one member each meeting to argue the strongest case against the group's preferred option." · 例如:“Assign one member each meeting to argue the strongest case against the group's preferred option.”
Evaluate a study on more than one dimension
- Classic studies can be assessed for findings, sampling, procedure and ethical concerns. Name the actual study and documented concern.
- Do not claim that every classic study is forbidden today or that ethical criticism automatically validates or invalidates all findings. Approval depends on the proposed procedure and review.
How should an account evaluate a classic study with documented ethical concerns?
Evaluate these dimensions separately. Whether a new procedure would be approved needs an actual proposal and review.
A group is unanimous in public. What remains unknown from that observation alone?
Public agreement does not establish private belief or its cause. A separate appropriate check is needed.
Carry the distinction to a team
- A unanimous decision does not reveal whether members privately agree. An anonymous preliminary view can expose disagreement, subject to the task’s rules.
- State what was observed, what mechanism is proposed and what remains unknown. Neither “ordinary people” nor one study proves a universal response.
State what was observed, what mechanism is proposed and what remains unknown. Neither “ordinary people” nor one study proves a universal response.
A result from selected participants proves that every person would respond identically.
False. Recruitment, sample and procedure limit the claim. Neither a group label nor one study establishes a universal response.