Psych 312 Activity Assignment 1 Answer Sheet Student Namedir

Psyc 312activity Assignment 1 Answer Sheetstudent Namedirectionsrea

Read each scenario and answer the questions below in the boxes provided (they will expand to fit your answer). All information needed to answer these questions can be found in this week’s readings, along with the scenario details themselves. Try to be thorough in your answers, providing explanations and supporting evidence as necessary. Your answers should be more than one simple sentence. Aim for a few sentences or a short paragraph for maximum credit.

Scenario A: Mary is sitting in her high school biology class, paying attention to her teacher’s lecture. She begins to hear a faint snoring and notices that one of her fellow classmates, Tim, has fallen asleep in the middle of the lecture.

1. What does your schema tell you about what to expect in a classroom setting? Include expectations about both the classroom setting itself as well as expected behaviors of students and professors.

Our schemas about classroom settings typically include expectations of attentive behavior from students and professional, prepared conduct from teachers. We expect a structured environment where students are engaged, listening, and participating appropriately, while teachers are calm, instructive, and attentive to the class's needs. These schemas prepare us to interpret behaviors like sleeping as disruptions or signs of disengagement, based on these set expectations.

2. Mary struggles with insomnia. Her teacher just came from a parent-teacher conference regarding a student in another class who she believes is lazy and disrespectful. Contrast how Mary and her teacher will each be primed to think about Tim’s behavior and why.

Mary, dealing with insomnia, may be more likely to interpret Tim’s sleeping as a sign of fatigue or stress related to her personal struggles, possibly attributing it to external factors like exhaustion rather than laziness. Conversely, the teacher, having recently formed stereotypes about laziness and disrespect, may be primed to interpret Tim’s sleep as intentional disengagement or disrespect, influenced by her negative bias or prior stereotypes about students’ motivation.

3. What does the theory of Self-Fulfilling Prophecy say about how the teacher will treat Tim from now on? What is the likely outcome for Tim at the end of the semester?

The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy theory suggests that if the teacher perceives Tim as lazy or disrespectful, she may treat him in a less supportive or more critical manner, reinforcing negative expectations. This could lead Tim to feel misunderstood or less motivated, potentially resulting in poorer performance and behavior that confirms the teacher’s initial stereotypes. By the end of the semester, Tim might genuinely underperform or become disengaged, fulfilling the teacher’s negative expectations.

4. Explain how the teacher’s perception of base rate information (e.g., base rate of laziness in high school students) may influence her interpretation of Tim’s behavior. Provide an answer for both a high base rate and a low base rate estimate.

If the teacher perceives a high base rate of laziness among high school students, she might interpret Tim’s sleeping as typical or expected behavior, and thus less indicative of individual issues. If she perceives a low base rate, she may see Tim’s behavior as unusual or problematic, leading her to interpret it as a sign of disrespect or lack of motivation rather than a common adolescent trait.

Scenario B: As Seth was taking an evening walk last night, his neighbor’s dog, Bruno, escaped from their yard and bit him. Seth is especially angry because several of his neighbors have complained about Bruno barking viciously or snapping at them in the past, yet the owner has done nothing about it. Normally Seth gets along well with dogs, but for some reason Bruno frequently snaps at him.

1. Using the covariation model to analyze the situation, what does consensus information tell you about Bruno’s behavior? Is Bruno’s behavior high or low in consensus and why?

Consensus information examines how other people behave in similar situations. Given that neighbors have complained about Bruno’s aggressive behaviors, consensus is high—many people are experiencing similar problems with Bruno, suggesting his behavior is influenced by external factors or the dog’s environment rather than an individual-only trait.

2. What does distinctiveness information tell you about Bruno’s behavior? Is Bruno’s behavior high or low in distinctiveness and why?

Distinctiveness assesses whether Bruno’s behavior is specific to this situation. Since Bruno has previously snapped at Seth but not necessarily at others during this walk, his behavior shows some level of distinctiveness—snapping appears to occur selectively rather than in all contexts, indicating high distinctiveness if he only snaps at Seth.

3. What does consistency information tell you about Bruno’s behavior? Is Bruno’s behavior high or low in consistency and why?

Consistency refers to whether Bruno’s snapping occurs repeatedly over time. If Bruno has bitten or snapped at Seth before and has shown aggressive behavior in the past under similar circumstances, then consistency is high. If this was an isolated incident, then consistency is low. Based on the information, previous complaints and snapping suggest high consistency, indicating a stable pattern of aggressive behavior.

4. Based on your answers above, would you make an internal or external attribution for Bruno’s behavior and why?

Given high consensus, high consistency, and moderate to high distinctiveness, an external attribution may seem appropriate—Bruno’s aggressive behavior might be influenced by external factors like his environment or treatment by his owner. If behavior is highly consistent across time and contexts, however, an internal attribution—such as a naturally aggressive personality—could also be appropriate. Overall, the evidence suggests that Bruno’s aggressive behavior is likely influenced by external factors, such as inadequate training or provocation, leading to an external attribution.

Scenario C: Your coworker, Lydia, is up for a promotion in your office. However, when the promotion is announced, it appears that Lydia was passed over and instead the promotion went to Craig.

1. According to the Fundamental Attribution Error, how will you explain Lydia’s failing to earn the promotion?

According to the Fundamental Attribution Error, I might attribute Lydia’s failure to her personal qualities—perhaps believing she lacked the necessary skills, motivation, or competence—rather than considering external factors like office politics, favoritism, or organizational constraints.

2. Using the Two-Step Process of Attribution, explain how you might alternatively explain the situation and adjust your original attribution about Lydia.

The Two-Step Process involves first making an internal attribution—believing Lydia did not get the promotion due to personal deficiencies—and then adjusting this view by considering external situational factors, such as her performance evaluation, political dynamics, or the qualifications of other candidates. Recognizing external influences may lead to a more balanced understanding, reducing biases in initial judgments.

3. What factors will influence whether or not you will complete the second step of the Two-Step Process of Attribution?

Factors include time constraints, cognitive load, personal motivation to be accurate, and the availability of contextual information. If I am motivated and have access to sufficient information about the organizational context, I am more likely to engage in the second step, considering external factors.

4. Contrast how someone from an individualistic vs. collectivistic culture would interpret the situation.

Someone from an individualistic culture might focus on Lydia’s personal abilities, viewing the outcome as a reflection of her individual effort or competence. Conversely, someone from a collectivistic culture might emphasize external factors such as workplace harmony, group consensus, or organizational influence, seeing the decision as influenced by group dynamics rather than Lydia's personal traits.

Scenario D: Terry is out bowling with some friends and acquaintances. Phil, who is on the opposing team, has been taunting her all night about her bowling skills. She tries not to let it bother her since she is usually pretty good at bowling, but his comments are starting to annoy her.

1. According to the Self-Serving Attribution theory, how will Terry explain the situation if she wins?

If Terry wins, she may attribute her success to her own skill, effort, or talent, viewing the victory as a personal achievement and a reflection of her competence—an internal attribution that enhances her self-esteem.

2. According to the Self-Serving Attribution theory, how will Terry explain the situation if she loses?

If Terry loses, she is likely to attribute her failure to external factors such as bad luck, distractions, or Phil’s taunting, protecting her self-esteem by defining her failure as outside her control.

3. Toward the end of the game, Phil drops his bowling ball on his foot, breaking his little toe. How will Terry explain this behavior based on the Belief in a Just World theory?

According to the Belief in a Just World theory, Terry might interpret Phil’s injury as a consequence of his own aggressive behavior or misdeeds, believing that good or bad outcomes are deserved. She might think Phil “earned” the injury because of his taunting or attitude, maintaining her belief that the world is fair.

4. What are the three reasons people make self-serving attributions and how does each reason apply to this situation?

The three reasons are self-enhancement (protecting self-esteem), maintaining a positive self-view, and reducing cognitive dissonance. In Terry’s case, she makes internal attributions when winning (to enhance her self-esteem), external attributions when losing (to protect her self-image), and interprets Phil’s injury via the belief in a just world, which helps maintain her worldview that people get what they deserve.

References

• Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Muraven, M., & Tice, D. M. (1998). Egos depletion: Is the active self a limited resource? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(5), 1252–1265.
• Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.
• Jones, E. E., & Davis, K. E. (1965). From acts to attribution: The perceiver’s internal standards. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (pp. 220–266). Academic Press.
• Kelley, H. H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. In D. Levine (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (pp. 192–238). University of Nebraska Press.
• Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 173–220.
• Snyder, M., & Swann, W. B. (1978). Behavioral confirmation in social interaction: From inductive statistics to causal models. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (pp. 17–61). Academic Press.
• Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92(4), 548–573.
• Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. Wiley.
• Leary, M. R., & Tangney, J. P. (2012). Handbook of self and identity. Guilford Press.
• Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 118(2), 224–253.