Shortly before the start of World War I, as the story goes, two young Serbians—Nada and Relja—fell in love. Soon before Relja departed for war, they stood on a bridge in their hometown of Vrnjačka Banja and declared their love for each other. Unfortunately, while away, Relja fell in love with another woman and never returned. Nada, as the story goes, never recovered from this loss and died young. “A tradition was born of this tragedy: local couples began to etch their names onto padlocks, attach them to the bridge, and throw the key in the water, a symbolic and public act sealing their commitment to each other” (Mars & Kohlstedt, 2020, p. 42). Take a look at some photos of the Vrnjačka Banja bridge. The practice of attaching locks to bridges and other public structures has become a practice in other cities around the world. Most often the locks are keyed padlocks, but sometimes they’re combination locks. (“My love, I will show my unwavering devotion to you by forgetting the combination!”) If just one couple, or a few couples, or even a few dozen couples attach locks to, say, a bridge, there is likely no harm in it. But what happens when thousands and thousands of couples do? It becomes a tragedy of the commons example. In 2015, with “[c]lose to one million locks—weighing 45 tonnes” attached to the Pont des Arts bridge in Paris, the bridge was starting to show damage. Venice, Rome, and Melbourne all encountered similar problems to their bridges where couples in love were attaching padlocks. If you’d like, pose this discussion question to your students: If you were a city official presented with this tragedy of the commons problem—everyone doing a small thing (attaching a padlock to a bridge) causing a big problem (bridge is being damaged by the added weight)—how would you solve it? Many cities replaced the bridge railings with acrylic or glass panels, e.g., Pont des Arts bridge. In Russia, they erected metal tree sculptures specifically for couples to attach their padlocks to (Mars & Kohlstedt, 2020).   Another tragedy of the commons example. Susan B. Anthony, a 19th century champion for women’s right to vote is buried in Rochester, New York at the Friends of Mount Hope Cemetery. It’s been a tradition on election day for visitors to her gravesite to put their “I voted” stickers on her gravestone. Unfortunately, the shear amount of accumulated glue from the stickers has started damaging the stone. “With this year marking 100 years since the ratification of the 19th Amendment, the grave has been getting a lot of attention.” When just a few people attached stickers to the gravestone, there was virtually no damage. But many more people did the same thing, damage started to accumulate. The solution? Cemetery officials covered the stone with transparent plastic so that visitors can still place their “I voted” stickers without damaging the stone (Asmelash, 2020).   References Asmelash, L. (2020). People who place their “I Voted” stickers on Susan B. Anthony’s headstone will notice something different there this year. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/27/us/susan-b-anthony-i-voted-gravestone-trnd/index.html Mars, R., & Kohlstedt, K. (2020). The 99% invisible city: A field guide to the hidden world of everday design. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing.   ... View more

Mask-wearing (or not) continues to be a social psychological goldmine. In this case, let’s take a look at conformity. The social pressure to wear or not wear a mask is pervasive. If you are not wearing a mask but are surrounded by people who are, you can feel the pressure to conform to the group’s behavior and put your mask on. If you are wearing a mask but are surrounded by people who are not, you can feel the pressure to conform to the group’s behavior and take your mask off. Even medical doctors who know the value of wearing masks as a coronavirus transmission preventative can feel the social pressure at a party where no one else is wearing a mask, as described in the New York Times article below. And imagine being at the White House reception for Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett, a reception where no one was wearing a mask. After covering conformity, provide the following discussion prompt. ******** Part A. Read this New York Times article: “If You See Someone Not Wearing a Mask, Do You Say Something?” (It’s better to link to this September 13, 2020 article in your library database as students may have exceeded their number of free New York Times articles for the month.) From our textbook reading, identify the factors that increase the likelihood of conforming. For each, note whether the factor was present in Dr. Robert Klitzman’s party experience. Provide evidence from the article. Part B. Review these photos taken on September 26, 2020. For each factor that increases the likelihood of conforming, note whether the factor was present. Provide evidence from the photos and article. Part C. Have you had a similar experience where you felt social pressure to wear a mask or not? Describe the experience. Which factors that increase the likelihood of conforming were present for you? Which were absent? Finally, what did you do: conform or not conform? Part D. Lastly, when put in the same position again, would thinking about the factors that increase the likelihood of conforming affect your ability to resist the social pressure? Why or why not? ... View more

It’s not very often we get to watch the birth of a social norm. Or at least not on this scale, nor at this speed. Mask-wearing was practically non-existent in the U.S. in March 2020. In late July, while certainly not universal, mask-wearing has become more common. As I’ve watched the norm shift in my community over these last few months, I’ve wondered about how other norms came into being. For example, seat belt use. In 1968, the U.S. law went into effect requiring all vehicles to have seat belts—except buses, such as the ones that carry children to and from school. It wasn’t until the mid-1980s that many states enacted seatbelt laws—wear a seatbelt or get fined. Now 90% of people in the U.S. wear seatbelts, with just about every state showing increased percentages since 2004, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (data for 2004 to 2011; data for 2012-2019). In looking at the data, my first thought was, how did they get these data? Self-report surveys? Nope. The data come from observational studies conducted by each state using a uniform set of observational criteria, called “Uniform Criteria for State Observational Surveys of Seat Belt Use.” I kid you not. After covering observational research, present this scenario to your students (in a synchronous or asynchronous discussion): Congratulations! You received a federal grant to conduct research on seat belt use in our state/territory. Your task is to estimate seat belt use. How would you select where you are going to do your observations? Are there particular places you would exclude? Explain your rationale. What time of day would you do your observations? Are there particular times you would exclude? Explain your rationale. Who would you observe? Just the driver or also passengers? Explain your rationale. If you’re observing at an intersection, would you observe all cars at the intersection? Or just those traveling, say, north/south or east/west? How would you decide? Explain your rationale. If you’re observing a two-lane road, would you observe cars traveling in both directions, or just one direction? How would you decide? Explain your rationale. Because of the scope of this study, you will need to hire and train people to do the observations. How would you ensure that the observations they make are accurate? Explain your rationale. After students have made their responses to these questions: Visit the Uniform Criteria for State Observational Surveys of Seat Belt Use. These are the criteria the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) gives to states to conduct their annual seat belt studies. The reports are then compiled and sent to the NHTSA. You can see the compiled data for 2012-2019. For A through F, compare your criteria with those of the NHTSA, particularly sections 1340.5 through 1340.8. Would you be in compliance? If not, what would you need to change? In reflecting on everyone’s initial observations plans, who came closest to the NHTSA criteria? Explain your choice. If you’d like to expand this discussion, consider asking students to take what they learned from the NHTSA criteria and use it to answer these questions about the prevalence of mask-wearing in your state/territory. How would you select where you are going to do your observations? Are there particular places you would exclude? Explain your rationale. What time of day would you do your observations? Are there particular times you would exclude? Explain your rationale. Who would you observe? Adults only or children, too? Explain your rationale. Where would you do your observations? How would you decide? Explain your rationale. Because of the scope of this study, you will need to hire and train people to do the observations. How would you ensure that the observations they make are accurate? Explain your rationale. How would define “mask-wearing”? Would any facial covering count? Does it need to be covering the nose? Explain your rationale. ... View more

A lot of my Intro Psych students struggle with the concept of cognitive dissonance. If circumstances, say, a pandemic, provide an example of cognitive dissonance, and a couple social psychologists, say, Elliot Aronson and Carol Tavris, present the explanation, how could I not use it? In their article in The Atlantic, Aronson and Tavris (2020) write: Dissonance is most painful when evidence strikes at the heart of how we see ourselves—when it threatens our belief that we are kind, ethical, competent, or smart. The minute we make any decision—I’ll buy this car; I will vote for this candidate; I think COVID-19 is serious; no, I’m sure it is a hoax—we will begin to justify the wisdom of our choice and find reasons to dismiss the alternative.    As a discussion (synchronous or asynchronous), present this scenario to your students. ******************* Cognitive dissonance and COVID-19 discussion: Part I Let’s start with the premise that I believe that I’m the kind of person who makes smart decisions. I want to see my extended family and my friends; I should go out. But, dang, that virus is out there. It could make me very sick. Heck, it could kill me; I should stay home. I have cognitive dissonance between two thoughts. Let’s say that I go out to visit family and friends. Now I have cognitive dissonance between a behavior and a thought: I’m visiting with people but that’s clashing with knowing that this behavior could be dangerous. Identify at least two things I could think or do that may reduce my dissonance.   ******************* Once students have offered their suggestions, such as saying “I’m young and healthy, it probably won’t affect me if I catch it,” prompt with this follow-up. ******************* Cognitive dissonance and COVID-19 discussion: Part II While it’s an easy way out of this particular cognitive dissonance, finding ways of justifying dangerous behavior is probably not the best solution. Aronson and Tavris (2020) write, Although it’s difficult, changing our minds is not impossible. The challenge is to find a way to live with uncertainty, make the most informed decisions we can, and modify them when the scientific evidence dictates—as our leading researchers are already doing. Admitting we were wrong requires some self-reflection—which involves living with the dissonance for a while rather than jumping immediately to a self-justification. Maybe what we say to ourselves instead is, “Yes, I usually make smart decisions, and I visited with people knowing that it may be dangerous to do so. While I can come up with a lengthy list of justifications, let me just sit with this for a while.”  To not fall prey to cognitive dissonance we have to be able to identify the two dissonant thoughts/behaviors, and we have to be willing to stop and ask ourselves why we are doing/thinking what we’re doing/thinking. Aronson and Tavris (2020) encourage us to ask ourselves, “Why am I believing this? Why am I behaving this way? Have I thought it through or am I simply taking a short cut, following the party line…?” Choose one of the solutions offered in this discussion for how to reduce dissonance. For example, "I'm young and healthy, so I'm less likely to get sick." Now, ask, "Why do I believe this?" "Because that's what friends keep saying"? Next, evaluate the evidence. "It's true that those who are young and healthy are less likely to die, but young, healthy people can get very sick, and yes, they can die. Even if they have mild or no symptoms, they can still pass it on to others who could get very sick or die." Cite your reputable source, e.g., the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.   Reference Aronson, E., & Tavris, C. (2020, July). The role of cognitive dissonance in the pandemic. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/07/role-cognitive-dissonance-pandemic/614074/ ... View more

Netflix has made ten of their documentaries available on their YouTube channel. For many years, Netflix has allowed teachers to screen documentaries in their classrooms. However, this isn’t possible with schools closed. So at their request, we have made a selection of our documentary features and series available on the Netflix US YouTube channel.  Of particular interest to psychology instructors is the 5-episode documentary Babies. The episodes average 50 minutes in length. Netflix provides you with a few discussion questions for each episode. Even if you don’t use them, they’ll give you a better sense of what the episodes cover. Love Video Link : 2619 Crawling Video Link : 2620 First Words Video Link : 2621 Sleep Video Link : 2622 First steps Video Link : 2623 Another documentary of interest, Period. End of Sentence (27 mins) opens with a young woman talking about having to drop out of school because she didn’t have access to menstrual products. When the local women start manufacturing pads, it becomes an important source of income, and, presumably, a source of independence, both for the women who are earning money and the women who are using the pads. After covering adolescence, this documentary could be an interesting discussion starter for what most of your students probably take for granted. If you’d like, you can expand discussion on whether menstrual products should be taxed or should be provided by schools.   Video Link : 2624 Knock Down the House (87 mins) follows four women who ran campaigns against incumbents in the 2018 mid-term elections. There may be some good content here for social psychology or political psychology. Video Link : 2625 Take a look at the titles and descriptions of the other documentaries Netflix has made available via YouTube. Be aware that the links on that page go to Netflix, not their YouTube channel.  ... View more

Between spending a lot of time thinking about what people need to know about psychology—and, thus, what we should cover in Intro Psych—and thinking about intimate partner violence (IPV), it is glaringly apparent that IPV belongs in the Intro Psych course.* One place to address the topic is in the social psychology chapter, right after covering foot-in-the-door. Ask students to use their web-enabled devices to visit this University of Michigan Sexual Assault Prevention and Awareness Center website or show the website on your screen. Briefly describe each of the eight tactics that may be used by an abuser. Set aside one tactic to use as an example of what you would like students to do during this activity. Divide your class into seven groups, assigning one tactic to each group. If you have a larger class (or want to use smaller groups), divide your class into, say, fourteen groups, where two groups will each be addressing the same tactic. Explain that each of these tactics may start with something small and then gradually increase in severity: foot-in-the-door. In one study, "[T] he women described how the violence occurred in a more or less insidious and gradual manner, first finding expression in the form of psychological violence through control, jealousy and disparaging comments about the woman, her relatives or friends, and attempts to circumscribe her existence"  (Scheffer Lindgren & Renck, 2008).  Because of the gradual escalation, the tactics can be hard to see. The goal of this activity is to make that gradual escalation visible, here, in the safety of the classroom. By knowing what to look for, you may be better able to see the warning signs or red flags in your own relationships or in the relationships of a friend or family member. Instructions to students: For your assigned abuse tactic, identify what the most severe demonstration of that abuse may be. Next, identify what you think may be the least severe demonstration of that abuse. Finally, fill in at least two intermediary steps. Using the tactic you set aside as an example, ask students for what the most severe demonstration of that abuse may be. For example, if you chose “Using Isolation,” the most severe may be the abuser not allowing their partner to communicate with anyone. Next, ask students what the initial foot in the door may look like. Perhaps the abuser doesn’t tell their partner when friends have called. Finally, ask students to fill in two intermediary steps, such as breaking their partner’s cellphone and perhaps, next, not allowing their partner to drive anywhere alone. Now ask students to take a couple minutes to think on their own to identify at least four foot-in-the-door steps for their assigned tactic. Least severe, somewhat severe, more severe, and most severe. Think of these as light yellow flags, bright yellow flags, orange flags, and red flags. A light yellow flag may seem harmless, but it could indicate the potential for escalation. Next, ask students to share in their assigned groups the behaviors that they identified. The group's task is to rank order the behaviors from least severe to most severe.  Once discussion winds down, ask groups to share their rank orderings. Detecting relationship patterns that may be unhealthy can lead to positive outcomes (Wuest & Merritt-Gray, 2008). Wrap up this activity by sharing with your students community or campus resources they can turn to for support. Be sure to include this national resource for your students’ friends and family who may not be local: The National Domestic Violence Hotline is available to “talk confidentially with anyone experiencing domestic violence, seeking resources or information, or questioning unhealthy aspects of their relationship.” Call them at 1-800-799-7233 or  text  LOVEIS to 22522. Or you can visit  thehotline.org  and click the “ Chat Now ” button in the top right corner of the page.   While these directions are for an in-class or live-video (with breakout rooms) class session, instructions may be adapted for an online class discussion board (ask students to post, say, four behaviors before seeing others' posts) or as a stand-alone assignment.   *Special thank you to social psychologist and intimate partner violence researcher Kiersten Baughman for sharing her expertise with me References   Scheffer Lindgren, M., & Renck, B. (2008). Intimate partner violence and the leaving process: Interviews with abused women. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-Being, 3(2), 113–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482620801945805 Wuest, J., & Merritt-Gray, M. (2008). A theoretical understanding of abusive intimate partner relationships that become non-violent: Shifting the pattern of abusive control. Journal of Family Violence, 23(4), 281–293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-008-9155-x ... View more

During this please-stay-away-from-other-people time, I have been thinking a lot about people who are trapped at home with an abuser. Yesterday morning we went to the grocery store for our next two-week round of supplies. No, we didn’t buy toilet paper. We had just happened to stock up before COVID-19, and we are still well-supplied. We were in the snacks aisle, when I realized that I had passed the sour cream and onion potato chips. I turned around to retrieve them, when a large man substantially farther away than the recommended six feet said, “So you’re coming this way then?!” I replied, pointing behind me, “Oh, you want to go this way?” “Not anymore!!” With that, he and the woman who was with him turned around and went down another aisle. Later, as I exited the frozen food aisle, he and she were about to pass that aisle. He spotted me, came up short, glared at me, huffed, and made a wide swing around me. Clearly, the grocery store was to be his and his alone that morning, and I had ruined his plan.   I have been having a hard time shaking the memory of these interactions. It’s the woman who was with him that I keep seeing. She was small, both in size and demeanor. She said nothing and was expressionless. She stood at his elbow and when he moved, she moved.   Now, I admittedly have no idea what the nature of their relationship is, but my he’s-abusive alarms were ringing loudly. And there was nothing I could do about it. At my college, I’m part of the team that helped our faculty move their winter quarter classes online for the end of the quarter. We’ve spent the last week helping our faculty get geared up to spend all of spring quarter online. While my focus has been on our faculty working from home, I’ve had to dedicate some time to thinking about my own spring quarter class and the students who will be in it. And now I can’t help but think about everyone’s living situation. How many of our college’s faculty and staff are trapped at home 24/7 with an abuser? How many of our students? How many of your faculty, staff, and students? The National Domestic Violence Hotline (2020) reports Here’s how COVID-19 could uniquely impact intimate partner violence survivors: Abusive partners may withhold necessary items, such as hand sanitizer or disinfectants. Abusive partners may share misinformation about the pandemic to control or frighten survivors, or to prevent them from seeking appropriate medical attention if they have symptoms. Abusive partners may withhold insurance cards, threaten to cancel insurance, or prevent survivors from seeking medical attention if they need it. Programs that serve survivors may be significantly impacted –- shelters may be full or may even stop intakes altogether. Survivors may also fear entering shelter because of being in close quarters with groups of people. Survivors who are older or have chronic heart or lung conditions may be at increased risk in public places where they would typically get support, like shelters, counseling centers, or courthouses. Travel restrictions may impact a survivor’s escape or safety plan – it may not be safe for them to use public transportation or to fly. An abusive partner may feel more justified and escalate their isolation tactics. Please consider sharing this information with faculty, staff, and students. If you are living with an abuser, please call the National Domestic Violence Hotline at 1-800-799-7233 or text LOVEIS to 22522. Or you can visit thehotline.org and click the “Chat Now” button in the top right corner of the page. After relating my grocery store experience to a colleague, they said they kept thinking about the LGBTQ youth who are now trapped at home with unsupportive family. And now I keep thinking about them, too. Please consider sharing this information about how to get help from The Trevor Project (2020). If you are an LGBTQ youth who is struggling or an ally who knows someone who is struggling, please call the TrevorLifeline at 1-866-488-7386 or text START to 678678. Or you can visit TheTrevorProject.org on your computer to chat. And there are children and teens who are living with abusive parents, guardians, or others for whom school may have been their only reprieve. Please consider sharing this information about how to get help from Childhelp (2020) . If you are a teenager or child and you are being hurt by someone, know someone who may be, or are afraid that you may hurt someone, please call or text the Childhelp National Child Abuse Hotline at 1-800-422-4453 or visit Childhelp.org for live chat.   References Childhelp. (2020). https://www.childhelp.org/childhelp-hotline/ National Domestic Violence Hotline. (2020). https://www.thehotline.org/ The Trevor Project. (2020). https://www.thetrevorproject.org/ ... View more

With colleges and universities moving their face-to-face classes online or into a live video format during this Spring 2020 COVID-19 outbreak, some faculty are being forced to confront an unpleasant reality: they don’t like how they sound or look when recorded. The mere exposure effect The more we see or hear something, the more—in general—we like it. That is called the mere exposure effect. Our voice Because of how the sound of our own voice travels from our throat to our ears, it sounds different in our heads than it does to the people around us. We have spent a lifetime listening to our voices produced that way, and so that is the voice we prefer. Microphones record our “outside” voice. Microphones pick up the sound of our voice as the people around us hear it. They like that voice because it’s the one they hear. We hate it because it doesn’t sound like our voice to us. It’s not the one we hear. Our face Symmetrical faces are perceived to be more attractive than asymmetrical faces. I hate to be the one to deliver this news, but your face probably is not symmetrical. And I know, speaking as one who does not have a symmetrical face. We have, again, spent a lifetime looking at our own faces—in a mirror. We much prefer this “mirrored” view of ourselves than we do, say, a photograph of ourselves, you know, the way other people see us. Try this. Take a photo of yourself. Use your phone’s or computer’s image editing tools to flip the photo to its mirror image. You will probably like the mirrored photograph more than the original—the view of yourself that you see most often. Ask your friends and family which one they prefer. Most often they’ll choose the original photo—the view of yourself that they see most often. No wonder we hate recording ourselves Recordings we make of ourselves don’t sound like us, and the view is not one we’re used to seeing. It’s a wonder that anyone ever consents to being recorded. Keep in mind that any recording you make is not for you. Your recording is—in the case of faculty—for your students. How you look and how you sound matches their reality. While you may not like it, they like matching the sound and face of the real you with the sound and face of the recorded you. And after all, your students are the ones your recordings are for. Check your recording software for a mirror image setting While there’s nothing I can do about your voice, some recording/webconferencing tools—like Zoom—include the ability to switch your webcam to mirror image. This feature was designed to better help you make sense of what you’re seeing on camera. In regular webcam view, it’s a challenge to get your stray hair back in place. Your right hand is on the left side of the screen and as you move your right hand toward your left, on the screen your right hand moves to the right. Everything is backwards! When you enable mirror image, it is just like you are looking in a mirror. Your right hand is on the right. When you move your right hand left, the webcam image of your hand also moves left. And you know what? Since this is how you see yourself all the time in your bathroom mirror, you’ll like how you look a lot more. But here’s the extra cool part. While the camera view looks like a mirror to you, it has not changed for your viewers. They will still see you as they would if they were standing in front of you. And that’s also the view that will be recorded. Not the mirror view. (Shout out to my colleague Eric Baer for showing me this in Zoom!) Theater vs. television/film While we are talking about recording yourself, now is a good time to remember that if you have spent most of your career standing in front of a classroom, you are a performer. Like theater-trained actors, you have honed your craft so that your gestures and emotions carry to the back of your classroom. Many theater-trained actors struggle when they go from the stage to the screen. Television and movie cameras are intimate machines—as are webcams. They are right up in your face, recording every wrinkle and every muscle twitch. Toning down your expressiveness for your webcam recording may not come easily to you. If you are wildly expressive on camera, don’t worry too much about it. Just know that it’s part of your “stage” presentation style. With practice, you could learn to dial it back, but that’s probably not worth your energy right now. No students are going to be harmed by your exuberance.   Go record yourself Go forth. Take a deep breath. And make a recording. ... View more

Ingroups can be pretty powerful. We tend to like people in our ingroups more than people in our outgroups (ingroup bias), and we tend to see people in our outgroups as being more like each other than people in our ingroups (outgroup homogeneity bias), for example. There is much rhetoric about Democrats vs. Republicans, immigrants/refugees vs. native born, the wealthy vs. the middle class vs. the working poor, people with homes vs. people who are homeless. Depending on where you live, the groups may be different than these, but the groups are there. The next time you cover ingroups/outgroups, ask your students what groups are most salient to them – on your campus or in your town/city. If you’re in a small college town, it may be the townies vs. those at the college. Write down the names of the groups where students can see them. If time allows, ask your students to work in pairs or small groups to generate examples of how ingroup bias or outgroup homogeneity bias has affected or could affect how each group sees themselves and sees the other. Next, show this 3-minute TV2 Denmark ad that aired in 2017. Video Link : 2526 Ask students to share their reactions to the video. If they could get their-previously-identified groups together, what questions would they ask? Who likes pizza? Who likes dogs? Who likes cats? Who likes to drive?   Close this activity by pointing out ingroups/outgroups shift depending on context. When one context—politics, for example—is continually salient, it’s easy to forget that we have plenty in common with members of our —say,  political — outgroup. What strategies might your students use to help them remember that they may have a lot in common with an outgroup member, and to remember that, in a different context, that person is probably a member of their ingroup? ... View more

“Nature doesn’t kill people with avalanches. People kill people with avalanches”  (Julavits, 2020, p. 26). Heidi Julavits tells us that in avalanche school she learned about six psychological concepts* that can cause back-country winter enthusiasts to make poor decisions—and then she went on to discuss how these very same factors led her, her classmates, and her avalanche instructors to make some poor decisions when they went out to the slopes (Julavits, 2020). Julavits makes it clear that knowing how psychological concepts can have a negative impact on our decisions doesn’t necessarily mean that we’ll make different decisions in the moment. This article reminds me—once again—that knowledge is necessary but not sufficient to change behavior. For example, I know what healthy eating and healthy exercise look like, and I know their benefits. That doesn’t mean that I always make the best decisions regarding healthy eating and healthy exercise. Knowledge is good. It’s just not enough. The Intro Psych thinking chapter or social psych chapter are good places to discuss these psychological concepts—and then help students think through ways of countering them so they don’t get sucked in when needing to make decisions that may indeed be life and death decisions. While the context here happens to be avalanches—and the avoidance thereof—these psychological concepts can be applied to almost any context where a decision needs to be made. Ian McCammon, a mechanical engineer, started thinking a lot about avalanches following the death of a friend. While his focus has been on the mechanics of avalanches, after researching 715 such accidents, he wrote about six psychological concepts that people may use out on the slopes that can lead to disaster (McCammon, 2004). These are the psychological concepts Julavits introduced to us in her avalanche school article (Julavits, 2020). McCammon (2004) begins with this premise: As sad as this accident was [the one that led to the death of his friend], the real tragedy is that similar stories unfold in accident after accident, year after year. An experienced party, often with avalanche training, makes a crucial decision to descend, cross, or highmark a slope they believe is safe. And then they trigger an avalanche that buries one or more of them. In hindsight, the danger was often obvious before these accidents happened, and so people struggle to explain how intelligent people with avalanche training could have seen the hazard, looked straight at it, and behaved as if it wasn’t there. (p.1) The Psychological Concepts Familiarity When we are in familiar surroundings, we are more likely to act just as we have acted in the past. That’s fine as long as the conditions are exactly the same. If they have changed, behaving the same way may not be the best course of action. In McCammon’s archival research, he found that people did indeed take more risks when they were in an area familiar to them. Consistency Once we’ve made a decision, it’s easiest to keep making decisions that are consistent with that first decision. Again, this is fine as long as the conditions stay the same. As conditions change, staying consistent with our first decision may lead to trouble. McCammon found that the groups most committed to being out on the slope took the most risks. Acceptance We want to be accepted by others, so we do things that we believe will lead to their acceptance. Straight men may make poor decisions in order to increase their chances of being accepted by women. McCammon found that groups that included both men and women made riskier decisions, and this seemed to be driven primarily by men making poor decisions, not the women. Expert halo An “informal leader” may spontaneously emerge in the group. This person may have experience or skill, may be older, or may just be more assertive. The group may give this person an “expert halo” and assume the person has expertise they don’t actually possess. McCammon found that groups that had someone that could be identified as a leader took greater risks. Social facilitation When people are confident in their abilities, the more people that are present, the more confident people become. McCammon found that groups that had avalanche training took greater risks if their group had met up with another group prior to the avalanche. Those who had not had avalanche training were less affected by the presence of another group.   Scarcity We value more that which is scarce. New, unblemished snow is scarce and, thus, is highly valued. Indeed, McCammon found that skiers heading to untracked snow took greater risks than those headed to previously-skied snow. Other examples If you live where your students ski or snowboard, this avalanche safety example may resonate with your students. In any case, ask your students to consider other situations where a group has to make a decision about whether or not it is safe to proceed. Boating on a body of water with choppy waves? Rafting on a river with unusually high water? Driving in an area where there is a tornado watch or warning? Weighing whether to stay or move inland with an approaching hurricane. Whatever situation is most likely for your student population, ask your students to identify how each of the factors discussed above may lead to a decision that may result in disaster. Overcoming these factors Now the hard part. Ask students what they could do to recognize these factors at play in the moment and, just importantly, how they could counteract them. As a take-home assignment, ask students to investigate strategies that help keep people from falling into these traps. During the next class session, ask students to share what they learned. Conclusion A lot of what we cover in the Intro Psych course has the potential to change a student’s life. This topic has the potential to save a student’s life.   References Julavits, H. (2020, January). Calamity lesson. New York Times Magazine, 24–31, 48. McCammon, I. (2004). Heuristic traps in recreational avalanche accidents: Evidence and implications. Avalanche Review, 22(68). Retrieved from www.snowpit.com.   *Julavits and McCammon refer to these concepts as heuristics. In Intro Psych, some of these are considered simply principles or concepts, so I’ve replaced the term heuristics with “psychological concepts.”   ... View more

Probably like you, a lot of my Intro Psych students are interested in medicine. Most are interested in nursing, but a smattering are interested in becoming physicians or another type of medical professional, such as respiratory therapists. This New York Times article (Brown & Bergman, 2019), coauthored by nurse and a physician, will be of interest to these future medical professionals in your course. After covering ingroups/outgroups and superordinate goals in the social psychology chapter, ask your students to read the article and address these questions. What factors contribute to dividing medical professionals into the subgroups of doctors and nurses? For example, physicians have higher status than nurses.   What superordinate goal do the article authors suggest would bring nurses and doctors together? At about 1,000 words, the article is short enough for students to read and discuss in class. Alternatively, it’s an excellent real-world example to bring into your lecture.   From the new APA Intro Psych student learning outcomes, this activity addresses: Identify examples of relevant and practical applications of psychological principles to everyday life. Integrative theme: Applying psychological principles can changes our lives in positive ways.   Reference Brown, T., & Bergman, S. (2019, December 31). Doctors, nurses and the paperwork crisis that could unite them. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/31/opinion/doctors-nurses-and-the-paperwork-crisis-that-could-unite-them.html ... View more

Cartoonists have pretty good insight into the workings of the human mind. How many of them took Intro Psych? These comics will jazz up your next research methods, cognition, personality, learning, and social psych lectures. Dilbert's boss does not have an operational definition of "employee engagement," and, thus, no way to measure it. Also, on the ethics side, no, it's not okay to make up data. Lio, having no trouble with functional fixedness, repurposes an object into a sled. Lio’s friends aren’t typical. His ingroups include monsters, aliens, and death himself. When everyone else sees those creatures as part of a threatening outgroup, to Lio, they are just his friends. Also, you don’t have to read through too many strips to see Lio’s strong internal locus of control. Rat in Pearls Before Swine can be counted on for a solid outgroup homogeneity bias. Jeremy’s mom in Zits provides a nice example of positive punishment. No, I don’t think he’ll forget his textbook at home again. Or, perhaps more likely, if he does forget it at home, he won’t ask his mom to bring it to school. After all, punishment makes us better at avoiding the punishment. Caulfield, the boy in Frazz, wonders if Santa has fallen victim to the just-world phenomenon. Pig in Pearls Before Swine, whose sweetness and innocence may be unparalleled in the comics universe, does not fall for the fundamental attribution error. Looking for more example from the comics? Here are some previous comic-focused blog posts: Spotlight effect Door-in-the-Face, classical conditioning, and operant conditioning Change blindness, priming, and positive reinforcement ... View more

Here’s some information the business majors taking your Intro Psych class should be thinking about. During the social psychology chapter, pose this question to your students: Is it good for employees to know how much money their managers and their coworkers are making? Why? Give students a couple minutes to think about this. If you’d like, let students discuss with one or two people around them. If you have an audience response system, ask each question separately. “Is it good for employees to know how much money their managers are making?” Ask volunteers to share their reasoning. Next, ask “Is it good for employees to know how much their coworkers are making?” Again, ask volunteers to share their reasoning. Zoë Cullen (Harvard Business School) and Ricardo Perez-Truglia (UCLA) wondered the same thing. You’re welcome to read the working paper or a summary written by the authors for the Harvard Business Review. Managers (vertical inequality) Cullen and Perez-Truglia (Cullen & Perez-Truglia, 2018) asked a couple thousand employees of “a large commercial bank in Asia” to guess how much their manager made. They thought that their managers made about 14% less than they actually did. The researchers then randomly assigned the employees to either learn how much their managers actually made or to remain in the dark. With the assistance of the bank, researchers “gathered daily timestamp, email, and sales data for the year following our survey.” Learning that their managers made more money than they thought resulted in employees working more hours, sending more email messages, and selling more than those who did not learn how much their managers actually made. In fact, the more off employees were in their estimates, the more work they did. And the closer the manager was on the corporate ladder to the employee, the more pronounced the effect. “[A]fter realizing that these managers get paid more, employees became more optimistic about the salaries they will earn themselves five years in the future.”   Coworkers (horizontal inequality) Cullen and Perez-Truglia (Cullen & Perez-Truglia, 2018) asked those same research participants to guess the salaries of “the other employees with the same position and title, from the same unit.” While the participants were closer in accuracy with their guesses than they were with managers, most still underestimated how much their coworkers were making. Again, participants were randomly assigned to learn how much their coworkers actually made or to remain in the dark. Using the same “daily timestamp, email, and sales data for the year following our survey,” researchers found employees worked less than their in-the-dark counterparts. And they didn’t work just a little bit less. “ Finding out that peers earn on average 10% more than initially thought caused employees to spend 9.4% fewer hours in the office, send 4.3% fewer emails, and sell 7.3% less.” This is a beautiful – if unfortunate – example of relative deprivation. Relative deprivation is “the perception by an individual that the amount of a desired resource (e.g., money, social status) he or she has is less than some comparison standard. This standard can be the amount that was expected or the amount possessed by others with whom the person compares himself or herself” (American Psychological Association, n.d.) When we experience relative deprivation, we feel worse. And when that relative deprivation is experienced in a work setting, that feeling worse translates into working less. Discussion Ask your students to imagine that they are employers. How might they handle salary information? Would they be transparent, letting everyone know how much everyone is paid? Would they release average salaries by position type rather than attach names to salaries? And should different people who hold the same position be paid different salaries? Cullen and Perez-Truglia (Cullen & Perez-Truglia, 2018) offer a couple suggestions. “[K]eep salaries compressed among employees in the same position, but offer them large raises when they get promoted to a higher position.” “[T]ransparency about average pay for a position, without disclosing individual salaries.”   The researchers conclude their Harvard Business Review article with this advice.   We encourage you to start experimenting with transparency at your company.  The first step is to figure out what your employees want. You can find out through anonymous surveys. Just mention some alternatives that you consider viable, and let them voice their preferences. For instance, do your employees feel informed about their salaries five years down the road? Would they want to find out the average pay two or three promotions ahead? Once you look at the survey results, you can decide what information to disclose and how. According to our findings, signals about the enticing paychecks waiting five years in the future is the push they need to be at their best.   References American Psychological Association. (n.d.). Relative deprivation. Retrieved December 26, 2018, from https://dictionary.apa.org/relative-deprivation Cullen, Z., & Perez-Truglia, R. (2018). The motivating (and demotivating) effects of learning others’ salaries. Retrieved December 27, 2018, from https://hbr.org/2018/10/the-motivating-and-demotivating-effects-of-learning-others-salaries ... View more

There are a lot of social psychological concepts that can help explain road rage. This Seattle Times article (Doughton, 2018) beautifully identifies a number of these concepts. Students will see how social psychology tells us something about our everyday lives. And, hopefully, students will remember this the next time they find themselves overly angry at the behavior of strangers. You can use the article in any number of ways. Pull out the examples to frame your social psychology lecture After students read the chapter, but before you cover the concepts in class, ask students, as a homework assignment, to identify the social psychological concepts Before you cover these concepts, ask students to read the article, then, in small groups, identify the social psychological concepts After your social psychology lecture, ask students to read the article, and then in small groups, identify the social psychological concepts If your students are reading the article and identifying the concepts, ask students to define the concepts they find in their own words, quote sections of the article that illustrate each of those concepts, and, finally, explain how the quotes they found illustrate each of the concepts students have identified. To make it easier, give students these concepts to find in the article: Deindividuation Fundamental attribution error Self-serving bias Outgroup homogeneity bias If you’d like students to reflect on previous content they’ve learned about in their Intro Psych course, ask them to identify examples of these concepts in the article: Sympathetic nervous system arousal Observational learning Long-term effects of stress References Doughton, S. (2018, November 2). How to keep your head from exploding in Seattle traffic. Seattle Times. Retrieved from https://www.seattletimes.com/pacific-nw-magazine/how-to-keep-your-head-from-exploding-in-seattle-traffic ... View more

Mexican immigrants, President Trump has repeatedly told his approving base, are “bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.” In this week’s West Virginia rally he highlighted Mollie Tibbetts’ accused “illegal alien” killer as a vivid example. Hence the wish to “build a wall”—to keep out those who, we are told, would exploit Americans and take their jobs.   In an earlier 2018 essay, I responded to the inaccuracy of fear mongering about immigrant crime. But consider a different question: Who believes it? Is it people who live in regions with a greater number of unauthorized immigrants, and who have suffered the presumed crime, conflict, and competition? At the recent Sydney Symposium on Social Psychology, Christian Unkelbach (University of Cologne) reported an intriguing finding: In Germany, anti-immigrant views are strongest in the states with fewest immigrants. Across Germany’s 16 states, intentions to vote for the right-wing Alternative für Deutschland (Alternative for Germany [AfD]) was greatest in states with the fewest asylum applications. (My thanks to Dr. Unkelbach for permission to share his translated figure.) I wondered: Might a similar pattern emerge  in U.S. states? To find out, I combined two data sets: A 2016 Pew report provided data on the percentage of unauthorized immigrants in each state’s population. A 2016 PRRI report provided state-by-state data on immigrant acceptance. The result? Voila! In the United States, more immigrants predicts more state-level acceptance of immigrants. And fewer immigrants predicts more fear of immigrants. (West Virginia, with the lowest unauthorized immigrant proportion, also is the least immigrant-supportive.) Moreover, the U.S. correlations are very similar to the German: Across the 16 German states, the correlation between immigrant noncitizen population and anti-immigrant attitudes was -.61. Across the 50 U.S. states, the correlation between immigrant noncitizen population and immigrant-supportive attitudes was +.72. The legendary prejudice researcher Thomas Pettigrew would not be surprised. In a new article at age 87 (I want to be like him when I grow up), Pettigrew reports that in 477 studies of nearly 200,000 people across 36 cultures, intergroup contact predicted lower prejudice in every culture. With cross-racial contact, especially cooperative contact, people from South Africa to the United States develop more favorable racial attitudes. In a new study by Jared Nai and colleagues, living in a racially diverse U.S. neighborhood—or even just imagining doing so—leads people to identify more with all humanity, and to help strangers more.   As straight folks get to know gay folks, they, too, become more gay-supportive. And, these new data suggest, as citizens interact with and benefit from their immigrant neighbors, they, too, become more open-hearted and welcoming.   In my own Midwestern town, where minority students (mostly Hispanic) are a slight majority of public school students, these yard signs (this one from my front yard) abound. We have known enough immigrants—as neighbors, colleagues, business owners, and workers—to know that they, like our own immigrant ancestors, can be a blessing. [Afterword: In kindly commenting on this essay, Thomas Pettigrew noted that one exception to the contact-with-immigrants benefit occurs “when the infusion of newcomers is large and sudden.  Then threat takes over without the time for contact to work its magic” (quoted with permission).] ... View more