Applying Social Psychology: From Problems to Solutions

Books

Abraham P. Buunk & Mark Van Vugt

  • Citations
  • Add to My List
  • Text Size

  • Chapters
  • Front Matter
  • Back Matter
  • Subject Index
  • SAGE Social Psychology Programme

    Senior Consultant Editor

    Michael A. Hogg (Claremont Graduate University, USA)

    Consultant Editors

    Richard E, Petty (Ohio State University USA)

    Marilynn B. Brewer (Ohio State University USA)

    John M. Levine (University of Pittsburgh USA)

    Stephen Reicher (St. Andrews University UK)

    Vincent Yzerbet (Université Catholique de Louvain Belgium)

    SAGE Publications is pleased to announce the launch of a new, international programme of titles in social psychology – both textbook and reference – brought together by a team of consultant editors led by Michael A. Hogg: the SAGE Social Psychology Programme. Featuring books written or edited by world-leading scholars (or younger academics ‘on the rise’) and infused with the latest research in the field, the programme is intended to be a self-contained, comprehensive resource that meets all the educational needs of a social psychology programme beyond introductory level.

    The remit of the SAGE Social Psychology Programme has both breadth and depth. Student textbooks are written by leading and experienced scholars in a style that is carefully crafted to be stimulating, engaging and accessible. They are schoarly, comprehensive and up-to-date, and boast the appropriate pedagogical devices and supplements – thus making them appropriate to build courses around at a variety of levels. Reference works, including Handbooks and Encyclopaedias, survey the landscape with an even broader sweep and should become benchmark volumes for years to come.

    Current and forthcoming titles include:

    • Understanding Social Psychology across Cultures – Peter Smith (University of Sussex, UK), Michael Bond (Chinese University of Hong Kong, China) & Ciĝdem Kaĝitçibasi (Koc University, Istanbul, Turkey)

      Published – December 2005

    • Cognitive Dissonance: 50 Years of a Classic Theory – Joel Cooper (Princeton University, USA)

      Publication date: March 2007

    • The SAGE Handbook of Social Psychology: Concise Student Edition – Michael A. Hogg (Claremont Graduate University, USA) & Joel Cooper (Princeton University, USA)

      Publication date: March 2007

    • The Encyclopedia of Social Psychology: 3 Volumes – Roy F. Baumeister (Florida State University, USA) & Kathleen D. Vohs (University of Minnesota, USA)

      Publication date: September 2007

    Copyright

    View Copyright Page

    Dedication

    To Yvonne A.B. Werkhoven, a truly applied social psychologist. (APB)

    To Hannie, my parents Leo and Corrie, my son Jamie and to all applied researchers and their contributions. (MVV)

    About the Authors

    Abraham (Bram) P. Buunk has been since 2005 Academy Professor in Evolutionary Social Psychology at the University of Groningen on behalf of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences. His main current interest is the application of evolutionary theorizing to human social behaviour. He has published widely on applied topics, including professional burnout, jealousy, absenteeism, AIDS-prevention, loneliness, depression, marital satisfaction, well-being among the elderly, and coping with cancer. He was a co-editor of Health, coping and well-being: Perspectives from social comparison theory (Erlbaum, 1997), and Solidarity and Prosocial Behaviour (Springer, 2006). He has served on scientific boards for the Dutch Cancer Foundation (NKB-KWF), and the Dutch AIDS Foundation. Currently he is a member of the Programme Committee on Evolution and Behaviour of the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO).

    Mark Van Vugt is Professor of Social Psychology at the University of Kent at Canterbury. He did his undergraduate degree at the University of Groningen and his PhD at the University of Maastricht in the Netherlands. He has published widely on topics in social and applied psychology, including leadership, social dilemmas, altruism and cooperation, social identity, environmental conservation, transport and water management. He is the chief editor of Cooperation in modern society: Promoting the welfare of communities, states, and organizations (Routledge, 2000). He is a fellow of the British Academy and sits on the editorial board of several journals in social psychology.

    Preface

    One of the wonderful experiences in life is that of having a problem and calling an expert, who walks in, takes a look, makes reassuring noises, goes to work and hey presto, your central heating system starts spreading comfort and happiness again. When I returned to academia after a stint as management consultant I realized looking back that I might have fallen somewhat short in providing clients with these wonderful experiences.

    Reflecting on what I had actually been using of the knowledge and tools acquired during my training as a social psychologist, I realized that the tools had come in handy but that the application of knowledge/theories hardly figured prominently. I was well equipped to interview people, construct questionnaires and surveys and arrive at an adequate analysis of problems. Yet when it came to providing solutions it seemed I had been mainly relying on common sense combined with the usual role of process consultant. This is a bit like your central heating engineer presenting you with, admittedly, a fine diagnosis of the problem and then offering to hold your hand while you wrestle with finding a way of getting the system to deliver some heat again.

    People, groups and organizations are obviously much more complex than the simple systems that keep the house operating: all the more reason to train future practitioners in using the theories and accumulated bodies of knowledge available. Extensive screening of the literature at the time did not throw up the desired textbook/training manual. So I started out developing my own course, which after the usual evolutionary developments has now taken shape as the PATH (Problem-Analysis-Test-Help) model presented in this book.

    At first sight this model looks the same as every other problem-solving course. The essential differences the PATH model introduces are twofold:

    1. from the very beginning it stresses using theories (plural) that might help to define and delineate the problem and, in the problem-solving phase suggests solutions that consequently have a solid foundation in theory and research; 2. in finding solutions, it examines factors that have a realistic chance of being changed.

    In addition to making better use of the available knowledge, the PATH model has the happy side-effect that practising social psychologists are better protected against confusing themselves or their clients.

    When in later life I was in charge of a large organization, using consultants from time to time, I was often struck by the difference between the business school alumni and social/organizational psychologists. The first category were strong on analysis and practical solutions they claimed had worked for others. The psychologists were strong on analysis and nearly always flavoured their solutions with a whiff of how things ought to be. Both groups succeeded in keeping any reference to research and theory well out of sight. This is actually good practice in an applied setting: the average manager/client does not always want to be bothered with academic trivia.

    Unfortunately, I am pretty confident that empirically-based theories only played a marginal role for both business school alumni and social/organizational psychologists. In essence this means that contributions from both disciplines do not reach beyond common sense supported by analytical tools. Particularly for the applied social psychologist this is a missed opportunity, as there is a wealth of theoretical/empirical material available through the average textbook. It just needs to be applied. This book sets out a methodology and discipline on how to do this.

    When students learn to see the usefulness of the textbook materials and apply them systematically, this will not only improve the craft of the applied psychologist and make for happier clients, it will also contribute immensely to the relevance of the text and the motivation and satisfaction of the students.

    Dr PeterVeen, 2007

    How to Use this Text

    This is the first edition of Applying Social Psychology. The authors recognize the value of including certain learning tools to foster the experience of using a textbook for both students and teachers. Accordingly, the authors have decided to incorporate a range of features to illustrate the PATH method and make the book more user-friendly. Many of these features have arisen from feedback on courses in applied social psychology that we and others have taught over the years. We trust that these features will strike a chord with the readers and users of this text. The authors would like to thank Pieternel Dijkstra for help in preparing these features as well as for editorial assistance.

    Key features in the textbook include the following:

    • Further readings

      If you want to find out more about the social psychological theories and research presented, we recommend a list of key readings in applied social psychology at the end of each chapter.

    • Assignments

      Each core chapter contains various assignments that enable students to practise applying social psychology to a diverse range of real-world problems. Each assignment focuses on a particular step in the PATH method. These assignments can be used by teachers to monitor and evaluate student progress or by the students themselves to monitor their own progress in the course.

    • Summaries

      At the end of each chapter a chapter summary is provided. These summarize the sequence of steps within that particular phase of the PATH method.

    • Figures and tables

      The text contains numerous tables and figures to support information in the text.

    • Updated research programmes

      This text contains a diversity of examples of key up-to-date research programmes in applied social psychology to illustrate the various aspects of the PATH method. We discuss research examples from around the world on a wide range of different social problems.

    • Text boxes

      The book contains several text boxes in which well-known social psychologists around the globe discuss why they got interested in applied social psychology and give examples of their applied research programmes.

    • Tests, measurements and instruments

      The text contains various examples of standard tests and measurement scales that are frequently used in applied social psychology. Examples are the self-esteem scale and the SYMLOG group observation instrument.

    • Glossary of key social psychological theories and concepts

      For best use of the text, we have identified a list of key social psychological theories and concepts and provide brief summaries of these in text boxes. It is advisable to use a core introductory text in social psychology for further details about theories and relevant research.

    • Case studies

      Each core chapter contains an example of research into a particular applied social psychology topic. This example serves as an illustration of how to conduct applied social psychology research.

  • Conclusion: Looking Backward and Forward

    After studying the previous chapters and completing the various exercises, the basic skills for addressing practical problems through applying social psychological theories will have been developed. Nevertheless, it usually takes quite some time and experience before our PATH model can be used in an optimal way. In the beginning you can follow the structured procedures outlined here in a somewhat rigid way. There is nothing wrong with that. On the contrary, this is the best way of learning basic skills and of obtaining experience and a sense of competence. Eventually, however, you will learn that the thing that matters most in the end is to get to a theoretically sound, empirically-based intervention.

    Indeed, it is important to be quite flexible in applying the various procedures outlined in this book. The more experience you get, the more likely it is that you can switch between the various steps in the model, and will go back and forth between, for instance, developing a problem formulation and coming up with explanations, or between developing a process model and developing interventions. Gradually, you will become more and more able to ‘play’ with the procedures, will know when and how to switch between stages, and will develop a sense for when and how to skip a stage. Most people will eventually develop their own approach that deviates from the PATH model, but that has proven its value in practice. In fact, our model has as its main goal allowing social psychologists to develop their own effective approach.

    We have said little about how to present the results of one's analyses to the client. This is, however, an important issue. In general, a psychologist should not try to present clients with the outcomes of the various exercises and procedures as they are presented in this book, These exercises and procedures are no more than the tools of the applied psychologist. Just as a carpenter does not reveal all the details of furniture making to his client, but just delivers the end product, a professional who designs interventions for social problems does not present the whole history of the development of the intervention to the client. Usually, he or she would present an analysis of the problem, the major causes that can be addressed in an intervention, and the nature of the intervention. Such a presentation needs to be given in clear and crisp language, without too many scientific terms and without any jargon. Social psychological concepts may be introduced, as far as they clarify the analysis of the problem.

    For example, a concept like ‘the bystander effect’ will be easily understood by an audience and may put a problem in the right perspective. A term like ‘self-efficacy’ may be necessary when presenting an intervention that is aimed at enhancing the control individuals experience over their situation. But you should not generally describe in detail how you generated your explanations and developed the intervention. Even worse would be to focus your presentation on the explication of social psychological theories, with the help of complex diagrams and schemas. The central goal should be to make clear what you are proposing and to convince a client that this is a well-developed and effective approach.

    This implies, among other things, that a psychologist should not constantly bother a client with all kinds of doubts and considerations. There is no need to let clients share in all the deliberations in choosing a given theory or intervention. When you cannot convince yourself, it is unlikely that you can convince others. Of course, a psychologist may explicitly want to present various alternative interventions with their own advantages and disadvantages to give a client various options. But the goal then is to facilitate choice by the client, not to recapitulate the considerations behind your own choice.

    To conclude, this book presents an elaborate procedure for developing theory-based interventions, the PATH method. This PATH method is a tool rather than a ritual that one should go through at all costs. It is our belief that social psychological concepts and theories may help in analysing and solving social problems. The goal of this book is to facilitate that and provide those faced with the problem of developing interventions for a variety of social problems with procedures that may help them to accomplish that task.

    Glossary

    Social Psychological Theories, Phenomena and Concepts for Explaining Social Psychological Problems
    Theories
    • affect-infusion model: a model that holds that mood affects the individual's judgment depending on the type of reasoning being used.
    • arousal: cost-reward model: a model that holds that another person's distress causes physiological arousal in an observer which, in turn, initiates the process of deciding whether to help.
    • attachment theory: theory about the emotional bond between infants and their caregivers, that assumes that individuals may develop on the basis of the bonds with their caregivers either a secure and avoidant or an anxious-ambivalent attachment style. This attachment style affects one's capacity for relationships in one's adult life, as well as other aspects in one's life, such as one's commitment to work.
    • attribution theory: a theory that explains the causes of events that happen to one-self or others. The attribution of these causes are known to influence performance affecting reactions etc.
    • balance theory: a theory that holds that people have an innate preference for a harmonious and consistent relationship among their cognitions.
    • cognitive dissonance theory: according to this theory people will experience unpleasant psychological tension if they perceive that their cognitions are psychologically inconsistent with their behaviour (‘dissonance’). Dissonance will motivate individuals to find ways to reduce it.
    • complementarity hypothesis: hypothesis that states that persons with dissimilar but compatible traits will be attracted to each other.
    • contact hypothesis: according to this hypothesis bringing members of different groups into contact with one another will reduce any pre-existing prejudice between them and result in more positive intergroup attitudes and stereotypes.
    • cultural theories: theories that state that, as individuals engage in particular cultural contexts, their psychologies are shaped accordingly.
    • elaboration-Likelihood Model (ELM): a model of persuasion that states that people may follow two routes of information processing: the central route (i.e. elaborate issue-relevant arguments) and the peripheral route (i.e. paying attention to peripheral cues such as the attractiveness of the source).
    • empathy-altruism hypothesis: hypothesis that states that empathy is associated with the selfless desire to benefit another and that empathically-motivated altruistic behaviour is not due to the desire for external rewards, the goal of avoiding guilt, or other selfish desires.
    • equity theory: a theory that states that people are happiest in relationships where the give-and-take are about equal.
    • evolutionary psychology: a theory that aims to explain the origins and maintenance of social behaviour from how that behaviour may have contributed to survival and reproductive success in our evolutionary past.
    • frustration-aggression model: according to this model the interruption of goal-directed behaviour, arising from either the arbitrary interference of other persons or personal inability, evokes frustration which in turn evokes a negative effect and aggressive behavioural tendencies.
    • general Adaptation Syndrome Model (GASM): a model that presents a three stage reaction to stress (alarm reaction, resistance, exhaustion).
    • heuristic-Systematic Model: a model of attitude change that specifies two routes to persuasion: systematic processing (i.e. an analytic orientation to information processing) and heuristic processing (i.e. a more restricted mode of information processing that makes fewer demands on cognitive resources).
    • interdependence theory: a theory that focuses on how individuals weigh the costs and benefits of a particular relationship and how their behaviours are affected by these evaluations. It holds that individuals will be most committed to a relationship when their satisfaction is high, the alternatives for their current relationship are unattractive, and the emotional and practical barriers against leaving the relationship are high.
    • negative state relief model: according to this model a negative mood is accompanied by a corresponding drive to reduce whatever bad feelings are present. For instance, according to this model a bad mood increases helpfulness because helping another person reduces one's own bad feelings.
    • norm theory: theory that postulates that every experience brings its own frame of reference or norm into being, either by guiding memory retrieval or by constraining mental simulation.
    • prospect theory: a theory that describes decisions under uncertainty in which the value of an outcome and its alternatives is calculated as the summed products (n) over specified outcomes (x).
    • prototype theory: a theory that a category's mental representation is based on a prototypical exemplar or prototype.
    • rational choice theory: according to this theory, in choosing lines of behaviour, individuals make rational calculations with respect to the utility of alternative lines of conduct, the costs of each alternative in terms of utilities foregone, and the best way to maximize utility.
    • reinforcement theory: according to this theory reinforcers can control behaviour.
    • self-affirmation theory: according to this theory people seek information about their own goodness as a human being.
    • self-categorization theory: a theory that is concerned with the variation in self-categorization in the level, content and meaning of self-categories, and with the antecedents and consequences of such variations. An important variation is self-categorization at the individual or group level (social identity).
    • self-discrepancy theory: a theory that holds that people are strongly motivated to maintain a sense of consistency between their actual self (how they view they are) and their ideal self (how they want to be), as well as their ought self (how they think they should be).
    • self-Evaluation Maintenance Model (SEM): a model that holds that self-evaluation depends on three variables in relation to other people: performance, closeness and relevance.
    • self-perception theory: a theory that holds that people come to know their internal states partially by inferring them from observations of their own overt behaviour and/or the circumstances in which this behaviour occurs.
    • self-verification theory: a theory that states that individuals seek information consistent with their own self-views, even when that information is negative.
    • similarity-hypothesis: an hypothesis that states that people are attracted to others who are similar to themselves.
    • social comparison theory: a theory about individual’ comparisons with other people and the effects of those comparisons on cognitions, effect and behaviours.
    • social exchange theory: a theory that assumes that how individuals feel about a relationship with another person depends on their perceptions of the balance between what they put into the relationship and what they get out of it.
    • social identity theory: a theory of group membership, processes and intergroup relations, stating that individuals tend to categorize themselves rapidly as a member of a group, which will lead to favouring one's own group over other groups.
    • social impact theory: a theory that claims that all forms of social influence will be proportional to a multiplicative function of the strength, immediacy, and number of people who are the source of influence and inversely proportional to the strength, immediacy and number of people being influenced.
    • social learning theory: a theory that states that people can learn by observing the behaviour of others and the outcomes of those behaviours.
    • social role theory: according to this theory men and women behave differently in social situations and take different roles, due to the expectations that society puts upon them.
    • status-expectation states theory: a theory that holds that individuals make judgments about each other on the basis of status characteristics (for example age, ability, gender, race).
    • subjective expected utility theory: a theory that holds that in choice situations people prefer the option with the highest subjectively expected utility.
    • theory of planned behaviour: an extension of the theory of reasoned action. This theory adds the concept of ‘perceived behavioural control’ so that it also becomes possible to predict actions that are under incomplete volitional control.
    • theory of reasoned action: a theory that aims to predict volitional action and that posits that intentions are the immediate antecedents of behaviour and that these intentions are determined by attitudes towards the behaviour and by the perceived social norms.
    • transactional model of stress: model that defines stressful experiences as person-environment transactions that depend on the impact of the external stressor and the person's appraisal of the stressor and his or her resources for dealing with the stressor.
    • triangle hypothesis: hypothesis that asserts that people with a primary competitive orientation expect others also to be competitive, whereas cooperatively oriented individuals expect more variation from others.
    Phenomena
    • actor-observer effect: the phenomenon that actors tend to attribute their actions to situational factors whereas observers tend to attribute the same actions to stable personal dispositions.
    • buffering effect: the phenomenon that having a particular resource or positive quality protects a person against the adverse impact of a stressful event.
    • bystander effect: the phenomenon where persons are less likely to intervene in an emergency situation when others are present than when they are alone.
    • cognitive consistency: the tendency for people to prefer congruence or consistency among their various cognitions, especially their beliefs, values and attitudes.
    • de-individuation: a state of reduced self-awareness associated with immersion and anonymity within a group.
    • diffusion of responsibility: the tendency for people to feel that responsibility for acting is shared, or diffused, among those present. That is, the greater the number of people who are present, the lower the individual's sense of responsibility.
    • distributive justice: the phenomenon that people evaluate the outcomes they receive from others not by their absolute favourability but by their consistency with principles of outcome fairness.
    • emotional contagion: the tendency to express and feel emotions that are similar to and influenced by those of others.
    • excitation transfer: the phenomenon that arousal elicited by one stimulus may mistakenly be attributed to another.
    • false consensus effect: the phenomenon that people tend to perceive their own preferences, attributes or behaviour as more common and situationally appropriate than those of individuals who have alternative preferences, attributes or behaviours.
    • false uniqueness: a tendency for people to overestimate the uniqueness of their own attributes, which occurs particularly associated for positive attributes.
    • fundamental attribution error: the tendency for perceivers to underestimate the impact of situational factors and to overestimate the role of dispositional factors in controlling behaviour.
    • gestalt: a whole which is more than the sum or average of individual elements.
    • group polarization: a tendency for groups to make decisions that are more extreme than the average of member’ initial positions.
    • groupthink: a mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive ingroup and that occurs when member’ strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action.
    • halo-effect: phenomenon where a person's positive or negative traits may ‘spill over’ from one area of their personality to another in other’ perceptions of them.
    • illusion of control: the incorrect perception that a person's actions can affect the outcomes of chance events.
    • illusory correlation: the perception that two classes of events are correlated which in reality are not correlated or are correlated to a lesser extent than perceived.
    • illusory superiority: the tendency for people to think they are better and more competent than the ‘average’ person.
    • informational influence: the tendency for people to accept information obtained from another as evidence about reality.
    • just world phenomenon: the phenomenon that people tend to see the world as a just place that leads them to perceive that people receive the outcomes they deserve, especially negative outcomes such as accidents and diseases.
    • mere exposure effect: the phenomenon that repeated, unreinforced exposure to a stimulus results in increased liking for that stimulus.
    • misattribution of arousal: the incorrect attribution of arousal to a cause other than the actual one.
    • negativity effects: the enhanced impact of negative information (relative to positive information) on human functioning.
    • normative influence: the tendency for people to conform to the positive expectations of others, motivated by the desire for approval and to avoid rejection.
    • outgroup homogeneity: the phenomenon that members of a group are seen as more homogeneous and similar to one another by an outgroup relative to ingroup member’ perceptions.
    • positive illusion: the tendency for people to unrealistically assess their abilities.
    • primacy effect: the phenomenon that impressions are influenced more by early rather than later information about a person.
    • procedural justice: the phenomenon that, when evaluating their outcomes with others, people judge the fairness of the procedures by which those outcomes were determined.
    • recency-effect: the phenomenon that later information supplants earlier information. Occurs when the impression concerns an unstable attribute, or when attention is focused on later information.
    • risky shift: the phenomenon that a group which already favours risk to some extent, reaches, through group discussion, a group decision that is even more risky.
    • self-fulfilling prophecy: the phenomenon that an originally false social belief leads to its own fulfillment.
    • self-serving bias: the tendency for people to attribute their successes to internal causes such as ability and their failures to external causes such as task difficulty.
    • social dilemma: a situation in which people's self-interest is at odds with the collective interest.
    • social facilitation: the phenomenon that an individual's performance may be facilitated by the presence of either passive audiences or other persons performing the same task.
    • social loafing: the tendency for individuals to exert less effort on a task when working for a group than when working for themselves.
    Concepts
    • affect: a general term describing mental processes that involve feeling, such as an emotional experience or mood.
    • altruism: a type of helping behaviour with the primary goal of reducing another person's distress.
    • arousal: an organism's level of physiological activation or excitation.
    • associative network: a model of human memory as the connections among isolated items of stored knowledge.
    • attention: whatever occupies consciousness/a person's mental focus at a particular time.
    • attitude: a psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favour or disfavour.
    • authoritarianism: an orientation which is overly deferential to those in authority whilst simultaneously adopting an overbearing and hostile attitude towards those perceived as inferior.
    • automaticity: information processing that occurs without conscious control.
    • bogus pipeline: a procedure intended to reduce distortions in self-report measures by convincing participants that the researcher has a valid and reliable means of knowing what their true responses are.
    • categorization: the process of classifying things or people as members of a group or category, similar to other members of that group or category and different from members of other groups or categories.
    • cognition: mental functions such as the ability to think, reason, and remember.
    • collectivism (vs. individualism): circumstances in which the meaning of a person and its realization are expressed predominantly in relationships.
    • cognitive appraisal: a mental process by which people assess whether a demand threatens their well-being and whether they have the resources to meet this demand.
    • commitment: the binding of an individual to a specific line of activity/or relationship.
    • comparison level (Cl): an internal standard representing the quality of outcomes an individual expects to obtain in a relationship.
    • comparison level of alternatives (Clalt): an internal standard representing the quality of outcomes an individual perceives to be available outside of the current relationship.
    • construct validity: the extent to which the measured variables accurately capture the constructs of theoretical interest.
    • counterfactual thinking: the thoughts people have about the alternative ways in which an event could have occurred.
    • descriptive norms: perceptions of how other people are actually behaving, whether or not this is approved of.
    • door-in-the-face: technique that obtains compliance to the target request by first obtaining non-compliance to a larger request.
    • drive: a person's internal state that energizes and maintains behaviour.
    • ego-involvement: the extent to which a task or issue is personally significant or motivating to an individual, and hence carries implications for that individual's self-concept or self-esteem.
    • experiment: a type of research in which a researcher randomly assigns people to two or more conditions, varies the treatments that people in each condition are given, and then measures the effect on some response.
    • external validity: the extent to which one can generalize from one particular setting to another.
    • foot-in-the-door: technique that predisposes people to comply to a critical request by first obtaining compliance to a minor request.
    • gender difference: differences between females and males (also called sex-difference).
    • gender identity: individual’ subjective feeling of themselves as males or females.
    • gender roles: the socially assigned roles traditionally associated with each sex.
    • gender stereotypes: beliefs about the behaviours and characteristics of each sex.
    • helping behaviour: voluntary acts performed with the intent of providing benefit to another person.
    • heuristic: a cognitive structure or process that serves the creative function of knowledge enrichment and productive thinking.
    • internal validity: the extent to which the research permits causal inferences about the effects of one variable upon another.
    • implicit personality theories: tacit assumptions regarding people's personality traits and the relationships among them.
    • impression formation: the process of forming evaluative and descriptive judgments about a target person.
    • impression management: the goal-directed activity of controlling or regulating information in order to influence the impression formed by an audience.
    • individualism (vs. collectivism): circumstances in which the worth of a person is predominantly defined as independent of the membership of groups.
    • injunctive norms: norms that state the ideal behaviour and that reflect basic values.
    • intrinsic motivation: form of motivation produced by the experience of free choice and autonomy.
    • locus of control: an individual's generalized expectancies regarding the forces, internal or external, that determine rewards and punishments.
    • loneliness: the unpleasant experience that occurs when a person's network of social relationships is deficient in some important way, either quantitatively or qualitatively.
    • memory: mechanisms by which people store and retrieve the knowledge they have encoded.
    • meta-analysis: the statistical integration of the results of independent studies in a specific area of research.
    • minimal group paradigm: research in which anonymous participants are experimentally classified as members of ad hoc, arbitrary or minimally meaningful categories (e.g. X vs. Y) and respond to non-identifiable members of their own and other categories.
    • minority social influence: a form of social influence in which a deviant subgroup rejects the established norm of the majority of group members and induces the majority to move to the position of the minority.
    • modelling: a process in which human thought, affect and action are altered by observing the behaviour of others and the outcomes they experience.
    • mood: generalized positive or negative feeling states.
    • nonverbal communication: the transmission of information and influence by an individual's physical and behavioural cues.
    • path analysis: the analysis of data to estimate the coefficients of a class of hypothesized causal models.
    • personality: intrinsic human qualities that lead to differences among individuals in their characteristic patterns of behaviour.
    • personal space: the distances and angles of orientation that people maintain for one another as they interact.
    • person perception: the detection of people's ‘internal’ psychological qualities, such as abilities, emotions, beliefs and goals.
    • prejudice: the holding of derogatory attitudes or beliefs, the expression of negative affect or the display of hostile or discriminatory behaviour towards members of a group on account of their membership within that group.
    • priming: the activation of particular connections or associations in memory just before carrying out an action or task.
    • prisoner's dilemma: a mixed-motive reward structure in which each of two or more parties must choose between cooperation and non-cooperation.
    • prosocial behaviour: a broad category of interpersonal actions that are positively evaluated with reference to cultural or societal standards.
    • prototype: the most typical member of a category.
    • reactance: a motivational state in response to influence attempts from others, directed towards the reestablishment of one's behavioural freedoms.
    • reciprocity: responding to the positive or negative actions of others in a similar way.
    • reference group: any group that individuals use as a basis for social comparison.
    • reinforcer: any stimulus that, when contingent on a response, serves to increase the rate of responding.
    • relative deprivation: a psychological state in which there is a perceived negative discrepancy between one's current situation and that which was expected or that which is felt as deserved.
    • salience: a property of a stimulus that causes it to stand out and attract attention.
    • schema: cognitive structures that represent a person's knowledge about an object, person or situation, including information about attributes and relationships among those attributes.
    • script: a schema that describes the typical sequence of events in a common situation.
    • self-appraisal: the process of seeking, in a relatively impartial manner, information that facilitates an accurate assessment about (aspects of) oneself.
    • self-awareness: a state in which the person is the object of his/her own attention.
    • self-concept: the composite of ideas, feelings and attitudes that a person has about his/her own identity, worth, capabilities and limitations.
    • self-disclosure: the process by which individuals reveal their innermost feelings and experiences to interaction partners.
    • self-efficacy: people's belief about their capability to produce performances that influence events affecting their lives.
    • self-enhancement: the process of interpreting and explaining information in such a way that has favourable or flattering implications for oneself.
    • self-esteem: a positive evaluation of oneself (also called feelings of self-worth or self-respect).
    • self-handicapping: the act of creating or inventing an obstacle to one's performance in order to avoid looking incompetent.
    • self-monitoring: individual differences in the extent to which people monitor (i.e. observe and control) their expressive behaviour and self-presentation.
    • self-presentation: the conscious or unconscious attempt to control images of the self that are conveyed to audiences during social interactions.
    • social categories: categories individuals use to interpret the social world.
    • social categorization: the process of assigning a target person to an existing social category.
    • social cognition: name for both a branch of psychology that studies the cognitive processes involved in social interaction, and an umbrella term for these processes themselves.
    • social comparison: the process of comparing an ability, opinion or characteristic of one's self to that of another person.
    • social comparison orientation: individual differences in the extent to which people compare themselves with others.
    • socialization: the process whereby people acquire the rules of behaviour and the systems of beliefs and attitudes that will equip a person to function effectively as a member of a particular society.
    • social norm: generally accepted way of thinking, feeling or behaving that is endorsed and expected because it is perceived as the right and proper approach.
    • social support: the existence of positive social relationships that may help maintain or advance one's health and well-being.
    • social value orientation: individual differences in the utility derived from outcomes for others. Three types are distinguished: a prosocial orientation, an individualistic orientation, and a competitive orientation.
    • stereotypes: societally shared beliefs about the characteristics that are perceived to be true of social groups and their members.
    • stereotyping: the use of stereotypes when judging others.
    • stress: people's physiological or psychological response to demands from the environment that either approach or exceed their capacities to respond.
    • subjective expected utility (SEU): the probability of an outcome times the utility of that outcome.
    • survey: systematic data collection about a sample drawn from a larger population.
    • trait: a stable, internal property that distinguishes among individuals.
    • transactive memory: a system shared among group members for encoding, storing and retrieving information such that detailed memories are available to group members without actual physical possession.
    • type A behaviour: behavioural attributes that increase the risk of coronary heart disease, such as striving for achievement, competitiveness, impatience, and hostility.
    • unconscious processes: mental processes that occur without awareness.
    • unobtrusive measure: a non-reactive form of data collection (i.e. it does not require the cooperation of participants).
    • values: trans-situational goals that serve as guiding principles in the life of a person or group.

    Bibliography

    Abrams, D. & Hogg, M.A. (2004). Meta-theory: Lessons from social identity research. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(2), 98–106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.65
    Adih, W.K. & Alexander, C.S. (1999). Determinants of condom use to prevent HIV infection among youth in Ghana. Journal of Adolescent Health, 24(1), 63–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1054-139X%2898%2900062-7
    Ajzen, I. (1987). Attitudes, traits and actions: Dispositional predictions of behavior in personality and social psychology. In L.Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 20, pp. 1–63). New York: Academic Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601%2808%2960411-6
    Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978%2891%2990020-T
    Ajzen, I. & Fishbein, M. (2000). The prediction of behaviour from attitudinal and normative variables. In T.E.Higgins & A.W.Kruglanski (Eds.), Motivational science: Social and personality perspectives (pp. 177–190). New York: Psychology Press.
    Albarracín, D., Johnson, B.T. & Fishbein, M. (2001). Theories of reasoned action and planned behaviour as models of condom use: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 127(1), 142–161.
    Aronson, E., Wilson, T.D. & Akert, R.M. (2002). Social psychology (
    4th
    edn). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
    Bales, R.F. & Cohen, S.P. (1979). SYMLOG: A system for the multiple level observation of small groups. New York: Free Press.
    Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
    Bargh, J.A., Chen, M. & Burrows, L. (1996). Automaticity of social behaviour: Direct effects of trait construct and stereotype activation on action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 230–244. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.230
    Bartholomew, L.K., Parcel, G.S., Kok, G. & Gottlieb, N.H. (2006). Planning health promotion programs: An intervention mapping approach. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
    Batson, D.C. (1991). The altruism question: Toward a social-psychological answer. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
    Batson, D.C. & Powell, A.A. (2003). Altruism and prosocial behaviour. In T.Millon & M.J.Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Personality and social psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 463–484). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
    Baumeister, R.F. (1999). The self in social psychology. New York: Psychology Press.
    Baumeister, R.F. & Tice, D.T. (1990). Anxiety and social exclusion. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 9, 165–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/jscp.1990.9.2.165
    Bazerman, M.H., Curhan, J.R., Moore, D.A. & Valley, K. (2000). Negotiation. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 279–314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.279
    Becker, R. & Mehlkop, G. (2006). Social class and delinquency: An empirical utilization of rational choice theory with cross-sectional data of 1990 and 2000 German General Population Surveys (Allbus). Rationality and Society, 18(2), 193–235. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1043463106063323
    Bell, P.A. & Baron, R.A. (1974). Environmental influences on attraction: Effects of heat, attitude similarity and personal evaluation. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 4(5), 479–481.
    Bern, D.J. (1972). Self-perception theory. In L.Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 1–62). New York: Academic Press.
    Bennenbroek, F.T.C., Buunk, B.P., Stiegelis, H.E., Hagedoorn, M., Sanderman, R., Van den Bergh, A.C.M. & Botke, G. (2003). Audiotaped social comparison information for cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy: Differential effects of procedural, emotional and coping information. Psycho-Oncology, 12, 567–579. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pon.674
    Bierhoff, H.W. (2002). Prosocial behaviour. London: Psychology Press.
    Bierhoff, H.W. & Rohmann, E. (2004). Altruistic personality in the context of the empathy-altruism hypothesis. European Journal of Personality, 18(4), 351–365. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/per.523
    Boyar, S.L., Maertz, C.P. & Pearson, A.W. (2005). The effects of work-family conflict and family-work conflict on non-attendance behaviors. Journal of Business Research, 58(7), 919–925. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2003.11.005
    Breakwell, G.M. (2004). Doing social psychology research. Leicester: British Psychological Society. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470776278
    Brehm, S.S., Kassin, S.M. & Fein, S. (2005). Social psychology (
    6th
    edn). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
    Brennan, A. & Kline, T. (2000). A justice explanation of employee reactions to office relocation: A case study. Psychologist-Manager Journal, 4(1), 105–115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0095884
    Brief, A.P., Dietz, J., Cohen, R.R., Pugh, D.S. & Vaslow, J.B. (2000). Just doing business: Modern racism and obedience to authority as explanations for employment discrimination. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 81(1), 72–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1999.2867
    Brodbeck, F.C. & Greitemeyer, T. (2000). Effects of individual versus mixed individual and group experience in rule induction on group member learning and group performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36(6), 621–648. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jesp.2000.1423
    Brug, J., Glanz, K., Van Assema, P., Kok, G. & Van Breukelen, G. (1998). The impact of computer-tailored feedback on fat, fruit and vegetable intake. Health Education & Behavior, 25, 357–371.
    Brug, J., Oenema, A. & Campbell, M. (2003). Past, present and future of computer-tailored nutrition education. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 77, 1028–1034.
    Brug, J., Van Vugt, M., Van den Borne, B., Brouwers, A. & Van Hooff, H. (2000). Predictors of willingness to register as an organ donor among Dutch adolescents. Psychology & Health, 15(3), 357–368.
    Buunk, B.P. (1990). Affiliation and helping interactions within organizations: A critical analysis of the role of social support with regard to occupational stress. In W.Stroebe & M.Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 293–322). Chichester: John Wiley.
    Buunk, B.P., Bakker, A.B., Siero, F.W., van den Eijnden, R.J.J.M. & Yzer, M.C. (1998). Predictors of AIDS-preventive behavioral intentions among adult heterosexuals at risk for HIV-infection: Extending current models and measures. AIDS Education and Prevention, 10, 149–172.
    Buunk, B.P. & Bosman, J. (1986). Attitude similarity and attraction in marital relationships. Journal of Social Psychology, 126(1), 133–134. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1986.9713583
    Buunk, A.P. & Gibbons, F.X. (2007). Social comparison: The end of a theory and the emergence of a field. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 102, 3–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.09.007
    Buunk, B.P., Gibbons, F.X. & Visser, A. (2002). The relevance of social comparison processes for prevention and health care. Patient Education and Counseling, 47, 1–3. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0738-3991%2802%2900054-X
    Buunk, A.P., Massar, K. & Dijkstra, P. (2007). A social cognitive evolutionary approach to jealousy: The automatic evaluation of one's romantic rivals. In J.Forgas, M.Haselton & W.Von Hippel (Eds.), Evolution and the social mind: Evolutionary psychology and social cognition (pp. 213–228). New York: Psychology Press.
    Buunk, B.P. & Schaufeli, W.B. (1999). Reciprocity in interpersonal relationships: An evolutionary perspective on its importance for health and well-being. European Review of Social Psychology, 10, 259–291. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14792779943000080
    Buunk, B.P., & Verhoeven, K. (1991). Companionship and support at work: A microanalysis of the stress-reducing features of social interaction. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 12(3), 243–258. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15324834basp1203_1
    Buunk, B.P. & Ybema, J.F. (1997). Social comparisons and occupational stress: The identification-contrast model. In B.P.Buunk & F.X.Gibbons (Eds.), Health, coping and well-being: Perspectives from social comparison theory (pp. 359–388). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    Buunk, B.P., Zurriaga, R., Gonzalez-Roma, V. & Subirats, M. (2003). Engaging in upward and downward comparisons as a determinant of relative deprivation at work: A longitudinal study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 62, 370–388. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0001-8791%2802%2900015-5
    Byrne, D. (1971). The ubiquitous relationship: Attitude similarity and attraction: A cross-cultural study. Human Relations, 24(3), 201–207. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001872677102400302
    Byrne, D., Ervin, C.R. & Lamberth, J. (1970). Continuity between the experimental study of attraction and real-life computer dating. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 16(1), 157–165.
    Campbell, D., Carr, S.C. & Maclachlan, M. (2001). Attributing ‘third world poverty’ in Australia and Malawi: A case of donor bias?Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31(2), 409–430. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2001.tb00203.x
    Cassel, B.J. (1995). Altruism is only part of the story: A longitudinal study of AIDS volunteers. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, Vol. 56(5-B), pp. 2937.
    Cialdini, R., Kallgren, C. & Reno, R. (1991). A focus theory of normative conduct: Theoretical refinement and re-evaluation of the role of norms in human behaviour. In L.Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 201–234). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
    Cialdini, R.B. & Trost, M.R. (1998). Social influence: Social norms, conformity, and compliance. In D.T.Gilbert, S.T.Fiske & G.Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (Vol. II, pp. 151–192). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
    Clarke, S., Botting, N. & Norton, M. (2001). The complete fundraising handbook. London: Directory of Social Change.
    Cooper, C.L., Dyck, B. & Frohlich, N. (1992). Improving the effectiveness of gain-sharing: The role of fairness and participation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(3), 471–490. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2393453
    Cooper, J. & Fazio, R.H. (1984). A new look at dissonance theory. In L.Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 17, pp. 229–266). New York: Academic Press.
    Crandell, C.S. (1988). Social contagion of binge eating. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 588–598. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.55.4.588
    Daly, M. & Wilson, M. (2001). Risk-taking, intrasexual competition, and homicide. In J.A.French, A.C.Kamil & D.W.Leger (Eds.), Evolutionary psychology and motivation (pp. 1–36). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
    Darwin, C. (1871). The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. New York: D. Appleton and Company.
    Dawes, R.M. & Messick, D.M. (2000). Social dilemmas. International Journal of Psychology, 35(2), 111–116. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/002075900399402
    Dawes, R.M., Van de Kragt, A.J. & Orbell, J.M. (1988). Not me or thee but we: The importance of group identity in eliciting cooperation in dilemma situations: Experimental manipulations. Acta Psychologica, 68(1–3), 83–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918%2888%2990047-9
    DiClemente, C.C., Prochaska, J.O., Fairhurst, S.K. & Velicer, W.F. (1991). The process of smoking cessation: An analysis of precontemplation, contemplation, and preparation stages of change. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59(2), 295–304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.59.2.295
    Dijker, A.J., Koomen, W. & Kok, G. (1997). Interpersonal determinants of fear of people with AIDS: The moderating role of predictable behavior. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 19, 61–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15324834basp1901_5
    Dijkstra, A. (2005). Working mechanisms of computer-tailored health education: Evidence from smoking cessation. Health Education Research, 20, 527–539. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/her/cyh014
    Dovidio, J.F., Piliavin, J.A., Schroeder, D.A. & Penner, L.A. (2006). The social psychology of pro-social behavior. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
    Dutton, D.G. and Aron, A.P. (1974) Some evidence for heightened sexual attraction under conditions of high anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 510–517. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0037031
    Elander, J., West, R. & French, D. (1993). Behavioral correlates of individual differences in road-traffic crash risk: An examination of methods and findings. Psychological Bulletin, 113(2), 279–294. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.113.2.279
    Evans, L. & Hardy, L. (2002). Injury rehabilitation: A goal-setting intervention study. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 73, 310–319.
    Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700202
    Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Oxford: Row, Peterson.
    Fischer, P., Greitemeyer, T., Pollozek, F. & Frey, D. (2006). The unresponsive bystander: Are bystanders more responsive in dangerous emergencies?European Journal of Social Psychology, 36(2), 267–278. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.297
    Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
    Fishman, J.A. & Galguera, T. (2003). Introduction to test construction in the social and behavioral sciences: A practical guide. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
    Fiske, S.T. (1998). Stereotyping, prejudice and discrimination. In D.T.Gilbert, S.T.Fiske & G.Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 357–411). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
    Fliszar, G.M. & Clopton, J.R. (1995). Attitudes of psychologists in training toward persons with AIDS. Professional Psychology Research and Practice, 26, 274–277. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.26.3.274
    Folkman, S., Lazarus, R.S., Dunkel-Schetter, C., DeLongis, A. & Gruen, R.J. (2000). The dynamics of a stressful encounter. In T.E.Higgins & A.W.Kruglanski (Eds.), Motivational science: Social and personality perspectives (pp. 111–127). New York: Psychology Press.
    Gage, A.J. (1998). Sexual activity and contraceptive use: the components of the decision making process. Studies in Family Planning, 29(2), 154–166. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/172156
    Galanter, M., Hayden, F., Castañeda, R. & Franco, H. (2005). Group therapy, self-help groups, and network therapy. In R.J.Frances & S.I.Miller (Eds.), Clinical textbook of addictive disorders (
    3rd
    edn, pp. 502–527). New York: Guilford Publications.
    Gardner, G.T. & Stern, P.C. (1996). Environmental problems and human behavior. Needham Heights: Allyn & Bacon.
    Geurts, S.A., Buunk, B.P. & Schaufeli, W.B. (1994a). Health complaints, social comparisons, and absenteeism. Work & Stress, 8, 220–234.
    Geurts, S.A., Buunk, B.P. & Schaufeli, W.B. (1994b). Social comparisons and absenteeism: a structural modeling approach. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 1871–1890. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1994.tb00565.x
    Geurts, S.A., Schaufeli, W.B. & Buunk, B.P. (1993). Social comparison, inequity, and absenteeism among bus drivers. European Work and Organizational Psychologist, 3, 191–203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09602009308408589
    Gibbons, F.X., Gerrard, M. & Lando, H.A. (1991). Social comparison and smoking cessation: The role of the ‘typical smoker’. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 27(3), 239–258. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031%2891%2990014-W
    Gillespie, R. (1991). Manufacturing knowledge: A history of the Hawthorne experiments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Graham, S., Weiner, B., Giuliano, T. & Williams, E. (1993). An attributional analysis of reactions to Magic Johnson. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23(12), 996–1010. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1993.tb01018.x
    Griffitin, W. (1970). Environmental effects on interpersonal affective behavior: Ambient effective temperature and attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 15(3), 240–244. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0029432
    Guagnano, G.A., Stern, P.C. & Dietz, T. (1995). Influences of attitude-behavior relationships: A natural experiment with curbside recycling. Environment and Behavior, 27(5), 699–718. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013916595275005
    Hardy, C. & Van Vugt, M. (2006). Nice guys finish first: The competitive altruism hypothesis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 1402–1413. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167206291006
    Heilman, M.E., Simon, M.C. & Repper, D.P. (1987). Intentionally favored, unintentionally harmed? Impact of sex-based preferential selection on self-perceptions and self-evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(1), 62–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.72.1.62
    Helweg-Larsen, M. & Collins, B.E. (1994). The UCLA Multidimensional Condom Attitudes Scale: Documenting the complex determinants of condom use in college students. Health Psychology, 13(3), 224–237. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.13.3.224
    Hewstone, M., Stroebe, W. & Jonas, K. (2005). Social Psychology (
    4th
    edn). Oxford: Blackwell.
    Hogg, M. & Turner, J.C. (1987). Intergroup behaviour, self-stereotyping and the salience of social categories. British Journal of Social Psychology, 26(4), 325–340. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1987.tb00795.x
    Hogg, M. & Vaughan, G. (2005). Social Psychology (
    4th
    edn). London: Prentice Hall.
    Huhmann, B.A. & Brotherton, T.P. (1997). A content analysis of guilt appeals in popular magazine advertisements. Journal of Advertising, 26(2), 35–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00913367.1997.10673521
    Jackson, D., Mannix, J. & Faga, P. (2005). Overweight and obese children: Mother’ strategies. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52(1), 6–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03558.x
    Joireman, J.A., Van Lange, P.A.M. and Van Vugt, M. (2004). Who cares about the environmental impact of cars? Those with an eye toward the future. Environment and Behavior, 36(2), 187–206.
    Karau, S.J. & Williams, K.D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(4), 681–706.
    Kashima, Y., Gallois, C. & McCamish, M. (1993). The theory of reasoned action and cooperative behaviour: It takes two to use a condom. British Journal of Social Psychology, 32(3), 227–239.
    Kenrick, D.T. & Johnson, G.A. (1979). Interpersonal attraction in aversive environments: A problem for the classical conditioning paradigm?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(4), 572–579.
    Kenrick, D.T., Neuberg, S.L. & Cialdini, R.B. (2005). Social psychology: Unraveling the mystery (3rd edn). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
    Kerr, N.L. (1989). Illusions of efficacy: The effects of group size on perceived efficacy in social dilemmas. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 25(4), 287–313.
    Kerr, N.L. & Tindale, S.R. (2004). Group performance and decision making. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 623–655.
    Kitayama, S., Markus, H.R., Matsumoto, H. & Norasakkunkit, V. (1997). Individual and collective processes in the construction of the self: Self-enhancement in the United States and self-criticism in Japan. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1245–1267.
    Kiviniemi, M.T., Snyder, M. & Omoto, A.M. (2002). Too many of a good thing? The effects of multiple motivations on stress, cost, fulfillment, and satisfaction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(6), 732–743.
    Kline, G.H., Pleasant, N.D., Whitton, S.W. & Markman, H.J. (2006). Understanding couple conflict. In A.L.Vangelesti & D.Perlman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of personal relationships (pp. 445–462). Cambridge: University Press.
    KlugerA.N. & DeNisi, A. (1998). Feedback interventions: Toward the understanding of a double-edged sword. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7(3), 67–72.
    Kok, G.J., Schaalma, H., De Vries, H., Parcel, G. & Paulussen, T. (1996). Social psychology and health education. In W.Stroebe & M.Hewstone (Eds.), European Review of Social Psychology (Vol. 7, pp. 241–282).
    Komorita, S.S. & Parks, C.D. (1994). Social dilemmas. Madison, IL: Brown & Benchmark.
    Koslowsky, M. & Krausz, M. (2002). Voluntary employee withdrawal and inattendance: A current perspective. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
    Kramer, G.P. & Kerr, N.L. (1989). Laboratory simulation and bias in the study of juror behavior: A methodological note. Law and Human Behaviour, 13(1), 89–99.
    LaPiere, R.T. (1934). Attitudes versus actions. Social Forces, 13, 230–237.
    Latané, B. & Darley, J. (1970). The unresponsive bystander: Why doesn't he help? New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
    Lerner, M.J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York: Plenum Press.
    Levy, S.R., Freitas, A.L. & Salovey, P. (2002). Construing action abstractly and blurring social distinctions: Implications for perceiving homogeneity among, but also empathizing with, and helping others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(5), 1224–1238.
    Lind, A.E. & Tyler, T.R. (1997). Procedural context and culture: Variation in the antecedents of procedural justice judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(4), 767–780.
    Linville, P., Fischer, G.W. & Fischhoff, B. (1993). AIDS risk perceptions and decision biases. In J.B.Pryor & G.D.Reeder (Eds.), The social psychology of HIV infection (pp 5–38). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    Locke, E.A. & Latham, G.P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57, 705–717.
    Luzzo, D.A., Hasper, P., Albert, K.A., Bibby, M.A. & Martinelli, E.A. (1999). Effects of self-efficacy-enhancing interventions on the math/science self-efficacy and career interests, goals, and actions of career undecided college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 46, 233–243.
    Lyas, J.K., Shaw, P.J. & Van Vugt, M. (2002). Recycling in a London borough: Perceptions, participation and barriers to the use of survival bags. Paper presented at the Proceedings of Waste. Stratford-upon-Avon, 24–26 September.
    Lyas, J.K., Shaw, P.J. & Van Vugt, M. (2004). Provision of feedback to promote householder' use of a kerbside recycling scheme: a social dilemma perspective. Journal of Solid Waste Technology and Management, 30, 7–18.
    Lyness, K.S. & Thompson, D.E. (2000). Climbing the corporate ladder: Do female and male executives follow the same route?Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(1), 86–101.
    Lynn, M. & Mynier, K. (1993). Effect of server posture on restaurant tipping. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23(8), 678–685.
    Lyubomirsky, S., Sheldon, K.M. & Schkade, D. (2005). Pursuing happiness: The architecture of sustainable change. Review of General Psychology, 9(2), 111–131.
    Maio, G.R. & Esses, V.M. (1998). The social consequences of affirmative action: Deleterious effects on perceptions of groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(1), 65–74.
    Manstead, A.S.R. & Hewstone, M. (1995). The Blackwell encyclopedia of social psychology. Cambridge: Basil Blackwell.
    Mantler, J.L. (2001). Judgements of responsibility for HIV-infection: A test of Weiner's social motivation theory in the context of the AIDS epidemic (immune efficiency). Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 61(9-B), 5057.
    Markus, H.R. & Kitayama, S. (2003). Culture, self, and the reality of the social. Psychological Inquiry, 14(3–4), 277–283.
    Martin, C.L. & Brennett, N. (1996). The role of justice judgments in explaining the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Group & Organization Management, 21(1), 84–104.
    Martin, G. & Pear, J. (2003). Behavior modification: what is it and how to do it. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
    McCalley, L.T. & Midden, C.J.H. (2002). Energy conservation through product-integrated feedback: The roles of goal-setting and social orientation. Journal of Economic Psychology, 23, 589–603.
    McGuire, W.J. (1985). Attitudes and attitude change. In G.Lindzey & E.Arouson, Handbook of social psychology (pp. 233–346). New York: Random House.
    Montada, L. (1992). Attribution of responsibility for losses and perceived injustice. In L.Montada, S.H.Fillip & M.Lerner (Eds.), Life crises and experiences of loss in adulthood (pp. 133–62). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    Montada, L. (2001). Solidarität mit der Dritten Welt/Solidarity with the third world. In H.W.Bierhoff & D.Fetchenhauer (Eds.), Solidarität: Konflikt, Umwelt, Dritte Welt/Solidarity: Conflict, Environment, Third World (pp. 65–92). Opladen: Leske & Budrich.
    Myers, D. (2005). Social psychology. Boston: McGraw-Hill College.
    O'Keefe, D.J. (1990). Persuasion: Theory and research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
    O'Keefe, D.J. (2002). Persuasion: theory and research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
    Omoto, A.M. & Snyder, M. (1995). Sustained helping without obligation: Motivation, longevity of service, and perceived attitude change among AIDS volunteers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(4), 671–686.
    Omoto, A.M., Snyder, M. & Martino, S.C. (2000). Volunteerism and the life course: Investigating age-related agendas for action. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 22(3), 181–197.
    Oskamp, S., Burkhardt, R.L., Schultz, W.P., Hurin, S. & Zelezny, L. (1998). Predicting three dimensions of residential curbside recycling: An observational study. Journal of Environmental Education, 29(2), 37–42.
    Oskamp, S. & Schultz, W.P. (2001). Attitudes and opinions (3rd edn). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
    Ovretveit, J. (2001). Action evaluation of health programmes and changes: a handbook for a user-focused approach. Abingdon: Radcliffe Publishing.
    Paulus, P.B. & Dzindolet, M.T. (1993). Social influence processes in group brainstorming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(4), 575–586.
    Paulussen, T., Kok, G. & Schaalma, H. (1994). Antecedents to adoption of classroom-based AIDS education in secondary schools. Health Education Research, 9, 485–496.
    Paulussen, T., Kok, G., Schaalma, H. & Parcel, G.S. (1995). Diffusion of AIDS curricula among Dutch secondary school teachers. Health Education Quarterly, 22(2), 227–243.
    Penner, L.A., Dovidio, J.F., Piliavin, J.A. & Schroeder, D.A. (2005). Find more like this prosocial behavior: Multilevel perspectives. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 365–392.
    Podell, S. & Archer, D. (1994). Do legal changes matter? The case of gun control laws. In M.Costanzo & S.Oskamp (Eds.), Violence and the law. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
    Prislin, R. & Wood, W. (2005). Social influence in attitudes and attitude change. In D.Albarracín, B.T.Johnson & M.P.Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp. 671–705). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
    Quine, L. (2002). Workplace bullying in junior doctors: Questionnaire survey. British Medical Journal, 324, 878–879.
    Reed, M.B. & Aspinwall, L.G. (1998). Self-affirmation reduces biased processing of health-risk information. Motivation and Emotion, 22, 99–132.
    Reis, H.T. & Judd, C.M. (2000). Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    Rogers, E.M. (1983). Diffusion of innovations. New York: The Free Press.
    Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
    Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings. In L.Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 173–220). New York: Academic.
    Rudolph, U., Roesch, S.C., Greitemeyer, T. & Weiner, B. (2004). A meta-analytic review of help giving and aggression from an attributional perspective: Contributions to a general theory of motivation. Cognition & Emotion, 18(6), 815–848.
    Rutter, D.R., Quine, L. & Albery, I.P. (1998). Perceptions of risk in motorcyclists: Unrealistic optimism, relative realism and predictions of behaviour. British Journal of Psychology, 89(4), 681–696.
    Schaalma, H., Kok, G. & Peters, L. (1993). Determinants of consistent condom use by adolescents: The impact of experience of sexual intercourse. Health Education Research, 8(2), 255–269.
    Schaller, M., Simpson, J.A. & Kenrick, D.T. (2006). Evolution and social psychology. New York: Psychology Press.
    Schultz, P.W. & Oskamp, S. (2000). Social psychology: An applied perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
    Schwartz, S.H. (1977). Normative influences of altruism. In L.Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 221–279). San Diego, CA: Academic.
    Sheeran, P., Abraham, C. & Orbell, S. (1999). Psychosocial correlates of heterosexual condom use: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125(1), 90–132.
    Sheeran, P. & Silverman, M. (2003). Evaluation of three interventions to promote workplace health and safety: evidence for the utility of implementation intentions. Social Science & Medicine, 56, 2153–2163.
    Sheeran, P. & Taylor, S. (1999). Predicting intentions to use condoms: A meta-analysis and comparison of the theories of reasoned action and planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29(8), 1624–1675.
    Sheeran, P., Webb, T.L. & Gollwitzer, P.M. (2005). The interplay between goal intentions and implementation intentions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(1), 87–98.
    Sherman, D.A.K., Nelson, L.D. & Steele, C.M. (2000). Do messages about health risks threaten the self? Increasing the acceptance of threatening health messages via self-affirmation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1046–1058.
    Silver, R.C., Wortman, C.B. & Crofton, C. (1990). The role of coping in support provision: The self-presentational dilemma of victims of life crises. In B.Sarason, I.Sarason & G.Pierce (Eds.), Social Support: An international view (pp. 397–426). New York: Wiley.
    Skinner, B.F. (1956). A case history in scientific method. American Psychologist, 11, 221–233.
    Smith, K.H. & Stutts, M.A. (2003). Effects of short-term cosmetic versus long-term health fear appeals in anti-smoking advertisements on the smoking behaviour of adolescents. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 3, 157–177.
    Smith, P.K., Talamelli, L., Cowie, H., Naylor, P. & Chauhan, P. (2004). Profiles of non-victims, escaped victims, continuing victims and new victims of school bullying. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 565–581.
    Sparks, P., Shepherd, R., Wieringa, N. & Zimmermans, N. (1995). Perceived behavioural control, unrealistic optimism and dietary change: An exploratory study. Appetite, 24(3), 243–255.
    Steadman, L. & Quine, L. (2004). Encouraging young males to perform testicular self-examination: A simple, but effective, implementation intentions intervention. British Journal of Health Psychology, 9, 479–487.
    Steiner, I.D. (1972). Group process and productivity. New York: Academic Press.
    Strecher, V.J., Seijts, G.H., Kok, G.J., Latham, G.P., Glasgow, R., DeVellis, B., Meertens, R.M. & Bulger, D.W. (1995). Goal setting as a strategy for health behavior change. Health Education Quarterly, 22, 190–200.
    Stroebe, W. & Stroebe, M.S. (1995). Social psychology and health. Belmont: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.
    Stürmer, S., Snyder, M., Kropp, A. & Siem, B. (2002). Empathy-motivated helping: The moderating role of group membership. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(7), 943–956.
    Sunnafrank, M. (1992). On debunking the attitude similarity myth. Communication Monographs, 59(2), 164–179.
    Sutton, S.R. & Eiser, J.R. (1984). The effect of fear-arousing communications on cigarette smoking: An expectancy value approach. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 7, 13–33.
    Swann, W.B., Stein-Seroussi, A. & Giesler, R.B. (1992). Why people self-verify. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 392–401.
    Taylor, P.J., Russ-Eft, D.F. & Chan, D.W.L. (2005). A meta-analytic review of Behavior Modeling Training. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 692–700.
    Thibaut, J.W. & Kelley, H.H. (1959). The social psychology of groups. New York: Wiley.
    Thompson, L.L. (2006). Negotiation: Overview of theory and research. In L.L.Thompson (Ed.), Negotiation theory and research (pp. 1–6). Madison: Psychosocial Press.
    Tyler, T.R. & Blader, S. (2002). The influence of status judgments in hierarchical groups: Comparing autonomous and comparative judgments about status. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89, 813–838.
    UNAIDS/WHO (2005). Aids epidemic update 2005.
    Van Baaren, R.B., Holland, R.W., Steenaert, B. & Van Knippenberg, A. (2003). Mimicry for money: Behavioral consequences of imitation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39(4), 393–398.
    Van Lange, P.A.M. & De Dreu, C.K.W. (2001). Social interaction: Cooperation and competition. In M.Hewstone & W.Stroebe (Eds.), Introduction to social psychology (pp. 341–370). Oxford: Blackwell.
    Van Vugt, M. (1998). The conflicts in modern society. Psychologist, 11(6), 289–292.
    Van Vugt, M. (1999). Solving natural resource dilemmas through structural change: The social psychology of metering water use. In M.Foddy, M.Smithson, S.Schneider & M.Hogg (Eds.), Resolving social dilemmas: Dynamic, structural, and intergroup aspects (pp. 121–133). New York: Psychology Press.
    Van Vugt, M. (2001). Community identification moderating the impact of financial incentives in a natural social dilemma: Water conservation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(11), 1440–1449.
    Van Vugt, M. (2006). Evolutionary origins of leadership and followership. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 354–371.
    Van Vugt, M., De Cremer, D. & Janssen, D. (2007). Gender differences in competition and cooperation: The male warrior hypothesis. Psychological Science, 18, 19–23.
    Van Vugt, M., Meertens, R.M. & Van Lange, P.A.M. (1995). Car versus public transportation? The role of social value orientations in a real-life social dilemma. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25(3), 258–278.
    Van Vugt, M. & Samuelson, C.D. (1999). The impact of personal metering in the management of a natural resource crisis: A social dilemma analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(6), 731–745.
    Van Vugt, M., Snyder, M., Tyler, T. & Biel, A. (2000). Cooperation in modern society: Promoting the welfare of communities, states, and organizations. London: Routledge.
    Van Vugt, M. & Van Lange, P.A.M. (2006). Psychological adaptations for prosocial behavior: The altruism puzzle. In M.Schaller, D.Kenrick & J.Simpson (Eds.), Evolution and social psychology (pp. 237–261). New York: Psychology Press.
    Van Vugt, M., Van Lange, P.A.M., Meertens, R.M. & Joireman, J.A. (1996). How a structural solution to a real-world social dilemma failed: A field experiment on the first carpool lane in Europe. Social Psychology Quarterly, 59(4), 364–374.
    Verplanken, B. & Aarts, H. (1999). Habit, attitude, and planned behaviour: Is habit an empty construct or an interesting case of automaticity?European Review of Social Psychology, 10, 101–134.
    Walker, F.H., Taylor, A.J. & Green, D.E. (1990). Attitudes to AIDS: A comparative analysis of a new and negative stereotype. Social Science & Medicine, 30(5), 549–552.
    Walker, I. & Smith, H.J. (2002). Relative deprivation: Specification, development, and integration. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    Watson, D., Clark, L.A. & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070.
    Weiner, B. (1990). Searching for the roots of applied attribution theory. In S.Graham & V.S.Folkes (Eds.), Attribution theory: Applications to achievement, mental health, and interpersonal conflict (pp. 1–13). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    Weiner, B. (1993). AIDS from an attributional perspective. In J.B.Pryor & G.D.Reeder (Eds.), The social psychology of HIV infection (pp. 287–302). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    Weiner, B., Perry, R.P. & Magnusson, J. (1988). An attributional analysis of reactions to stigmas. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55(5), 738–748.
    Weinstein, N. (2003). Exploring the links between risk perceptions and preventive health behavior. In J.Suls & K.Wallston (Eds.), Social psychological foundations of health and illness. Malden: Blackwell.
    Weinstein, N.D. & Klein, W.M. (1996). Unrealistic optimism: Present and future. Journal of Social & Clinical Psychology, 15(1), 1–8.
    Wheeler, L. & Suls, J. (2005). Social comparison and self-evaluations of competence. In A.J.Elliot & C.S.Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 566–578). New York: Guilford Publications.
    Wood, J.V., Taylor, S.E. & Lichtman, R.R. (1985). Social comparison in adjustment to breast cancer. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 1169–83.

    • Loading...
Back to Top

Copy and paste the following HTML into your website