Social Psychology and Human Behavior - Essay Example

Social Psychology and Human Behavior Social Psychology and Human Behavior Introduction The performance of people differs with respect to different factors such as the intelligence potential, the ambitions of an individual, and the support from the external environment. People have different definitions to issues that positively or negatively influence their individual performance. According to some social psychology scholars such as Cast and Burke (2002), the presence of people helps significantly in improving the performance of an individual. However, the measure of the level to which they help in improving the performance is not defined. The nature of human behavior tends to be confusing, and this follows the realization that some individuals perform excellently in presence of others while others tend to be naïve, which leads to poor performance in presence of others. This implies that human behaviour in social situation is influenced by other people, and more importantly the social event in which the performance is expected to be measured. This material will focus at investigating why the presence of others improves individual performance in some situations but inhibits it in others. This will be achieved through integration of various social psychology theories such as drive theory, attribution theory, cognitive dissonance, elaboration likelihood model and self-verification theory among others. Observational learning or social learning and self-perception theories will be considered as they help in measuring the performance of an individual with comparison with other people. Social comparison theory and social penetration theories are other theories that will be included in the study to ascertain that individual behavior can be positively or negatively be influenced by the presence of others. The Issue and Analysis Human behavior has been found to be affected by different issues such as the environment, the individual perception of people about different situations or events and pride. People have different view point on the issues that affect their individual performance (Sison, 2008). Just to cite a few examples, it can be confirmed that athletes and bicycle races tend to be faster than when they are in environments where there are no people to cheer them up (Murray, Holmes, Dolderman & Griffin, 2000). This claim is supported by the self- verification theory, which focuses on the desire of people to be positively known and be recognized by others. The athletes or sport professionals tend to improve their performance in order to emerge winners and be recognized. This is a cognitive attribute because the feeling of desiring to be recognized due to positive contribution comes from the mind (Vaughan & Hogg, 2011). Hence, as argued by scholars who support the cognitive dissonance theory, people tend to become less productive and the performance lowers in situations where they fail to attain their dreams, especially where comparison is done. A student taking a course alone tends to incorporate less effort in reading or understanding the concepts in the course or unit as compared to a student who is competing with several other individuals in the same course. Studies have revealed that presence of competition or availability of other parties that are interested in the performance of an individual stimulates the cognitive and physical functionality of an individual, thus enhancing the performance (Swann & Bosson, 2008). There is no individual who wishes to be the last in a competition, and this triggers one to work extra-hard to be among the best. However, in situations where there is no competition, the efforts that one exerts are relatively low. The drive theory confirms this argument, in the sense that it speculates that the existence of audience causes arousal which in return establishes overriding or typical responses in the framework of the event (Forsyth, 2006). This is an indication that when there is presence of people, anticipating to be addressed by a speaker, the confidence of the speakers increases with increase in the number of multitude (Wood, Heimpel, Newby-Clark & Ross, 2005). One tends to be more prepared when making a presentation to large congregation as compared to when making a presentation to a single individual. This is because the presence of people causes stimulation and encouragement, which helps an individual to think more critically and deliver extraordinarily, sometimes, beyond what one might be prepared to deliver in such a situation. Considering the understanding established in the observational learning or the social learning theory, people tend to imitate and apply some of the behavioral traits they extract from other people. Taking young children as an example, they learn various behaviors from the people they interact with and try to use what they learn in their own life (Gill & Swann, 2004). Relying on the positive behavioral attributes such as intelligence and confidence, children who interact with intellectuals and scholars tend to develop a higher thinking potential or Intelligence Quotient (IQ) as compared to those who interact with people with little hope for the future. In the same way, children who interact with confident individuals, and are introduced to situations that require confidence such as singing in church or participating in activities such as playing, dancing and debating tend to perform better due to presence of other parties (Kassin, Fein & Markus, 2008). This implies that social learning is made more effective and reliable due to presence others. On the contrary, when a child is punished in presence of others, he/she may develop an avoidance behavior or a negative perception towards the punisher and the people present during the negative reinforcement. Such children may develop belligerent, harsh and aggressive traits, and the performance of such a child may decline immensely due to the mentality that develops in the mind of the young child. This is an indication that in one way or another, presence of others may influence the performance of an individual depending on the situation (Gosling, 2008). Social comparison theory on the other hand tries to present the argument that people gain information about themselves and establish inferences that are significant to self-esteem. According to the scholars who advocate for the social comparison theory, this is achieved through making comparison to relevant parties. If a singer wants to know the nature of the voice they produce while singing before making a recording, they tend to rely on the suggestions offered by others rather than what they perceive of themselves (David, 2007). Politicians become proud of themselves not because of the policies that they offer to people in their campaigns, but because of the good comments that they receive from their supporter. This is an indication that they tend to get confidence and positive reinforcement due to the influence they receive from other people. In most cases, presence of other positively motivates individuals to act or respond in a manner that is advanced as compared to when they are alone. Social comparison theory clearly describes such behavior in the sense that it argues that when people receive positive reinforcement from others, they tend to elevate their self-esteem which consequently boasts their performance. The social identity theory is another fundamental resource that can be used to illustrate the effects of presence of others on the individual performance or behavior of people. According to Henri Tajfel who devised the theory, the attitudes and behavior of people is affected by the categorization that is done in specified situations. The perceptions that people have on some issues or events differs depending on the group to which one is placed (Cassidy, Ziv, Mehta & Feeney, 2003). Considering an example of the polls that are done on the political contestants, the one who is ranked the top from research and predictions tends to be more confident of winning in the real elections than the individual ranked last (Moscovici & Markova, 2006). Hence, the association of people in such cases influences the perception and viewpoints of the contestants, in the sense that they may improve their campaigning strategies to the best or withdraw. According to psychological scholars, under-confidence and low self-esteem are some of the behavioral traits that negatively affect individuals when the influence of other parties is present. Individuals who have low self-esteem tend to perform poorly, just like those who are under-confident when presence of others is availed. Instead of getting encouragement from the people, they behave as if presence of people discourages and demoralizes them, and this negatively affects their general performance (Leary, 2007). However, according to the terror management theory, human transience causes existential trepidation and fear, implying that human behavior exists as a cushion against this trepidation. In order to fight fear and intimidation, which lowers self-confidence and decreases self-esteem, the theory suggests that people need to adapt some behaviors which foster confidence and high self-esteem. These are with inclusion of increasing interaction with various environments and surroundings that tend to motivate them and cause encouragement to their lives. This argument is supported by the evolutionary psychology which proposes that human traits tendencies are inherited from one individual to another, but can be modified through interaction and involvement of other people (Anderson, 2003). The perception that people have towards different phenomenon can be diversified through involvement of eternal forces which are with inclusion of people with positive motivational motives towards one another. Studies have revealed that people are dependent on one another, and this is irrespective of the reality that some influence the behavior of other negatively and hence the performance (Mischel & Shoda, 1999). Conclusion In the main, there are different arguments that have been offered regarding the influence of other people on individual’s performance. The issue of why the presence of others positively or negatively contributes to growth, development and social construction of behavior has been debated by psychologists and scholars specialized in human behavior (Dobbs, 2007). It can be concluded that the scenario or situation to which others are involves and the way they involve themselves in those situations contribute differently to the performance of an individual. As discussed, this claim is supported by different social psychology theories such as the self-verification theory which stresses that the desire that people have to be known and recognized by others (Cast & Burke, 2002). Thus, the social, economic, education, self-esteem, confidence and fear of the unknown are some of the issues that contribute to the difference in performance when other people are involved. References Anderson, C. (2003). The Sage Handbook of Social Psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. pp. 8–9, 11. Cassidy, J., Ziv, Y., Mehta, T. G., & Feeney, B. C. (2003). Feedback Seeking in Children and Adolescents: Associations With Self-Perceptions, Representations, and Depression. Child Development, 74, 612-628. Cast, A. D. & Burke, P. J. (2002). A Theory of Self-Esteem. Social Forces, 80, 1041-1068. David, G. M. (2007). Psychology (8 ed.). Worth. Dobbs, D. (2007). "The Gregarious Brain". The New York Times. Forsyth, D.R (2006). Group dynamics. Belmont, CA: Thomson-Wadworth. Gill, M. J., & Swann, W.B., Jr. (2004). On what it means to know someone: A matter of pragmatics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 405-418. Gosling, S. (2008). Snoop: What Your Stuff Says About You. New York: Basic. Kassin, S., Fein, S., & Markus, H. (2008). Social Psychology (7 ed.). Boston, NY: Houghton Mifflin Company. Leary, M. R. (2007). Motivational and emotional aspects of the self. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 317-344. Mischel, W., & Shoda, Y. (1999). Integrating dispositions and processing dynamics within a unified theory of personality: The Cognitive Affective Personality System (CAPS). In L. A. Pervin & O. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research 2. New York: Guilford, pp.197-218. Moscovici, S. & Markova, I. (2006). The Making of Modern Social Psychology. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Murray, S. L., Holmes, J. G., Dolderman, D., & Griffin, D. W. (2000). What the motivated mind sees: Comparing friends perspectives to married partners views of each other. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 600-620. Sison, E. L. A (2008). The dynamics of persuasion. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum. Swann, W.B., Jr. & Bosson, J. (2008). Identity negotiation: A Theory of Self and Social Interaction. In O. John, R. Robins, & L. Pervin (Eds.) Handbook of Personality Psychology: Theory and Research I (pp. 448-471). New York: Guilford. Vaughan, G.M. & Hogg, M.A. (2011). Social Psychology, 6th Edition. Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Australia Wood, J. V., Heimpel, S. A., Newby-Clark, I., & Ross, M. (2005). Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory: Self-esteem differences in the experience and anticipation of success. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 764-780. Read More