Application and Relevance of Social Psychology Concepts - Essay Example

Social Psychology: Application and Relevance of Concepts Introduction Social psychology is an area of study which seeks to explain how individual’s behaviors are influenced by the presence of other people (Kruglanski & Stroebe, 2012). For the purpose of understanding and application of social psychology concept in real life, this essay analyzes a real life case in the light of concepts and theories of social psychology. The main topic addressed in this paper revolves around attribution theory. The essay provides summary of the chosen article and relates the social psychology theories and concepts to the details provided in the case. The case chosen for the purpose is titled as “McDonald’s Targeted in Obesity Law Suit” appeared in the word edition of BBC news on 22 November, 2002. Case Summary The case under review is a lawsuit filed on behalf of many obese teenagers who accuse McDonald for being responsible for their obesity. The claimants are of the opinion that McDonalds have hidden or misrepresented the real nutritional information about the food they serve. The claimants also seem to put the blame of being unaware of health issues and risks related to regular fast food consumption. On the other hand, McDonald defends its position providing that everyone is aware of the health risks and controversy of fast food as it relates to health of people. Moreover, McDonald provides that the specific claims against McDonald seem absurd as it is not a single intake that causes obesity; it is a process that takes time and regularity of unhealthy practices (BBC, 2002). Reflection and Relation of Case to Social Psychology Concepts and Theories The conflict that is addressed in the above mentioned case brings in two different realities out of a situation. The social psychological view of ‘suspicion’ relates to such scenarios whereby the perceiver takes two different stances at the same time to evaluate the motives of others’ behaviors (Sinaceur, 2010). The exact motives and deriving forces remain unknown but the concept of suspicion opens the wider span for evaluation and making judgments about the deriving factors of a particular act. The distinction created to identify the driving forces to understand if the behavior is derived due to internal or external factors, however, remain questionable (DeLamater, 2006). The factors may work together to result in a specific behavior, however, it is also possible that internal factors are more dominant in creating the specified behavior and vice versa (Fein, 2001). The case in view provides ample room for suspicion to reduce the chances of correspondence errors if the judge feels the need. In the field of social psychology, attribution theory specifically concerns with human being’s perceived underlying reasons for their own behaviors and/or of other people (Nebraska Symposium on Motivation., & University of Nebraska, 1954). The theory provides two possible underlying justifications people provide to reason their own or others’ behavior as: ‘the situation’ or ‘the self’. When people attribute the behavior as a component of the situation or the environment, they tend to relate the achievements or failures to the external attributes, while when they relate the results to their personality traits, personal failures or personal efforts, they take responsibility of their actions or relate the results to internal attributes (Feldman 1986). Keeping attribution theory in view, neither McDonald’s nor the Plaintiff/claimants accept the results being derived from the internal attributes i.e. personal responsibility is neglected. Both the parties to the case are putting the blame on external factors and situations. When analyzing the situation from McDonald’s perspective, it attempts to negate the fact of obesity being caused by their food or their food ‘alone’. An evidence of this can be seen in the statement of McDonalds lawyer Brad Lerman that "People dont go to sleep thin and wake up obese". This reflects on the idea that McDonalds cannot be directly and severely accused of the rising obesity in the public. The statement reflects on the issue of obesity being a continuous and long process that involves many parties and many factors. Hence, external attributes are said to apply here in defending McDonald’s position in the case. On the other hand, the claimants are of the opinion that McDonald’s is responsible and must be held liable for the loss or damage caused to their health. They believe that McDonald “have deliberately withheld information." Hence, the blame game goes on between the parties to the case. According to Correspondent Inference theory, logical assumptions can be made about an individual if his actions are unexpected as per the social environment, is based on free and unrestricted choices and has effects that are diverse or unspecific (Vaughan & Hogg, 2005). In other words, conclusions about people are often made based on the results of the review of the context of their behaviors. As explained by Sanderson (2009), the real characters of a person can only be uncovered by the analysis of the behavioral evidence about them. However, all these should be pegged on the level of choice, effects and expectedness of the behavior. This theory is so relevant in examining the real characters of the people involved in this case. It can be applied in explaining how the degree of choice enabled them to make decisions and behave in a manner they did. A logical conclusion on the exact behaviors of the teenagers can be explained using this theory. The teenagers, a long side their parents, had to lodge their complaints against McDonald because of the choices that they had. First, the homeless teenager had to use the company’s products on daily basis because it was the only choice. If there were other alternatives, he would not have bothered to buy food from the company’s restaurants. Reflection on Biases and Errors in Relation to the Case The Fundamental Attribution Error (FAE) provides more weight to the dispositional attributes of a person deriving certain behaviors rather than the situational factors (Landridge & Butt, 2004). The error is based on the perceptual experiences of a person or a group that enable them to neglect the situational or environmental attributes that may have caused or contributed toward certain behaviors (Synder, Lopez & Pedrotti, 2011). A closer look to the case provides its relation and close association with the concept of fundamental attribution error or correspondence bias. McDonald’s lawyer, Brad Lerman, seems to have admitted that dispositional attributes enabled the claimants or their relatives to the harms of obesity and not the food offered at McDonald. The lawyer, in his defense, states that "The understanding and comprehension of what hamburgers and French fries do has been with us for a long, long time." This certainly directs the attention toward a personal choice that the customers made at McDonalds for eating unhealthy food. It must be noted that the controversy prevailing around the advertisement of unhealthy food and specific targeting techniques are neglected to protect their position. Hence, the court’s decision in favor of McDonald is yet another representation of fundamental attribution error focusing on dispositional attributes and neglecting the factors that prevail widely in the society affecting the choices people make and the intake they choose. Another study that researched the topic of perceptual effects that play a vital role in eating behaviors and the obesity prejudice and blame among the obese participants (Pearl & Lebowitz, 2014). Hence, the perception being an internal attribute seems to overrule the environmental or external factors to be held responsible for personal choices of obese people on eating or dietary behaviors. Social psychology provides a number of biases people rely on when defending their position. In this regard, the claimants provided an overwhelming reliance on external factors for their obesity which perfectly exemplifies ‘self-serving bias’. Nevid (2009) explains that people attribute their success to dispositional factors but explain their failures away to protect and increase the levels of their self-esteem. Actor-observer bias is another possible bias that resulted in the case being settled in McDonalds favor. The actor-observer bias occurs when a person takes a position of either an actor or an observer to form opinion and perception about the behavior (Pastorino & Doyle-Portillo, 2011). When a person is the actor, he tends to put the blame of any negative outcomes to the situational characteristics surrounding the issue. On the other hand, when the same person takes on the stance of an observer, he is more likely to attribute the failure to the person involved (Nisbett, 1971). Hence, when resolving the issue, judge’s decision might have been affected by the actor-observer bias. But why does such a difference arises in the first place? Pastorino & Doyle-Portillo (2013) provide a rather rational and reasonable argument that when a person is an outsider to the situation, he observes rationally and is well aware of how the involved parties behaved or reacted, while when he is an actor to the situation, he fails to observe or rationally analyze own behavior and is left with no choice but to put the blame on external factors like others, the situation, luck etc. Baron and Byrne (1976) reflects on the case by providing views on obesity and its relation with fast-food restaurants’ deliberate efforts to attract consumers toward an unhealthy lifestyle. He exposes the proponents of McDonalds and other fast-food chains with the reasoning that food is not addictive and is under a consumer’s control to take it or reject it, hence, the consumers having any effect on their health should take full responsibility of their actions. On the other hand, proponents are of the opinion that McDonalds is specifically targeting children and youngsters leading to the rising obesity and the related health issues. They further argue that McDonalds hides nutritional benefits and ingredient information which the consumers, if known, might not opt to purchase and consume (Baron & Byrne, 1976). The concept of predictive attribution as provided by social psychology reflects on the attributions made in a manner so as to predict future events (Crisp and Turner, 2007). The case provides that other “fast-food companies fear that it could trigger a rash of further suits” resulting in more payouts. This indeed is not based on the conceptual arrangement of predictive attribution. However, further microscopic view put such companies in pessimistic participants of the industry being focusing on the worst case scenario. Conclusion The attribution theory is applicable to the scenario with its two-dimensional provisions including external and internal factors. The case provides evidences of both its dimensions on the involved parties. The biases and errors in judgment, as the case provides, relate to the position that decision maker holds (i.e. actor-observer bias) and fundamental attribution error (i.e. high focus on dispositional attributes) when making judgments. In addition, the judgment may be flawed due to focus on specific information and deliberately leaving some information unnoticed or unused when making decisions. The case provides sufficient information that could be analyzed using social psychology concepts. For instance, the concept of predictive attribution could be applied if the case was critically examined. In addition, the case study provides knowledge and deeper understanding of applicability of social psychology concepts in real life scenarios. The concepts highlight the need to critically evaluating a scenario, understanding one’s position (i.e. observer or actor) and the biases and errors in making judgments to avoid wrong decisions and flawed understanding of an event and its consequences. When dealing with such cases, there is a need to include relevant information that is not mentioned like the controversy of junk-food advertisement directly related to the increase in obesity rates among children. In addition, further reflection on how McDonalds and other fast-food chains are targeting young generation using specific mediums and timings when youngsters come across the marketing message easily. Such cases are a source of observational learning and may aid in gaining more knowledge about real life cases. References Baron, R. A., & Byrne, D. (1976). Social psychology: Understanding human interaction. Boston BBC,. (2002). BBC NEWS | Americas | McDonalds targeted in obesity lawsuit. News.bbc.co.uk. Retrieved 6 April 2015, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2502431.stm Crisp, R. J., & Turner, R. N. (2007). Essential social psychology. London: SAGE. DeLamater, J. D. (2006). Handbook of social psychology. New York: Springer. Fein, S. (January 01, 2001). Beyond the Fundamental Attribution Era?. Psychological Inquiry, 12, 16-20. Feldman, R. S. (1986). The Social psychology of education: Current research and theory. Cambridge [Cambridgeshire: Cambridge University Press. Kruglanski, A. W., & Stroebe, W. (2012). Handbook of the history of social psychology. New York: Psychology Press. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation., & University of Nebraska (Lincoln campus). (1954). Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Lincoln, Neb.: University of Nebraska Press. Nevid, J. S. (2009). Psychology: Concepts and applications. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co. Pastorino, E., & Doyle-Portillo, S. (2011). What is psychology? Essentials. Australia: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Pastorino, E., & Doyle-Portillo, S. (2013). What is psychology?. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Cengage Learning. Jones, E. E., & Nisbett, R. E. (1971). The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. New York: General Learning Press. Pearl, R. L., & Lebowitz, M. S. (January 01, 2014). Beyond personal responsibility: effects of causal attributions for overweight and obesity on weight-related beliefs, stigma, and policy support. Psychology & Health, 29, 10, 1176-91. Sanderson, C. A. (2009). Social psychology. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley. Sinaceur, M. (May 01, 2010). Suspending judgment to create value: Suspicion and trust in negotiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 3, 543-550. Snyder, C. R., Lopez, S. J., & Pedrotti, J. T. (2011). Positive psychology: The scientific and practical explorations of human strengths. Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE. Vaughan, G. M., & Hogg, M. A. (2005). Introduction to social psychology. Frenchs Forest, N.S.W: Pearson/Prentice Hall. Read More