Applied
Social
Psychology
1. Introduction
to
applied
social
psychology
Social
psychology
is
a
basic
science
aimed
at
understanding
human
social
behavior
and
the
motivations,
cogn
itions
and
emotions
related
to
such
behavior.
Applied
scientists
should
focus
their
efforts
on
aspects
of
a
soci
al
problem
where
they
would
have
the
most
impact
in
improving
the
relevant
problems.
This
basic
principle
should
be
taken
into
account
when
deciding
which
problem
to
study,
which
variables
to
concentrate
on
and
the
decision
on
what
kind
of
interventions
to
use
in
managing
the
problem.
Social
psychology
may
be
define
d
as
the
scientific
field
that
seeks
to
understand
the
nature
and
causes
of
individual
behavior
and
thought
in
social
situations.
Applied
social
psychology
may
be
defined
as
the
systematic
application
of
social
psychologi
cal
constructs,
principles,
theories,
intervention
techniques,
research
methods
and
research
findings
to
unde
rstand
or
ameliorate
social
problems.
Constructs
are
the
building
blocks
of
psychological
principles
and
theor
ies.
A
construct
refers
to
a
clearly
defined
individual
(psychological)
characteristic
that
is
generally
latent
and
thus
not
directly
observable,
although
it
can
be
assessed
through
interviews
or
questionnaires
(attitude,
val
ues,
social
norms).
A
principle
is
a
statement
of
how
a
psychological
process
works.
Principles
describe
basic
processes
by
which
human
think,
feel
and
act:
·∙ The
foot-‐in-‐the-‐door
technique:
making
a
small
initial
request,
followed
by
a
larger
related
request
within
a
short
period
of
time
·∙ Cognitive
dissonance:
uncomfortable
tension
that
can
result
from
having
two
conflicting
thoughts
at
the
same
time,
or
from
engaging
in
behavior
that
conflicts
with
one’s
beliefs
or
attitudes
·∙ Availability
heuristic:
tendency
to
judge
the
likelihood
or
frequency
of
an
event
by
the
ease
with
which
relevant
instances
come
to
mind
Basic
and
applied
social
psychology
differ
in
two
important
respects:
Basic
social
psychologist
are
particularly
interested
in
developing
and
testing
theories,
while
applied
social
ps
ychologist
focus
on
understanding
and
resolving
practical
problems.
Basic
social
psychologists
may
conduct
s
tudies
merely
out
of
scientific
curiosity
about
some
phenomenon,
while
applied
social
psychologists
are
spec
ifically
trying
to
contribute
towards
solving
social
problems.
In
the
end,
applied
social
psychologists
will
focus
their
efforts
on
the
improvement
of
people’s
quality
of
life.
They
do
not
necessarily
have
to
conduct
studies
themselves
to
learn
more
about
phenomena
causing
the
problem
at
hand.
Basic
social
psychologists
tend
to
follow
a
deductive
approach.
They
start
with
a
particular
theory,
and
exami
ne
to
what
extent
the
theory
may
be
helpful
in
understanding
various
types
of
social
behavior.
Applied
social
psychologists
tend
to
follow
an
inductive
approach.
They
start
from
a
specific
social
problem,
and
examine
t
o
what
extent
various
theories
may
help
to
understand
this
specific
problem,
and
which
theory
provided
the
best
explanation
of
the
particular
behavior
causing
the
problems.
Both
are
interested
in
developing
and
testing
theories,
both
use
scientific
methods,
both
are
motivated
by
th
e
same
goals
of
science
(description,
prediction,
causality
and
explanation)
and
both
include
similar
factors
p
redicting
cognitions
and
behavior
in
their
studies.
The
term
science
refers
to
two
things:
(1)
reliance
on
scien
tific
methods,
and
(2)
guidance
by
the
core
values
of
science.
A
core
set
of
values
should
be
adopted
to
qualif
y
a
study
as
scientific
in
nature:
accuracy,
objectivity,
skepticism
and
open-‐mindedness.
, 2. The
use
of
theory
in
applied
social
psychology
Theories
have
three
major
roles
in
applied
social
psychology:
(1)
they
help
make
sense
of
social
behavior
(un
derstand),
(2)
they
guide
and
inform
the
development
of
interventions
intended
to
address
a
social
problem
(solve)
and
(3)
they
can
be
tested
for
practicality
and
usefulness
in
the
real
world
(evaluate).
The
rational
choice
theory
maintains
that
individuals
are
motivated
to
act
in
ways
that
promote
their
self-‐int
erests.
The
theory
contains
a
number
of
constructs
–
most
notably
costs
and
rewards.
Theories
regarding
social
thinking
typically
describe
how
people
appraise
themselves
and
their
social
world.
I
t
includes
the
ways
we
gather,
organize
and
interpret
social
information.
From
this
area
of
study
we
have
the
ories
regarding
attributions,
attitudes,
self-‐concept
and
schemas.
Social
thinking
Social
influence
Social
relationships
Focus
of
theories
Describe
how
people
ap Describe
how
the
social
Describe
what
makes
pe
praise
themselves
and
th environment
changes
an ople
relate
to
each
other
eir
social
world
individual’s
thoughts,
fe
positively
and
negatively
elings
and/or
behavior
Types
of
theories
Attributions,
cognitive
di Obedience,
compliance,
Ingroup/outgroup
biases
ssonance
theory,
attitud elaboration
likelihood
m ,
stereotypes,
prejudice,
es,
theory
of
planned
be odel
discrimination,
contact
t
havior
heory,
prosocial
behavio
r
Application
of
theories
To
desging
tools
or
inter To
design
interventions
t To
design
interventions
t
ventions
that
describe,
p hat
promote
specific
beh hat
improve
social
relati
redict,
or
change
social
a aviors
onships
ppraisals
The
attribution
theory,
as
Heider
outlined,
provides
a
system
for
understanding
how,
when
and
why
people
make
the
attributions
they
do.
One
of
the
basic
findings
from
attribution
theory
was
that
individuals
typically
attribute
their
own
poor
behavior
to
external
causes,
and
the
poor
behavior
of
other
to
internal
causes
(fun
damental
attribution
error).
Current
attitude
theory
suggests
that
changing
attitudes
typically
does
not
prod
uce
a
corresponding
change
in
behavior.
Festinger’s
cognitive
dissonance
theory
suggests
that
it
is
psycholo
gically
uncomfortable
when
our
actions
and
our
attitudes
are
not
congruent.
The
theory
deals
with
the
relati
onship
between
a
person’s
attitudes,
beliefs
and
behavior
about
himself
or
his
surroundings.
The
theory
of
p
lanned
behavior
emerged
as
a
framework
for
understanding
the
relationship
between
attitudes
and
behavio
rs.
According
to
this
theory,
the
best
predictor
of
an
individual’s
behavior
is
his/her
intention
to
act,
which
in
turn
is
caused
by
three
constructs:
attitude,
subjective
norms
and
perceived
behavioral
control.
Unlike
imitation,
conformity
is
generally
a
conscious
process.
Conformity
occurs
when
a
person
changes
his
or
her
behavior
to
be
consistent
with
real
or
imagined
social
expectations.
Whereas
pressure
to
conform
is
g
enerally
subtle
and
unstated,
compliance
results
from
a
plainly
stated
request.
Robert
Cialdini
and
Noah
Gol
dstein
theorize
that
people
are
motivated
to
comply
with
a
direct
request
when
compliance
results
in
individ
ual
goals
being
fulfilled.
There
are
three
possible
goals:
·∙ A
person
can
reduce
ambiguity
in
a
situation
and
acquire
a
more
accurate
sense
of
reality
(accuracy).
Information
about
the
correct
course
of
action
can
come
from
other
people
in
the
situation
(social
norms),
perceived
authority
figures
or
even
one’s
mood.
·∙ A
person
can
develop
or
preserve
meaningful
social
relationships
(affiliation).
A
person
is
more
likely
to
comply
with
a
request
that
will
lead
to
enhanced
relationship
or
preserve
social
harmony.
, ·∙ A
person
can
improve
his
or
her
self-‐concept,
or
maintain
a
favorable
self-‐concept.
A
person
is
more
likely
to
comply
with
a
request
that
is
consistent
with
his
or
her
self-‐concept.
When
behavioral
change
is
in
response
to
an
explicit
demand,
we
turn
to
theories
of
obedience.
One
particul
arly
influential
theoretical
perspective
is
the
elaboration
likelihood
model
(ELM,
Richarc
Petty
and
John
Carc
ioppo).
The
basic
tenet
of
the
ELM
is
that
there
are
different
routes
to
persuasion:
the
central
route
and
the
peripheral
route.
The
central
route
is
characterized
by
high
elaboration,
the
peripheral
route
by
low
elaborat
ion.
While
persuasion
can
occur
through
the
peripheral
route,
it
tends
to
be
weak,
temporary
and
easily
cha
ngeable.
By
contrast,
persuasion
generated
through
the
central
route
is
likely
to
be
stronger,
longer
lasting
a
nd
generally
resistant
to
counter-‐attack.
The
key
to
understanding
when
stereotypes
will
result
in
prejudice
appears
to
be
motivation.
An
intrinsically
motivated
person
values
or
believes
it
is
personally
important
not
to
be
a
prejudices
person.
In
contrast,
a
pe
rson
can
be
extrinsically
motivated
to
avoid
prejudice
when
they
do
not
want
to
appear
prejudiced
to
other
people.
Contact
theory
maintains
that
contact
between
groups
will
only
result
in
reduced
prejudice
if
four
fe
atures
are
present:
equal
status,
common
goals,
intergroup
cooperation
and
institutional
support.
There
are
relationship-‐mending
prosocial
behaviors,
which
repair
and
restore
relationships.
On
the
other
ha
nd,
relationship-‐enhancing
prosocial
behaviors
promote,
develop
and
sustain
relationships.
The
social
impa
ct
theory
has
several
fundamental
principles:
diffusion
of
responsibility
(as
the
seize
of
the
group
increases,
the
probability
of
any
single
individual
taking
action
decreases)
and
pluralistic
ignorance
(look
to
others
as
a
source
of
information
when
interpreting
a
situation).
Despite
the
many
advantages
of
utilizing
theory
in
applied
work,
there
are
also
a
number
of
important
consi
derations.
First,
not
all
problem
are
identical.
Related
to
the
issue
of
complexity
of
the
problem
is
the
comple
xity
of
the
theory.
Some
theories
are
quite
narrow
in
scope,
focusing
on
a
single
process
or
small
set
of
activ
ating
circumstances.
A
third
challenge
is
that
prediction
and
explanation
are
not
equally
attainable.
A
fourth
challenge
in
using
theory
in
applied
work
is
connecting
the
principles
and
construct
defined
in
the
theory
to
t
he
situation
in
the
real
world.
While
basic
research
focuses
primarily
on
the
process
of
discovery
and
the
development
of
theoretical
mode
ls,
applied
research
has
focused
on
using
existing
theories
to
solve
social
problems.
The
work
of
applied
soci
al
psychologists
is
better
characterized
as
use
inspired.
In
his
book
Pasteur’s
Quadrant,
Donald
Stokes
argues
that
any
line
of
inquiry
can
be
classified
along
two
dimensions:
quest
for
fundamental
understanding
(left),
a
nd
consideration
of
the
usefulness
of
the
research
findings
(top):
No
Yes
Yes
Pure
basic
research Use-‐inspired
basic
res
(Bohr)
earch
(Pasteur)
No
Pure
applied
research
(Edison)