Difficulty: Introductory | Prerequisites: None (this is where the course begins)
Social psychology sits at the intersection of individual thought and social context. These first two weeks lay the groundwork: what social psychology studies, why it qualifies as science, and the methods it uses to test claims about human behaviour. Week 1 introduces the discipline's core assumptions, including the idea that situations shape behaviour far more than most people expect. Week 2 covers the scientific method, research designs, and the ethical and institutional pressures that influence what gets published. You should come away understanding why rigorous methodology matters and where folk intuition falls short.
Social psychology is the scientific study of how people's thoughts, feelings and behaviours are shaped by the real or imagined presence of others. It treats the situation as at least as important as the person. Studying it properly requires controlled experiments, awareness of cognitive biases, and a healthy scepticism toward both folk intuition and published results.
Folk psychology
Our everyday tendency to form intuitive theories about ourselves and those around us, to predict or explain what they do. In simple terms, this is the "common sense" psychology everyone uses before they learn any science.
Scientific psychology
The systematic, formalised study of thought and behaviour using the methods and institutions of empirical science. Think of it as the disciplined counterpart to folk psychology.
Social psychology
The scientific study of how people's thoughts, feelings and behaviours are influenced by the actual, imagined, or implied presence of others. It insists we view individuals through the lens of social interaction.
The physical stance
Treating things as objects that only have physical properties (mass, shape, velocity). In simple terms, you are looking at what something is made of, nothing more.
The design stance
Treating things as systems capable of specific functions. You focus on what something does rather than what it is made of.
The intentional stance
Treating things as agents with goals, beliefs and feelings. This is how we typically think about other people in everyday life.
Reductive materialism
The philosophical position that nothing but physically accountable matter and energy needs to be considered when explaining phenomena.
Construal
The assumed context through which a situation is interpreted. Two people can face the same event and construe it very differently.
Schema
A knowledge structure that shapes expectations, habits and interpretations. Think of it as a mental template your brain applies before you consciously choose to.
Scientific method
A set of self-checking procedures used to obtain reliable information about observable, natural phenomena. It operates on self-correcting feedback and requires claims to be both observable and falsifiable.
Hegemony of science
The distinguished cultural and ideological position that the institutions of science hold in the modern (especially Western) world. In simple terms, science carries unusual authority in our culture, and we often accept its conclusions on trust.
Scientific literacy
The ability to evaluate scientific theories by clear methodological criteria rather than taking results at face value.
Theory-ladenness
The observation that all scientific observation is shaped by the observer's prior theories, assumptions and folk psychology. Strictly objective observation of social phenomena is not possible.
Duhem-Quine problem
It is impossible to test the specific predictions of a scientific theory in isolation because testing always relies on background assumptions not contained in the theory. When predictions fail, researchers disproportionately revise their own theory rather than questioning those background assumptions.
Naturalistic observation
Non-intrusively viewing the apparent details of some phenomenon in a non-contrived setting. It can only be used for behaviours that are self-evident in a natural context.
Case study
Long-term following and documentation of a particular example, usually as part of an intervention. This is an idiographic mode of description, shaped by the particulars of both subject and investigator.
Survey
The administration of a set of limiting questions and criteria to foster comparisons between multiple observations. A nomothetic approach: results can be generalised, but may miss crucial unforeseen details.
Correlation coefficient
A numerical value ranging from -1 to +1 that describes the strength and direction of a linear relationship between two variables. Correlation does not imply causation.
Independent variable (IV)
The variable the researcher exerts experimental control over, the one deliberately manipulated.
Dependent variable (DV)
The variable thought to be affected causally by the independent variable, the one being measured.
Cross-sectional design
A research design where all subject sampling and measuring is done at one point in time.
Longitudinal design
A research design where subjects are followed and measured across multiple points in time. Helps reduce flukes of circumstance and track cohort effects.
Sequential design
Combines key features of cross-sectional and longitudinal research: cross-sectional measurements across several groups, followed across comparable time points.
Operationalising
Developing operational definitions for phenomena that are not naturally or obviously discontinuous, producing a set of operations designed to yield an observable result that stands in for the concept in question (e.g. an IQ test standing in for intelligence).
Reliability
Whether a measure produces the same result every time it is used under the same conditions. Evaluated through inter-rater reliability, test-retest reliability and internal consistency.
Validity
Whether a measure is actually measuring what it claims to measure. Internal validity concerns confounding variables; external validity concerns whether results generalise beyond the study.
Ecological validity
The degree to which the circumstances of a study resemble, or meaningfully embody, the details of real social life.
Replication
Repeating a study to confirm its findings. Direct replication copies the original procedure; conceptual replication tests the same idea with a different method.
Folk psychology is the intuitive, everyday counterpart to scientific psychology
Scientific psychology employs systematic, empirical methods and institutional oversight
Both involve theorising about behaviour, but scientific psychology subjects its theories to falsification and self-correction
Physical stance: treats things purely as physical objects (mass, trajectory, material)
Design stance: treats things as functional systems (what they do, what they are for)
Intentional stance: treats things as agents with goals, beliefs and feelings (this is how we navigate the social world day to day)
Humans are social animals. Our minds are designed to anticipate the presence of others.
Biological and cultural coevolution. Biology and culture are not independent; they are historically linked and mutually reinforcing.
Theory-laden observation. Observation is never purely objective. It runs on a continuum: Subjective (the world as I see it) < Inter-Subjective (the world we agree on) < Objective (the world as it is).
The individual is not primary. The socially situated person, not the isolated individual, is the proper unit of analysis.
The power of the situation. Situational factors influence behaviour far more than most people intuitively expect.
Obedience to authority increases when:
The authority seems legitimate
The subject's role in the larger project is made explicit
The situation is novel and tasks escalate incrementally
The authority figure is physically closer and more vigilant
Others are present but do not dissent
Obedience decreases with closeness to the victim. The Milgram experiment demonstrated that ordinary people will administer what they believe are dangerous electric shocks when instructed by an authority figure, highlighting the power of the situation over individual disposition.
Attribution refers to locating the cause of behaviour. This concept is introduced here and expanded substantially in Week 4.
A set of self-checking procedures for obtaining reliable information about observable, natural phenomena
Requires claims to be observable and falsifiable
Operates on self-correcting feedback
Most of what we "know" in daily life comes from instruction, hearsay, consensus, speaker's authority and fit with existing beliefs, all guided by confirmation bias
Scientific literacy means evaluating theories by clear criteria rather than accepting results at face value
You cannot test a theory's specific predictions in isolation; testing always relies on background assumptions not contained in the theory
All theories, predictions and tests smuggle in small assumptions
When predictions fail, researchers tend to revise their own theory disproportionately rather than questioning background assumptions
Researchers draw background knowledge from folk psychology, which is itself an extension of theory-ladenness applied to research methods
Science has two main tasks: description (correlational research) and explanation (experimental research). Effective explanation relies on accurate description.
Three methods ordered by invasiveness:
Naturalistic observation: non-intrusive, natural setting, limited to self-evident behaviours
Case studies: long-term, idiographic, shaped by the particulars of the subject and investigator
Surveys: nomothetic, generalisable, but may miss unforeseen detail
Limitations of correlations:
Correlation does not imply causation
Vulnerable to directionality problems (which variable causes which?) and third-variable confounds
Experiments are the only research design considered suitable for demonstrating causal relationships
The researcher manipulates the independent variable and measures the dependent variable
Random assignment helps rule out confounds
Cross-sectional: all sampling and measurement at one point in time
Longitudinal: subjects followed across multiple time points; uses between-subjects and within-subjects comparisons; helps control for cohort effects
Sequential: combines features of both; cross-sectional measurements across several groups, followed over comparable time points
Operationalising means developing measurable stand-ins for abstract concepts. Two concerns follow:
Reliability (does it measure consistently?):
Inter-rater reliability
Test-retest reliability
Internal consistency
Validity (does it measure what it claims to?):
Internal validity: are confounding variables and alternative explanations ruled out?
External validity: do findings generalise beyond the study?
Ecological validity: do study circumstances resemble real social life?
Researchers have a duty of care: subjects must not be subjected to undue harm
Participants must receive sufficient information for informed consent
When deception is used, participants must be debriefed afterwards
Key ethical considerations: vulnerability, harm, deceit, consent, intellectual honesty
Direct replication: repeating the original procedure exactly
Conceptual replication: testing the same idea with a different method
Standard significance cut-off is p < 0.05
Replication can be costly in biological and behavioural sciences
Publish-or-Perish: institutional pressure to produce positive results
Post-hoc revision: adjusting hypotheses after seeing data
File-drawer effect: studies with null results never get published
Private data: raw data not shared, limiting independent verification
The Milgram experiment explains why ordinary employees follow unethical orders in corporate or military settings: legitimate authority, incremental escalation and the absence of dissent combine to produce compliance. Understanding correlational versus experimental evidence matters every time you read a health headline claiming "X causes Y" when the study was only correlational.
Students often think social psychology is just "common sense." It is not. Folk psychology is riddled with confirmation bias, and many of its intuitions are contradicted by experimental evidence.
Students confuse correlation with causation, especially when a study "sounds" causal. If there is no manipulated independent variable and random assignment, the study cannot demonstrate causation.
Students sometimes assume naturalistic observation is the weakest method. It is not weaker, just less invasive; it is the appropriate choice when the phenomenon is self-evident in a natural context.
Students treat the intentional stance as the "correct" way to view things. All three stances are descriptive tools, each useful in different contexts.
⚠️ Be able to name and distinguish the three descriptive stances with examples.
⚠️ Know all five indispensable concepts and be ready to explain why "the power of the situation" is central to social psychology.
⚠️ Distinguish correlational from experimental research and explain why only experiments can demonstrate causation.
⚠️ Know the three research designs (cross-sectional, longitudinal, sequential) and when each is appropriate.
⚠️ Distinguish reliability from validity, and know the subtypes of each.
⚠️ Be able to explain the Duhem-Quine problem and its connection to theory-ladenness.
⚠️ Know the four sources of publication bias (publish-or-perish, post-hoc revision, file-drawer effect, private data).
True or False: Social psychology focuses on the individual in isolation. (False, it focuses on the individual in social context.)
The ______ stance treats things as agents with goals, beliefs and feelings. (Intentional)
True or False: A strong positive correlation between two variables proves that one causes the other. (False, correlation does not imply causation.)
______ validity asks whether a study's circumstances resemble real social life. (Ecological)
True or False: The Duhem-Quine problem says theories can be tested in perfect isolation. (False, testing always depends on background assumptions.)
Q: What do we call the naturally occurring, intuitive counterpart to scientific psychology?
A: Folk psychology, our everyday tendency to form intuitive theories about ourselves and those around us.
Q: What are the three descriptive stances?
A: Physical (objects with physical properties), design (systems with functions), and intentional (agents with goals, beliefs and feelings).
Q: What are the defining characteristics of the scientific method?
A: Empirical testing, falsifiability, and self-correcting error-checking procedures.
Q: What are the two primary modes of scientific research?
A: Description (correlational research) and explanation (experimental research).
Q: Name the three types of research design and briefly distinguish them.
A: Cross-sectional (one point in time), longitudinal (multiple time points, same subjects), sequential (combines both across several groups and time points).
Q: What is the difference between reliability and validity?
A: Reliability is whether a measure produces the same result consistently. Validity is whether it actually measures what it claims to measure.
Q: What is ecological validity?
A: The degree to which a study's circumstances resemble real social life.
Q: Name four institutional pressures that contribute to publication bias.
A: Publish-or-perish, post-hoc revision, the file-drawer effect, and private data.
Q: What does the Duhem-Quine problem tell us about testing theories?
A: That it is impossible to test a theory's predictions in isolation; all tests rely on background assumptions, and researchers disproportionately revise their own theory when predictions fail.
Q: Under what conditions does obedience to authority increase (per Milgram)?
A: When the authority seems legitimate, the subject's role is made explicit, the situation is novel and incremental, the authority is physically close and vigilant, and others are present but do not dissent.
Theory-ladenness and the power of the situation reappear throughout the course: theory-ladenness feeds into attribution biases (Week 4) and implicit cognition (Week 6), while the power of the situation underpins conformity, obedience and social roles (Week 8). The distinction between folk psychology and scientific psychology also sets up the discussion of heuristics and dual-process thinking in Week 5.
folk psychology, scientific psychology, social psychology, descriptive stances, physical stance, design stance, intentional stance, reductive materialism, construal, schema, scientific method, hegemony of science, scientific literacy, theory-laden, theory-ladenness, Duhem-Quine, naturalistic observation, case study, survey, correlation, correlation coefficient, causation, independent variable, dependent variable, cross-sectional, longitudinal, sequential design, operationalising, operational definition, reliability, inter-rater, test-retest, internal consistency, validity, internal validity, external validity, ecological validity, informed consent, deception, debriefing, replication, direct replication, conceptual replication, publication bias, publish-or-perish, file-drawer effect, post-hoc revision, Milgram, obedience, authority, PSY 201, NYU social psychology midterm