Social Psychology

Notes

Module 1
What is Social Psychology?

➔ Lewin is known as the “Father of Social Psychology” because he initially

developed many important ideas of discipline, including a focus on the dynamic
interactions among people.
➔ Social psychology is the study of dynamic relationships between individuals and
the people around them.
➔ But our behaviour is also influenced by the social situation - the people with
whom we interact every day.
➔ Social Psychology is largely the study of social situations. Our social situations
create social influence, the process through which people change our thoughts,
feelings and behaviours and through which we can change theirs.
➔ Although, Individual’s character’s do matter, the social situation is often a
stronger determinant of behaviour than is personality. Eg. when social
psychologist analyse an event like cult suicide, they are more likely to analyse
the characteristics of the situation (the strong leader and the group pressure
provided by other group members) than on the characteristics of the cult
members themselves.

Social psychology attempts to study

● The actions and characteristics of other people
● Cognitive processes
● Environmental variables: impact of the physical world
● Biological factors

Conducting research in Social Psychology

➔ Social psychologists believe that the study of social behaviour should be

empirical - that is, based on the collection of data and systematic analysis
of observable data.
➔ Self report measures are measures in which individuals are asked to
respond to questions posed by an interviewer or on a questionnaire.
➔ Behavioural measures are measures designed to directly assess what
people do.

Research techniques
➔ Basic technique for studying social behaviour is systematic observation -
carefully observing behaviour as it occurs.
 ➔ Naturalistic Observation - observation of people’s behaviour in natural
settings (Linden, 1992)
➔ Survey Method - researchers ask large numbers of people to respond to
questions about their attitudes towards specific issues.
➔ Correlational method
◆ Social psychologists attempt to determine whether, and to what
extent, different variables are related to each other. This involves
carefully measuring each variable, and then performing
appropriate statistical tests to determine whether and to what
degree the variables are correlated.
● Playing violent video games <—---------------> Aggressive
behaviour

➔ Experimental Method
◆ In order to attain the goal of explanation, social psychologists
employ a method of research known as experimentation or the
experimental method.

➔ Experimental research designs are research designs that include the

manipulation of a given situation or experience for two or more groups of
individuals who are initially created to be equivalent, followed by a
measurement of the effect of that experience.
➔ The independent variable refers to the situation that is created by the
experimenter through the experimental manipulations, and the
dependent variable refers to the variable that is measured after the
manipulations have occurred.
● Viewing violence <—---------------------> Aggressive Behaviour

(imp)
Ethics

➔ Deception
◆ This technique involves efforts by researchers to withhold or conceal
information about the purposes of a study from participants.
◆ Reason - psychologists believe that if the participants found out the true
purpose of the study they might change their behaviour. Thus, the
research will not yield valid information about social behaviour or social
thought, unless deception is employed.

➔ Informed Consent-
◆ Giving participants as much information as possible about the procedures
to be followed before they make their decision to participate. In short,
this is the opposite of withholding information in order to persuade people
to participate
(Learn using acronym - DID)

➔ Debriefing-
◆ Providing participants with a full description of the purposes of a study
after they have participated in it.
◆ Most participants report that they view temporary deception as
acceptable provided that potential benefits outweigh potential costs and if
there is no other means of obtaining the information sought (Rogers,
1980; Sharpe, Adair & Roese, 1992).
Module 2
Social Cognition

➔ Refers to ways in which people think about themselves and the social world,
including how they select, interpret, remember and use social information.
➔ Cognitive miser- those who are reluctant to do much extra thinking (Fiske and
taylor, 1984, 1991)

Goals Of thinking

● Need to find the right answer to some problem or question.

● To confirm the desired answer to a problem
● To reach a pretty good answer or decision quickly

Stages Of Social Cognition

● Generic knowledge
○ Based on categories where groups of objects are thought about and
perceived in a similar way, and stereotypes, which are based on shared
beliefs may be represented as prototypes of scripts.
● Perception and attention
○ To gain attention something must be distinctive and salient or unexpected
or relevant to us.
● Encoding and interpretation
○ Means that once perceived, information needs to be encoded. Categories
must be accessed - first the most frequent ones (primacy effect), as they
have been used most recently.
● Organisation
○ Whereby information is organised by categories
● Relating information to prior knowledge
○ Information consistent with prior knowledge has a strong impact as it is
derived from existing knowledge.
(Learn using georp)
Biases in social cognition

➔ Primacy / recency effect

◆ Asch (1946) gave lists of characteristics (first positive then negative), the
order was found to be important as the first and last traits were best
remembered and given more importance than the middle items. Most
notably, if positive terms were presented first, they created a more
favourable impression of the person.
➔ Positive and negative biases
◆ If no information is given on a person we form a positive impression, but
if information is provided this forms more of an impression because such
information is distinctive or poses danger.
➔ Personal ways of categorisation and exploring other people simplifying our
impression of others.
➔ Physical appearance
◆ This influences impressions, possibly due to the primacy effect. We tend
to make generalisations, such as people who are thin are “good” and
people who are large are “bad”.

➔ Stereotypes
◆ These are used to categorise people, are slow to change, and are acquired
at an early age. Evident in situations of conflict and help make sense of
the world.

Automatic and Controlled Thinking

➔ Humans have a duplex mind. Some thinking proceeds by automatic means,

whereas other thinking relies on conscious control.
➔ The stroop effect was first described by James Ridley Stroop in 1935. The
incongruent test(when the ink and colour don't match), the automatic response is
to say the word rather than the ink colour. It takes conscious effort to override
the automatic response and say the ink colour itself.

Automatic thinking and knowledge structures

➔ The four elements that distinguish automatic from controlled processes are
intention, control, effort, and efficiency (Bargh, 1994).
➔ Automatic thinking relies on knowledge structures
➔ Knowledge structures are organised packets of information that are stored in
memory. These knowledge structures form when a set of related concepts is
frequently brought to mind, or activated. When people think about a concept, it
becomes active in memory.
➔ Related concepts also become activated. Over time, as related concepts are
frequently activated together, the set of related concepts become so strongly
linked that activation of one part of the set automatically activates the whole set.
Heuristics

Definition - Heuristics is the process by which humans use mental shortcuts to

arrive at decisions

➔ Strategies used to form judgments, make decisions, and find solutions to

complex problems. This involves focusing on the most relevant aspects of
a problem or situation to formulate a solution.

Types of Heuristics

● Availability heuristic
○ Definition - It is the tendency to judge the frequency or likelihood of an
event by the ease with thich relevant instances come to mind.
○ The ease with which relevant instances come to mind is influenced not
only by the actual frequency but also by factors such as how salient or
noticeable the event is, how recent the event is, and whether attention
was paid to the event.
○ Eg: death by aeroplane crash is given more importance and thought to be
more dangerous because of the news available online, compared to
tobacco consumption deaths.
● Simulation Heuristic
○ The simulation heuristic is the tendency to judge the frequency or
likelihood of an event by the ease with which you can imagine (or
mentally simulate) an event.
○ More easily imagined events are judged to be more likely. People respond
more emotionally to situations when they can easily imagine a different
outcome.
● Anchoring and Adjustment Heuristic
○ In estimating how frequent or likely an event is, people use a starting
point (called an anchor) and then make adjustments up and down from
this starting point.

Other Short-cut strategies: Schemas

● Definition: knowledge structures that represent substantial information about a

concept, its attributes, and its relationships to other concepts.
● The concept, for example, could be the self, another person, a social category
(e.g. politicians), or an object.
● Schemas are developed through your experiences, and they guide the way you
process information.

Scripts
 ● Definition: knowledge structures that contain information about how people
behave under varying circumstances.
● scripts are schemas about certain kinds of events.
● Scripts include many types of information such as motives, intentions, goals,
situations that enable certain behaviours, and the casual sequence of events, as
well as the specific behaviours themselves.

PRIMING
● When one concept becomes activated in the memory by thinking about it, related
concepts become activated too. Priming means activating a concept in the mind.

COUNTERFACTUAL THINKING

● Means contrary to the facts

● Counterfactual thinking involves imagining alternatives to past or present factual
events or circumstances
○ First instinct fallacy - our tendency to believe that it is better not to
switch one’s first answer, even if they think that the second one is
correct.
○ Upward counterfactuals - involve alternatives that are better than
actuality, whereas downward counterfactuals
○ Downward counterfactuals help people feel better in the aftermath of
misfortune. When something bad happens, people say,”it could have been
worse”
○ The framing effect is when our decision is influenced by the way
information is presented. Equivalent information can be more or less
attractive depending on what features are highlighted.

AFFECT AND SOCIAL COGNITION

● Different situations evoke different emotions but also the same situation can
evoke different emotions in different people.

CONSEQUENCES

● Current mood states do affect judgement involving heuristic processing or

substantive processing.
● Affect influences social memory and social judgement.
● Stereotyping is also affected by mood.
● Emotions can help decision making by prioritising and focusing attention and
setting behavioural goals (zeelenberg, nelissen, breugelmans and pieters, 2008).

ACTION IDENTIFICATION
 ● The meanings, which reflect different ways of experiencing the same action, are
the focus of action identification theory (Vallach and Wegner, 1985, 1987)
● Utilising cues from memory and from the behavioural context we are easily able
to construct an identification of the action being performed.
● These meanings, which reflect different ways of experiencing the same action,
are the focus of action identification theory (Vallacher & Wegner, 1985, 1987).

SELF-REFERENCE EFFECTS

● Information bearing on the self is processed more thoroughly and more deeply,
and hence remembered better than other information. This is called self-
reference effects.

● The self apparently operates like a powerful hook, and whatever gets hung on it
is more likely to be preserved.

INTERGROUP BEHAVIOURS

● It is defined as ‘any behaviour that involves interaction between one or more

representatives of two or more separate social groups’
● It is the behaviour among individuals that is regulated by those individuals'
awareness of and identification with different social groups.

Related issues

Related deprivation
● Relative deprivation refers to a perceived discrepancy between attainments or
actualities (what if) and expectations or entitlements (what ought to be)
● Mostly, relative deprivation arises from comparisons between our experiences
and our expectations (Gurr, 1970)

Relative deprivation -> frustration -> aversive environmental conditions -> individual
acts of aggression -> aggressions becomes more widespread and assumes role of
dominant response -> aggression spreads rapidly through social facilitation process ->
Collective violence

● Berkowitz argued that under conditions of perceived relative deprivation (e.g.

blacks in the United States in the late 1960s), people feel frustrated.
● The heat of a long, hot summer amplifies the frustration (especially in poor,
overcrowded urban neighbourhoods with little air conditioning or cooling
vegetation) and increases the prevalence of individual acts of aggression, which
are in turn exacerbated by the presence of aggressive stimuli.
○ Two types
■ Egoistic RD -> which derives from the individual’s sense of
deprivation relative to other similar individuals
■ Fraternalistic RD -> which derives from comparisons with
dissimilar others, or members of other groups.
 ● Factors for fraternalistic relative deprivation
○ Firstly, people need to identify strongly with their ingroup for the relative
deprivation to actually matter.
○ Groups that feel relatively deprived are unlikely to engage in collective
action unless such actions is considered a practical and feasible way of
beginning social change.
○ Third, relative deprivation rests on perceptions of injustice, one form of
injustice is distributive injustice- feeling that you have less than you are
entitled to relative to expectations. Procedural injustice: you feel that you
have been the victim of unfair procedures.
○ Finally, as fraternalistic relative deprivation depends on the particular
ingroup-outgroup comparison that is made, it is important to be able to
predict with whom we compare ourselves.

REALISTIC CONFLICT

● Sherif believed that where groups compete over scarce resources, intergroup
relations become conflictual and ethnocentric. Conducted field experiments in
1949, 1953 and 1954 at Summer camps for young boys in the United States
(Sherif, 1966). The procedure involved three phases:
○ Phase 1: boys arrive at the camp, run by experimenters, engaged in camp
wide activities, through which they form friendships.
○ Phase 2: camp was divided into two groups, to split up friendships.
Groups were isolated, with separate living quarters and daily activities,
they developed their own norms and status differences. The groups made
little reference to each other apart from some embryonic ethnocentrism.
○ Phase 3: the groups were brought together to engage in organised
intergroup competitions embracing sports contests and other activities.
This generated fierce competitions and intergroup hostility, which rapidly
generalised to situations outside the organised competitions.
Ethnocentrism attitudes and behaviour were amplified coupled with in-
group solidarity. Lunch Breaks became and opportunity to throw food at
each other.
○ Phase 4: the two groups were provided with superordinate goals, goals
they both desired but were unable to achieve on their own. The groups
had to work together in cooperation.

REALISTIC CONFLICT THEORY

● Sheriff (1966) proposed a realistic conflict theory of intergroup behaviour, in

which the nature of the goal relations among individuals and groups determines
the nature of interindividual and intergroup relations.
● Individuals who share goals requiring interdependence for their achievement
cooperate and form a group, while individuals who have mutually, exclusive
goals (i.e. a scarce resource that inly one can obtain, such as winning a chess
game) engage in interindividual competition which prevents group formation or
contributes to the collapse of an existing group.
SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORY

● Social identity theory, proposed by Henri Tajfel and John Turner in the 1970s,
posits that individuals derive a portion of their self-concept from their
membership in social groups.

Uses of social identity

Social identity groups can give you a sense of
● Belonging: being part of a group can instil feelings of connection
and unity, giving individuals the comforting sense that they’re not
alone in their experiences or perspectives.
● Purpose: group affiliations often come with shared goals or
missions which can provide direction and purpose to individual
members.
● Self-worth: affiliating with a group can boost self-esteem as
individuals derive pride from group achievements and a positive
group image.
● Identity: groups provide a framework to understand oneself in the
context of a larger community. They can help define who you are
based in shared attributes, values, or goals.

MINIMAL GROUP PARADIGM

● These groups are formed with minimum goals and are indeed minimal, yet
people start belonging to each other, leading to social identity,

DYNAMICS OF INTERGROUP BEHAVIOUR

● Intergroup dynamics refer to the behavioural and psychological relationship
between two or more groups, as well as those towards another group.

THEORIES OF INTERGROUP RELATIONS

● SELF-CATEGORISATION THEORY
○ According to Turner and Reynolds (2004), people’s self-perception varies
from perceiving oneself as an individual(personal identity) or as a
member of a group (Social-identity). People move along the interpersonal-
intergroup continuum and categorise themselves in individual or
collective terms depending on the context.
● SOCIAL DOMINANCE THEORY
○ According to this theory, many myths, policies and practices in society
unfairly advantage dominant groups over subordinate groups. These
myths and ideologies maintain and amplify existing hierarchies.
● SYSTEM JUSTIFICATION THEORY
 ○ People tend to internalise beliefs that serve to maintain the status quo,
even though it may be harmful to their group’s interests.

CONDITIONS OF SOCIAL HARMONY

EDUCATION FOR TOLERANCE
One strategy of value for children is for them to experience being stigmatised and then
victimised.
The eye of the storm, red eye blue eye.

CONTACT BETWEEN GROUPS

● Contact causes people to recognise that they are in fact a great deal more
similar than they had thought and hence to get to like one another.
● Assimilation: the merging of a subordinate group or culture into a dominant
group or culture.

SUBORDINATE GOALS
● Sherif (1966) managed to improve intergroup relations between warring factions
of boys by arranging for them to cooperate to achieve superordinate goals
(shared goals that were unachievable by either group alone).
○ Disadvantage of subordinate goals
■ They do not reduce intergroup conflict if the groups fail to achieve
the goal.

GROUPS THAT NEGOTIATE

● Bargaining: process of intergroup conflict resolution where representatives

reach agreement through direct negotiation.
● Mediation: process of intergroup conflict resolution where a neutral third part
intervenes in the negotiation process to facilitate a settlement.
● Arbitration: process of intergroup conflict resolution in which a neutral third
party is invited to impose a mutually binding settlement.

MODULE 3

SOCIAL CATEGORISATION AND LEADERSHIP

Definition: it is the process of sorting people into groups on the basis of characteristics
they have in common. (eg, race, gender, age)
● Serves a basic epistemic function: organising and structuring our knowledge
about the world.

TYPES
● Ingroup-outgroup categorization
 ○ Dovidio and Gaertner (2010) have already noted a mindset of “us vs
them”. Here social categorisation leads to the formation of ingroup and
outgroup categories.
● Ingroup-only categorisation
○ If ingroup-outgroup categorisation is characterised as “us vs them”, then
the psychological relevance of ingroup-only categorisation could be
characterised as simply “us”
● Outgroup-only categorisation
○ Those who are not in this category are not seen as sufficiently similar to
each other to form a discernable or salient category. To capture the
psychological relevance of outgroup-only categorisation,we describe it as
“them”.

GROUPS AND LEADERSHIP

● Definition: a process of social influence through which an individual enlists and

mobilises the aid of others in the attainment of a collective goal’.
● Leadership is typically a group process than an interpersonal process.

LEADER CATEGORISATION THEORY

● According to leader categorization theory our perceptions of leadership play a
central role in decisions we make about selecting and endorsing leaders, and
thus the leader’s ability to influence others and to lead effectively. (Lord and
Brown, 2004)

SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORY OF LEADERSHIP

-hogg, 2001

● Groups provide a people with a social identity - a sense of who hey are, how they
should behave and how others will treat them
● In groups, people want to know more about group’s norms and look to
internalise a prototype and how others will treat them.
● The most direct and reliable source of this comes from others in the group who
already seem to be highly prototypical
Theory: we develop a social identity based on the groups we belong to, including our
national, religious, political and occupational groups.
ETHNOCENTRISM: measuring or judging one’s own culture against another culture
and can lead to judging someone else’s culture negatively.

In-group bias:
● Tendency to favor one’s group over other groups.
● In-group bias affects our perception of others, giving preferential treatment to
the members for our own group while excluding other groups.

Out-group Homogeneity:
● It is the belief that members of the out-group are all the same.

Blaming the victim:

● The tendency to blame individuals for their victimisation, typically motivated by a
desire to see the world as a fair place.
SOCIAL COMPARISON THEORY
● The theory of social comparison (Festinger, 1954) laid out the power and the
processes in which people learn about themselves by comparing themselves to
others.
● Many facts about the self don’t carry much weight by themselves and only
become meaningful in comparison to others.

We compare ourselves to
● Upward social comparison, involving people better than you, can inspire you
to want to do better in order to reach their level.
● Downward social comparison, against people worse off than yourself, can
make you feel good.
● Sometimes we tend to compare ourselves to our own past performance. This is
also a downward comparison , but it is with ‘past self’ and not someone else.

GROUP COHESIVENESS

● Group cohesion refers to the extent to which members of a group desire to

remain in a group and resist leaving it (Balkwell, 1994; Cartwright, 1968).
● The presence of an outgroup or other form of competitive threat tends to
increase cohesion and commitment to local community groups (Putnam,2000).

NATURE OF GROUP COHESION

● Social cohesion
○ A group has social cohesion if its members stay in the group primarily
because they like one another as persons and desire to interact with one
another(Aiken, 1992; Lott & Lott, 1965)
○ Social Cohesion will be greater when group members are similar.
● Task cohesion
○ When a group has high task cohesion, its members remain together
primarily because they are heavily involved with the group’s task.
○ Task cohesion will be greater if members find the group’s task
intrinsically valuable, interesting, and challenging.

SOURCES AND CONSEQUENCES OF COHESION

1. Social psychological research suggests that positive emotions attributed to the

group are an important source of cohesion (Lawler, Thye, & Yoon, 2000, 2008)
○ The more that group members must rely on one another to achieve the
goals that generate positive motion, the more likely they are to attribute
positive emotion to the group. The players are more likely to think of the
 team as an important unit and to invest further in the group (Lawler, Thye
& Yoon, 2000)
2. Cohesion begets increased cohesion
○ Given the opportunity, members of highly cohesive groups communicate
more with one another than do members of less cohesive groups and the
interaction is of higher quality.
3. Members of groups with high cohesion are more likely to invest both time and
energy into their groups (Lawler, Thye, and Yoon, 2000) because they want them
to perform well. This helps explain why cohesion tends to increase the
productivity and performance of groups.

GROUP DECISION MAKING

Involves several steps

1. Define a set of possible options
2. Gather all the relevant information about these options
3. Share this information among themselves
4. Carefully assess all the potential consequences of each option under
consideration
5. Calculate the overall value of each option
6. The group selects the most attractive option as the group’s choice.

LEADER (characteristics)

● Requires there to be an individual, or clique, who influences the behaviour of

another individual or group of individuals - where there are leaders, there must
be followers.
● An effective leader is someone who is successful in setting new goals and
influencing others to achieve them.

THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP
● CONTINGENCY THEORIES
○ Contingency theories of leadership recognise that the leadership
effectiveness of leadership behaviours or styles is contingent on the
leadership situation - some styles are better suited to some situations or
tasks than are others.
○ 1. Fielder’s contingency theory
○ 2. Normative decision theory
○ 3. Path-goal theory

1. Fielder’s theory
● The first and the best-known contingency theory in social psychology is
that of Fred Fielder (1946)
● Fiedler, distinguished between
○ Task-oriented leaders who are authoritarian, value group
success and derive self-esteem from accomplishing a task rather
than being liked by the group, and
 ○ Relationship-oriented leaders who are relaxed, friendly, non-
directive and sociable, and gain self-esteem from happy and
harmonious group relations.
● If you’re a high LPC leader, you’re a relationship-oriented leader.
● If you’re a low LPC leader, you’re a task oriented leader.

Rating your least preferred coworker favourably means that you see the best in people -
even those who wouldn’t necessarily choose to work with.
Rating your least preferred coworker unfavourably suggests that you struggle to see
their contributions, since you value efficiency and effectiveness over the attributes.
There isn't one “right” way to lead. While task-orientation may be preferable to the
organisation at large, teammates themselves tend to prefer relationship-orientation.

2. NORMATIVE DECISION THEORY

● A second contingency theory, which is focused specifically on leadership in group
decision-making contexts, is normative decision theory (NDT, Vroom & Jago,
1988).
● NDT identifies three decision-making strategies among which leaders can
choose:
a. Autocratic (subordinate input is not sought)
b. Consultative (subordinate input is sought, but the leader retains the
authority to make the final decision); and
c. Group decision making (leader and subordinates are equal partners in
a truly shared decision-making process).

3. PATH GOAL THEORY

1. PGT rests on the assumption that a leader’s main function is to motivate
followers by clarifying the paths that will help them reach their goals.
2. Two types of leaders
a. Structuring (the leader directs tasks - related activities) - most effective
when followers are unclear about their goals and how to reach them. Eg.
the task is new, difficult or ambiguous.
b. Consideration (the leader addresses followers’ personal and emotional
needs). Most effective when the task is boring or uncomfortable, but not
when followers are already engaged and motivated, because considerate
can seem distracting and unnecessary.

TYPES OF LEADERSHIP(imp)

● Transformational leadership is a leadership style in which the leader inspires and

motivates his/her followers to achieve exceptional performance by creating a
vision, setting high expectations, and challenging the followers to exceed their
own self-interests for the benefit of the organisation or society at large (Collins,
2014)
Bass and Rigo (2006) noted the following, as the main features and characteristics of
transformational leadership:
 1. Visionary: transformational leaders have a clear vision of what they want to
achieve
2. Effective communicators: transformational leaders are good communicators who
articulate their vision effectively to their followers.
3. Inspirational and motivational: transformational leaders inspire and motivate
others by providing a compelling future direction
4. Forster change: Transformational leaders are change leaders or drivers.
5. Empathetic: Transformational leaders are empathetic and understand their
followers’ needs
6. and concerns.
7. Intellectual stimulation: They encourage creativity and innovative thinking,
challenging the
8. status quo and promoting new ideas.

Advantages
● Transformational leaders inspire their followers to go above and beyond,
resulting in higher
levels of motivation and commitment (Bass and Riggo, 2006).
● By setting high expectations and encouraging innovation, transformational
leaders can drive
their teams or organisations to achieve outstanding results (Kouzes and Posner, 2017).
● Transformational leaders create a positive and supportive work environment that
promotes
collaboration, creativity, and a sense of purpose (Northouse, 2018). They are known to
create
an all-inclusive work environment.
● Transformational leaders are change leaders, they lead and drive change in
organisations or
societies. (Collins, 2014).

Disadvantages
● Transformational leadership relies heavily on the leader's influence, and if the
leader is absent
or fails to provide proper guidance, it can negatively impact the followers (Bass and
Riggo,
2006). Followers often become over-reliant on the leader’s guidance and decision-
making.
● Transformational leaders may set extremely high expectations, leading to
increased stress
and burnout among their followers (Bass and Riggo, 2006). The leaders too, face
burnout as
they invest too much time and energy in supporting and developing their followers.
● Since some individuals naturally resist change, they may resist the
transformational leader's
vision or find it difficult to adapt to the constant changes and challenges (Kouzes and
Posner,
2017). The ideas of the leader may simply face resistance.
MODULE 4