Date post: | 10-Apr-2018 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | swanandyadav |
View: | 219 times |
Download: | 0 times |
of 20
8/8/2019 Lecture 11 Group & Group Dynamics
1/20
Groups & Group Dynamics Satisfy survival, psychological,
informational, & identity needs
Structure of small groups norms; roles,status systems
How individuals thoughts, feelings &
actions are influenced by being part of agroup; how individuals can affect groups
8/8/2019 Lecture 11 Group & Group Dynamics
2/20
What are groups?Groups differ in their degree of commitment & social cohesiveness.
Incidental groups - minimal group paradigm (workshop at a
conference) Membership groups - defined by being a member
(committee, club)
Identity-reference groups affiliation acts as a referenceframe for social identity (religious community, politicalaffiliation)
People in individual interaction with each other - - - Peopleacting as a group
8/8/2019 Lecture 11 Group & Group Dynamics
3/20
Social Influence in groups
Social loafing (idling) - where people have little or noinvolvement or commitment to group, individualisticnorms, no investment in what happens impact of
group on individual behaviour is negative/minimal
Social facilitation (energizing) - working harder as amember of group than alone, task
important/interesting, strong commitment to goal(Collectivist cultures)
8/8/2019 Lecture 11 Group & Group Dynamics
4/20
Social loafing = experimental artefact of creating
incidental groups (low commitment, meaningless
tasks), not a universal quality of task performancein a group
Groups that have (collectivist), or are motivated to
develop, cohesiveness, commitment, & work onworthwhile task, social energising more likely
8/8/2019 Lecture 11 Group & Group Dynamics
5/20
Identity-reference groups
Shift from personal to social identity
Becomes in-group, encourages
cooperation & conflict with outgroups
Summer Camp experiments (Sherif et al.1961).
8/8/2019 Lecture 11 Group & Group Dynamics
6/20
White middle class 11-12 year old boys at
summer camp
4 phases: Spontaneous friendship formation
Ingroup formation (2 groups formed, kept separate)
Intergroup competition (placed in competitive
situations) Intergroup cooperation (create superordinate goals
achieved only through intergroup cooperation)
8/8/2019 Lecture 11 Group & Group Dynamics
7/20
Conformity Allport 1924 groups tend to give more
conservative judgments than individuals
Sherif 1936 autokinetic effect
Aschs studies (1951)
Group norms shared standard of conduct
expected of group membersGarfinkel 1967 students behave as lodgers
Festinger 1954 Social Comparison theory
8/8/2019 Lecture 11 Group & Group Dynamics
8/20
Minority InfluenceAsch: majority influence many factors but
most important = being only dissenter in
group. Effect extinguished where subjecthas even one supporter.
So easier to resist if not odd one out;
But can you persuade others to move to yourposition?
8/8/2019 Lecture 11 Group & Group Dynamics
9/20
Moscovici et al. 1969 study of colour
perception(groups of 6, incl. 2 stooges, blue/green
slides)
Some members of majority can bepersuaded by small minority IF their
judgments are consistent
Also important how behaviour of minority isinterpreted.
8/8/2019 Lecture 11 Group & Group Dynamics
10/20
Two main processes What kind of decision is it? (e.g., intellectual vs.
judgmental)
How will the decision be made?
Normative vs. informational social influence
Heuristic vs. systematic processing
8/8/2019 Lecture 11 Group & Group Dynamics
11/20
Majority influence on group decisions.
majorities can exert greater normative and
informational social influence than minorities. majority influence (Aschs 1950's classic studies) -
compliance
minority influence (Moscovici 60's/70's) conversion
8/8/2019 Lecture 11 Group & Group Dynamics
12/20
Explanations forSocial Influence
Processes in groupsSame Process Models
Dual Process dependency model (Turner 1987) :
Normative & Informational influence contributedifferentially in different situations Where confident of own judgment, + majority perceived
as powerful, then Normative influence predominates
Where lack confidence, so conflicting info from minoritycan have greater impact, majority less powerful, thennormative influence reduced
8/8/2019 Lecture 11 Group & Group Dynamics
13/20
Different Process ModelsMoscovicis Innovation Model based on social
representations (how new ideas of original thinkerscome to influence the images, thinking, vocabulary &
beliefs of ordinary people)
Majority influence operates through conformity &normalization, passive heuristic processing
Minority, through a discrete process of innovation, direct
processing effort consistency is key sustainedattempt to exert information influence (real-life pressuregroups - Amnesty Int, Greenpeace)
8/8/2019 Lecture 11 Group & Group Dynamics
14/20
Turner's Referent Information Influence model 1991
(based on social identity theory)
3rdform: referent information influence operatesthrough peoples self-categorization
Identify oneself with a group, then use that groupsnorms as standards for own decision making
8/8/2019 Lecture 11 Group & Group Dynamics
15/20
Group discussion enhances the initial attitudes of
people who already agree.
Are group decisions more cautious? Researchhas shown shifts both toward caution and
toward risk.
Group enhancement of initial tendencies:group-produced enhancement or exaggeration
of members' initial attitudes throughdiscussion = group polarization.
Brainstorming
8/8/2019 Lecture 11 Group & Group Dynamics
16/20
What produces group polarization? A special case ofthe risky shift (Stoner 1961) Social comparison explanation: individual members discover that
they are not nearly as extreme in the socially valued direction asthey initially thought. Because they want others to evaluate thempositively (normative influence), begin to shift toward even moreextreme positions.
Persuasive arguments explanation: hearing more arguments in
favour of their own position rather than against it, and hearingnew supportive arguments that they had not initially considered,members gradually come to adopt even more extreme positions.
Both explanations play a role.
8/8/2019 Lecture 11 Group & Group Dynamics
17/20
C. Groupthink (Janis 1971, 1982) when
consensus-seeking overrides critical analysis. Symptoms of groupthink
overestimation of in-group
close-mindedness increased conformity pressures
Research on groupthink - does not always
occur in the way Janis proposed. NOT foundin groups outside lab why? Key = different norms.
8/8/2019 Lecture 11 Group & Group Dynamics
18/20
IV. Leadership A leader is an influence agent.
Transformational leaders take heroic and unconventionalactions.
The contingency model Fiedler (1967, 1978) highlightspersonal and situational factors in leader effectiveness.
Gender and culture can influence leadership style.
Importance of task (group effectiveness combination ofleadership style & group task)
E.g., jury forepersonperceived as leader, it is usually men ofhigher SES (socio-economic status), might influence the verdict,although evidence is mixed here.
8/8/2019 Lecture 11 Group & Group Dynamics
19/20
VI. Applications: How Do Juries Make Decisions?Minority influence upon others verdicts
a small minority may influence the majority vote by conversion, if they are consistent, committed in their opinions andarguments, seem to be acting on principle rather than out of self-gain and incur some cost, as well as are not overlyrigid and unreasonable in their opinions and arguments.
Social / majority influences on jury decision-makingjurors have usually decided on a verdict before they retire to deliberate and jury deliberation consists merely of trying to
persuade others to the same opinion. Social group pressure may thus lead to illogical decisions for a number ofreasons:
group polarisation a group tends to make more extreme decisions (either riskier or more cautious) through aprocess of social comparison and increasing conformity to the groups initial majority decision;
conformity group pressure to agree with majority verdicts may result in a lack of consideration for alternative,minority opinions. This can be both informational (uncertainty over the verdict) and normative (need to be sociallyapproved). The pressure may increase with the severity of the crime, the need for a majority rather than unanimousverdict (whoever cares about one or two dissidents then...), and the size of the jury (1 against 5 people resists lessthan 2 against 10 people see Asch);
Groupthink esp. in a cohesive and isolated group, dominated by a directive leader e.g. confirmatory bias notequally considering evidence against their joint beliefs;
Social loafing individuals in the jury may be inclined to deliberate less that they would alone and let others thinkfor them.
8/8/2019 Lecture 11 Group & Group Dynamics
20/20
ReadingGeneral:Ch. 8 & 9 Hogg & Vaughan
Critical evaluation:Pheonix, A. (2007) Chapter 5 Intragroup processes: Entitativity. In D.Langdridge & S. Taylor (Eds.). Critical Readings in SocialPsychology. OUP.
Wekselberg, V. 1996 Groupthink: A triple fiasco in social psychology. In C.W.
Tolman, F. Cherry, R. van Hezewijk & I. Lubek. ( Eds.). Problems of Theoretical Psychology. Ontario: Captus Press.
Fraser & Burchell Ch. 8 (esp. discussion of normative vs. informational influence)