8. Small group processes

Question 1

What is a group?

Answer 1

The term “group” is an inference to a “social group” and social groups share some form of connectedness or unity.
Two or more people who interact and influence each other (Shaw, 1981).

Question 2

John Turner (1987)

Answer 2

Argues that group members do not need to interact to feel being in a “group”. They even don’t need to be in one another’s presence.
Group members simply have to identify as a group and perceive themselves as ‘us’ in contrast to ‘them’.
As such, an individual can act and think as a group member.

Question 3

Why do groups exist?

Answer 3

• To meet a need to belong.
  
  • To provide information and decrease uncertainty.
  • To supply rewards that are not easy to gain as an individual.
  • To accomplish goals that are hard to reach as an individual.

Question 4

Group cohesiveness

Answer 4

A sense of team spirit and ‘We-ness’.
Group cohesiveness is about perceiving things in common with other group members.
It is attraction to the group as a whole, rather than simply liking some individuals within it.
The more cohesive the group, the more likely it is to remain together.

Question 5

Two theoretical examples of intra-group and inter-group collective influence

Answer 5

The collective influence of a group - social facilitation, social loafing.
The collective influence in interacting group - group polarisation, minority loafing.

Question 6

Social facilitation

Answer 6

Others mere presence improves the speed and the accuracy of simple motor task performance.

Question 7

Social facilitation in animals

Answer 7

In the presence of other animals, ants excavate more sand, chickens eat more grain, and rats pair mate more often.

Question 8

Triplett (1898)

Answer 8

Norman Triplett (1898) noticed cyclists’ times were faster when they raced together than when each alone raced against the clock and designed one of the first social psychology experiments.
Triplett (1898) asked children to wind string on a fishing reel as rapidly as possible. They wound faster when they worked with non-competitive individual co-participants than when they worked alone.

Question 9

Contradictory research to social facilitation

Answer 9

Other early studies revealed that on some tasks the presence of others hinders performance: cockroaches and parakeets learn mazes more slowly, and people were bad at learning nonsense syllables, completing a maze, and performing complex math problems.

Question 10

Updated social facilitation theory Robert Zajonc (1965)

Answer 10

Increased arousal enhances performance on easy tasks for which the most likely dominant response is correct. On complex tasks, for which the correct answer is not dominant, increased arousal promotes incorrect responses.

Question 11

Social loafing

Answer 11

It is a tendency for people to exert less effort when they pool their efforts towards a common goal than when they are individually accountable.

Question 12

Social facilitation versus social loafing

Answer 12

When being observed increases evaluation concerns, social facilitation occurs; when being lost in a crowd decreases evaluation concerns, social loafing occurs.

Question 13

Mechanism for social loafing

Answer 13

In social loafing, individuals believed that they were evaluated only when they acted alone. The group situation decreased evaluation apprehension; therefore responsibility is diffused across all group members.

Question 14

Is social loafing a universal or cultural phenomenon?

Answer 14

Collectivist cultures exhibit less social loafing than people in individualistic cultures. This is because:
1) Loyalty to family and group (including working groups and peers) runs strong in collectivist cultures.
2) The success of the group is as important as individual success, therefore, these cultures are less likely to be influenced by the adverse effects of pooled unidentifiable individual efforts.
More cross-cultural work is needed to fully understand how social loafing works in different cultures.

Question 15

Sport social loafing example

Answer 15

Whether in a group or not, individuals exert more effort when their output is individually identifiable. When individuals were made identifiable in team sports social loafing and the number of free-riders (people benefitting from the group but giving little in return) reduced.

Question 16

Group polarisation

Answer 16

A principle that helps to explain both bad (e.g. conflict) and good (e.g. risk aversion) outcomes of small group dynamics: in-group discussion typically enhances group members’ initial learnings and the average inclination of group members.
Group polarization predicts that discussion will strengthen an attitude shared by group members.

Question 17

Moscovici and Zavalloni (1969)

Answer 17

French students’ initially positive attitude towards their presidents and negative attitude towards Americans is enhanced after group discussion.

Question 18

Palmer and Loveland (2008)

Answer 18

When the interview panel members discussed the interviewees after an interview, it resulted in a polarized evaluation of the candidates’ performance as either ‘good’ or ‘bad’.

Question 19

Group polarisation in everyday life

Answer 19

Like-minded groups & echo chambers -> In everyday life people mostly associate with others whose attitudes are similar to their own.
People have always tended to associate with people whose attitudes are similar to their own. Now can communicate both off and online.

Question 20

Group polarisation in schools (accentuation effect)

Answer 20

‘Accentuation’ effect: over time, initial differences among groups of college students become accentuated. In the first-year students at College X are more intellectual than those at College Y, that gap is likely to have increased by the time they graduate.
The gaps between sets widen, not just educationally but also socially. This demonstrates the importance of diversity in educational settings.

Question 21

Group polarisation in communities

Answer 21

Where you live, and who you live close to, can influence your beliefs and values. Influences who we interact with on a daily basis.
Exchange of information and gossip can spread more quickly through communities we are close to. Only geographical communities. Geographical communities become psychological communities.
Conservative places attract more conservatives and become more so. Liberal places attract more liberals and become more so. Neighbourhoods become echo chambers.

Question 22

Cehajic-Clancy et al., 2024

Answer 22

Context-level intergroup contact is the strongest predictor of reconciliation in post-war countries.

Question 23

Gang delinquency

Answer 23

During community conflicts, like-minded people amplify their shared tendency -> a gang is more dangerous than the sum of its individual parts. Gang delinquency emerged from groups promoting group hostilities.
Unsupervised peer groups are the strongest predictor of a neighbourhood’s crime victimisation rate.

Question 24

Group polarisation on the internet

Answer 24

The lack of visual cues and increased anonymity led to raised group polarization.
Fake news, misinformation, and conspiracy theories -> impact of group polarization and small-group discussions -> discussing a rumour with our online friends gives it credibility and leads to group polarization.
The internet offers a space for like-minded people to find one another and interact. Online interactions provide support for shared concerns and grievances and amplify the perception of injustices.
Online interactions of shared grievances lead to the formation of novel group identities and the emergence of anonymous online leaders during social movements.
As real-life leaders, a Twitter/X account can be seen as a leader and mobilise crowds for social change if it is perceived as a model, representative member working for the group.

Question 25

Informational influence

Answer 25

Conformity occurring when people accept information about reality provided by other people.
Willingness to accept information offered by someone else (we consider to be a credible and reliable source) as accurate evidence of the truth -> shift in attitude
Active participation in discussion produces more attitude change than passive listening does. Participants and observers hear the same ideas, but when participants express them in their own words, the verbal commitment magnifies the impact.

Question 26

Normative influence

Answer 26

Conformity occurs when we conform to the expectations of others and do what we ‘ought’ to do -> norms of groups shape our behaviour.
Seeking rewards such as social acceptance and approval and avoiding punishment such as social exclusion. Happens more strongly when we feel the groups is monitoring our behaviour and has the ability to punish or reward us.

Question 27

Festinger (1954) social comparison theory

Answer 27

Suggests that “we humans want to evaluate our opinions and abilities, something we can do by comparing our views with others” -> we are most persuaded by people in our ‘reference groups’ - groups we identify with.
We want to be liked and approved by other people. When our reference groups has similar opinions to us. So we state our ideas in a more radical way. Speaking it makes a verbal commitment. We start to believe the more radical views that we have expressed.

Question 28

Injunctive group norms

Answer 28

Perception of the approval of behaviours by others (e.g. perceived approval of drinking behaviour by family and friends are associated with actual drinking behaviour).

Question 29

Descriptive group norms

Answer 29

Perception of the prevalence of behaviours among others (e.g. the perception that others are following COVID-19 health measures predicted compliance with health measures).

Question 30

Group identity (Turner et al., 1987)

Answer 30

The groups we belong in society provide us with a social identity. This identity means feeling psychologically attached to a group and having things in common with our fellow members (ingroup members), and thinking ourselves as quite different from other social groups (outgroup members).
We try to maximise the difference between the ingroup and the outgroup.

Question 31

Minority influence determinants

Answer 31

Consistency
Self-confidence
Defection

Question 32

Consistency

Answer 32

People do not like inconsistency, conflict, and disagreement. When a minority tries to influence a majority, they capitalise on this by creating anxiety and uncertainty among majority group members.

Question 33

Moscovici et al., 1969

Answer 33

The blue-green studies concluded that minority consistency creates doubt and provides an possible alternative way of looking at things. The only way to restore certainty and consistency is for the majority to shift to the view of the minority.

Question 34

Self-confidence

Answer 34

Self-confidence is an aspect of consistency.
Consistency and persistence convey self-confidence. Any behaviour by a minority that conveys self-confidence tends to raise self-doubts among the majority. By being firm and confident, the minority’s apparent self-assurance may prompt the majority to reconsider its position.

Question 35

Defections from the majority

Answer 35

When a minority consistently doubts the majority’s wisdom, majority members become freer to express their own doubts and may even switch to the minority position.