Ch.7, Group Influence Flashcards
Shaw Definition of Group:
all groups have on thing in common: their members interact; group is two or more people who interact with and influence one another
Social Facilitation Effect:
prescence of others improves the speed with which people solve problems, and improves accuracy on simple motor tasks (also applies more often); occurs when people work toward individual goals when their efforts can be individually evaluated
Crowding
The effect of other’s presence increases with their number
Being in a crowd intensifies positive or negative reactions
What you do well, you will be energized to do best in front of others
What you find difficult may seem impossible in the same circumstances
Evaluation Apprehension
Observers make us apprehensive because we wonder how they are evaluating us
Social Loafing
People don’t try as hard when there are others in the group because there is less evaluation apprehension and therefore less arousal
Collectivist cultures exhibit less social loafing than people in individualist cultures
People in groups engage less in loafing when the task is challenging, appealing or involving
Deindividuation
Losing sense of self in a group
In groups people are more likely to abandon normal restraints and lose their sense of individual responsibility
Perceive individual actions as the group’s
Physical Anynomity
Zimbardo: anonymous women delivered longer electric shocks to helpless victims than identifiable women
These effects are present on social media when people can engage in any behaviour without it being “traced back” to them
Activities such as throwing rocks and group singing can set the stage for more uninhibited behaviour
Deindiviuated people are less restrained, less self regulated
Large groups create “production blocking” : losing one’s ideas while awaiting a turn to speak
Group Polarization
Group Polarization: a tendency for discussio to enhance the individual’s initial leanings; discussion typically strengthens the average inclination of group members
Accentuation Phenomenon:
: over time, initial differences among groups of university students become accentuated: group members reinforce shared inclinations; also occurs in communities (a gang is more dangerous than the sum of its individual parts) and on the internet (allows people to find reinforcing groups and isolate themselves with one another and find support for their beliefs)
Informational Influence: Explaining Group Polarization
Group discussion elicits a pooling of ideas, most of which favor the dominant viewpoint
Active participation in discussion produces more attitude change than hearing someone else’s arguments
Also depends on where info is coming from/ verbal commitment is important
Normative Influence and Group Polarization
WE are most persuaded by people in our reference groups/groups we identify with
Pluralistic Ignorance: An example of pluralistic ignorance includes not speaking up when a friend cheats on his math test because you incorrectly think that the rest of your friends believe cheating is okay (BELIEVE THEIR VALUES ARE MORE EXTREME) even though you personally believe that cheating is wrong.
Symptoms of Groupthink
Illusion of Invulnerability: belief that nothing bad will happen
Unquestioned belief in the group’s morality: group members assume the morality of their group and ignore ethical/morale issues
Rationalization: the group discounts challenges by collectively justifying it’s decisions
Stereotyped View of Opponent:
Conformity Pressure: group members scold those who do raise doubts
Self-Censorship: since disagreements are often uncomfortable and the group seems to be consensus, members often withhold or discount their misgivings
Illusion of Unanmity: self censorship and pressure overall not to ruin the group consensus gcreates the idea of unanimity
Mindguards: members protect the group from info that would call into question the morality/effectiveness of its decisions
Task vs social leadership
Task Leadership: organizing work, setting standrads, focusing on goal attainment
Social Leadership: building teamwork, mediating conflicts, and being supportive
“Great Person” Theory of Leadership:
all great leaders share certain traits; not viable, effective leadership varies with the situation
Transactional vs transformational leadership
Transactional Leaders: focus on getting to know their subordinates and listening carefully; maintain high expectations
Transformational Leaders: inspiring, focused on optimism and transformation, charismatic, energetic, extroverted.
Minority Slowness Effect:
tendency for people with minority views to express them less quickly than people in the majority
A persistent minority will soon become the focus of debate
social arousal and the dominant response
Social arousal facilities dominant responses, whether right or wrong (for example, students take less time to learn a simple maze and more time to learn a complex one in the presence of others)
Applies to sports teams performing better in home games than away games
Zajonc and Social Facilitation
Arousal enhances whatever response IS DOMINANT: increased aroused arousal enhances performances on easy tasks for which the most likely “dominant” response, WHETHER RIGHT OR WRONG
However, when the response is not dominant and the task is not easy, performance is worse
Sports and the Home Advantage, Stephen Bray
Home field advantage is found as more of an advantage for good teams than poorly performing teams
“Driven By Distraction”, Sanders
conflict between paying attention to others and paying attention to a task at hand overloads our cognitive system
When people wonder how co actors are doing or how an audience is reacting
Mere Presence, Cottrell/Zajonc
Mere presence of others produces some arousal even without evaluation apprehension or arousing distraction
CONCLUSION: ENHANCEMENT OF A DOMINANT RESPONSE IS STRONGEST WHEN PEOPLE THINK THEY ARE BEING EVALUATED
Depersonalized Warriors Phenomena, Watson
Cultures with depersonalized warriors were also the cultures the brutalized the enemy more
CONCLUSION: BEING ANONYMOUS MAKES ONE LESS SELF-CONSCIOUS AND MORE RESPONSIVE TO CUES PRESENT IN THE SITUATION, WHETHER NEGATIVE OR POSITIVE
Risky Shift Phenomenon”, STONER
Groups are likely to take greater risks
Group decisions are riskier:occurs when a group decides by consensus
Group polarization and terrorism
Terrorism primarily rises among people whose shared grievances bring them together and fan their fire
They interact in isolation from moderating influences, they become progressively more extreme
Informational influence and leniency
Informational influence may account for the increased leniency in juries
Passive groups vs interactive groups
APPLIES WHEN THERE IS SOME TYPE OF PERFORMANCE, WHETHER THERE IS EVALUATION OR NOT
Passive Groups: NO INTERACTION, physically or virtually with other people, but some type of group identity or commonalities are shared
INCLUDES THE MERE PRESENCE OF OTHERS EFFECT ^^^
When it is practiced, dominant response will come out in mere presence
Completing easy tasks = easier in front of others (EASY IS SUBJECTIVE BETWEEN PEOPLE)
Completing hard tasks = harder in front of others
HIGHLY AROUSED ON DIFFICULT TASK = PERFORMANCE GOES DOWN
Interactive Groups: groups that fit criteria of textbook definition
Difference between social loafing and social facilitation
Social Loafing: you’re not being evaluated , no evaluation apprehension, and therefore less arousal
Social Facilitation: INDIVIDUAL efforts ARE being evaluated, evaluation apprehension, leads to more arousal
Causes of social loafing
CAUSES: sense of diffusion of responsibility, unclear responsibilities, lack of accountability, lack of motivation, witnessing others loafing
Sources of arousal
Evaluation Apprehension: worried what others are thinking
Distracted by the presence of others
Mere presence of others regardless of evaluation apprehension and distraction impacts performance
Energy INCREASES
