Group Behaviours Flashcards
Group
A group = “Two or more people who share a common definition and evaluation of themselves and behave in accordance with such a definition”
(Hogg & Vaughan, 2018, p. 276)
(Interaction, interdependence, shared goals, shared needs, structured interactions, mutual influence)
Why study gorups?
People act in groups in ways we might not predict from their behaviour as an individual
Groups can achieve things that individuals working separately can’t.
Groups sometimes act in ways that are worse than individuals: less moral / less effective etc.
Different types of groups
Common identity groups:People are attached to the group identity. More attached to the group than its individual members
Common based groups: people are attached to the members of the group. Opinions of group members influence attachment to the group
Intimacy groups:Strong interpersonal relationships - Families and Small groups of close friends
Task groups:Formed in order to fulfil task(s) -Committees and Work groups
Groups based on large social categories
Groups based on weak social relationships
Transitory groups
Group Norms
Groups have rules/ways of behaving that members follow… ‘norms’
Generic VS Subjective
Group norms can be created as a result of social interaction between group members
Group norms impact on individuals within the group
Behaviour / Judgements / Attitudes
How much group norms influence someone can depend how strongly they identify with the group (Terry & Hogg, 1996)
Examples of group norms influencing members include:
‘Informational influence’ (Sherif, 1936)
‘Social conformity’ (Asch, 1952)
Informational influence (Sherif, 1936)
Sherif used the perceptual illusion of the autokinetic effect to explore how groups influence one another’s judgements.
Participants watched a dot and were asked to individually estimate how much it had moved: answers varied quite a lot
Participants in a group were asked to agree on how much it moved: groups converged (came to an agreement) of around the average.
Participants asked to estimate dot movement again on their own: individuals gave responses close to the group average.
Individual estimations were influenced by group estimates; they followed the ‘group norm’. This is informational influence
Social conformity – Asch (1952)
Experimental investigation of social conformity (going along with the group).
Asked people to take part in a simple task, (judging line length) alone vs. in a group.
Participants in the experimental group didn’t know that their fellow group members were ‘confederates’ (not real participants), deliberately giving wrong answers.
Tested whether people were influenced by these fake group members.
- About 75% of participants conformed with the incorrect answer at least once.
Why?
At least 2 possible reasons:
- They didn’t believe the group but
didn’t want to being singled out
- They were convinced that the group must be
right, because so many people agreed
Impact of groups on performance
Social facilitation can be both positive and negative
The simple presence of other people when we are doing a task can change our performance, but whether it is improved depends on the circumstances.
Social remembering (positive effect of group membership)
Groups have the advantage of pooled knowledge to draw on, which is beneficial when recalling straightforward information (Clark & Stephenson, 1995)
Impact of groups on performance:The Ringelmann effect
When a group works together, at times some
members of the group begin to do less work
than others
Could be due to difficulty co-ordinating in the group
Could be due to a perceived decreased need for individual effort
This has been called the Ringelmann effect, or ‘social loafing’
Impact of groups on performance:Social loafing
Recent research demonstrates social loafing can be a problem in technology-supported teams
- Dispersion of members (i.e.
being located in different
places) increases loafing
- Team size also impacts on
loafing (as the team gets
bigger, individual input decreases)
(Alnuaimi, Robert & Maruping, 2010)
Social loafing is reduced by:
- Identifiability:- i.e. when people’s individual contributions to a task can be identified
- Individual responsibility:- i.e. when people know they can make a unique contribution to a task
Impact of groups on performance:The collective effort model
People will put effort into a group task when:
They believe their input will have an impact
AND
Completing the task is likely to bring them something they value, which could include:-
Concrete things like money, grades etc.
Abstract things such as satisfaction / enjoyment
(Karau & Williams, 1993)
Decision making in groups:groupthink
Groupthink is a very specific phenomenon, thought to occur under particular conditions:-
Stressful situation, without a clear correct solution
Cohesive group of like-minded people, cut off from external (moderating) influences
Strong, vocal leader
Janis (1971, 1982)
Key characteristics of groupthink are:
The group shares the idea that their decision is completely right, that they are ‘invulnerable’
They rationalise the decision, by only looking for evidence to support it, rather than weighing pros and cons
Group members are closed-minded towards alternatives
Disagreement and challenging the norm are actively discouraged by the group
Janis (1971, 1982)
Example: The Iraq War
Consequence: At least 132,000 (potentially many more) civilian deaths (in addition to thousands of deaths of army personnel)
Consequences of groupthink
When groupthink is occurring, it is more likely that:-
The group does not carry out adequate research
Alternative options are not considered
Risks are not adequately assessed
Summary
There are many different types of groups an individual may find themselves a member of
Group norms can influence individuals in various ways, e.g.
When individuals are unsure and look to the group for guidance (informational influence)
When individuals do what the group does to avoid standing out / looking silly (normative influence, social conformity)
The group can be greater or lesser than the sum of its parts (social facilitation vs. loafing)
Group decision making can be risky or cautious, depending on conditions
Group membership can offer protection when individuals’ decisions/cognition may be compromised
