Group dynamics Flashcards
Group
Collection of people perceived to be bonded together in a coherent unit to some degree
Evolutionary perspective on groups
Essential - impossible to perform certain tasks without a group, makes us more adaptive
Benefits of groups
Self-knowledge, coping (control and support), prestige, help us reach goals
Costs of groups
Barriers to joining (fees, hazing), restricted personal freedom, time/energy/resources, emotional distress when leaving (brain circuits overlap for social rejection and physical pain)
Entitativity
Group coherence, determined by frequency of interaction, importance, common goals, and perceived similarity
Study on social facilitation (biking)
People were faster when trying to beat others compared to beating their own personal record
Study on social facilitation (fishing)
Children wound the fishing reel faster when they were around others compared to alone
Social facilitation
Presence of others improves performance when it is an easy task/something you are good at
Social inhibition
Presence of others hurts performance when task is new or difficult
Study on facilitation vs inhibition (cockroaches)
Presence of other cockroaches led to better performance in simple maze and worse performance in complex maze
Study on facilitation vs inhibition (pool)
Good pool players performed better with an audience and bad pool players performed worse
Why task difficulty matters for facilitation/inhibition
Arousal strengthens dominant responses and interferes with non-dominant responses; presence of others causes arousal (evaluation apprehension, alertness/vigilance, distraction)
Why task difficulty matters for facilitation/inhibition
Arousal strengthens dominant responses and interferes with non-dominant responses; presence of others causes arousal (evaluation apprehension, alertness/vigilance, distraction)
Study on evaluation apprerhension
Social facilitation on an easy task only happened when audience was present and could see compared to when audience was blindfolded or when participant was alone
Study on alertness/vigilance
Participants dressed faster when in the presence of others for easy task (own clothes) and slower in the presence of others for hard task (provided clothes)
Study on distraction
When distracted, participants became aroused and experienced social inhibition or facilitation
Social loafing
Presence of others lets you off the hook
Study on social loafing (tug of war group size)
People put in the least work in a large group compared to the smaller group and when they were alone
Study on social loafing (cheering/clapping)
Sound output decreased as group size increased - in a replication study, they gave participants headphones and a blindfold; given pseudo-groups of 2 and 6, and told them to shout; were loudest when they were alone, then with one other person, and least loud when they thought they were in a group of 6
Group cohesiveness
Perceived similarity leads to high cohesiveness; people tend to gravitate toward similar others
Study on group cohesiveness
All-white vs diverse groups, solved “tourist problem”; all-white group had higher cohesiveness but the diverse group had more effective and feasible ideas
Deindividuation
Lose constraints on behavior when we can’t be identified
Processes driving deindividuation
Decrease in accountability, increase in obedience to group norms
Study on deindividuation (giving out shocks or money)
Independent or group tasks, could give either shocks or money to a confederate; deindividuated participants gave out higher levels of shocks or money (stronger effect on anti-social behavior)
Study on deindividuation (trick or treating)
Either alone or in a group and anonymous or identified; identified kids didn’t take as much extra candy, anonymous and in a group had more kids take extra candy
Contributors to deindividuation
Size of group and anonymity
Groupthink
Flawed thinking that occurs when group cohesiveness is valued over the thoughtful consideration of information
Groupthink study
3 conditions - highly cohesive group, isolated from contrary opinions, directive leader; more perceptions of invulnerability and self-censorship with all three conditions
Risky shift
Groups make riskier decisions
Group polarization
Shift toward extreme positions
Study on tendency of groups to focus on shared information
Had to make decisions in groups about student body president, candidate A has most positive qualities; everyone in shared information group could see candidate A’s 8 positive qualities, people in distributed information group could only see 2 of A’s positive qualities; shared information group reliably picked candidate A, distributed group failed to pick A because they didn’t pool together the information each person had
Avoiding groupthink
Group leader remains impartial, seek opinions from people outside the group, create subgroups where you discuss then come together, anonymous voting
Study on groupthink (juries)
Homogeneous (all white) vs diverse, evaluated Black defendant on trial for sexual assault; white jurors in all-white group saw defendant as more guilty than white jurors in diverse group; white jurors in diverse group raised more novel case facts and race-related issues than in all white-group
Mutually helping
Both sides benefit
Negative interdependence
Not possible for two people to attain the same outcome
Social dilemmas
Most beneficial action for an individual will, if chosen by most people, be harmful to everyone
Prisoner’s dilemma
Cooperative option benefits both sides, but individual outcome may be more appealing; If both parties choose individual outcome they both lose
Arousal and social facilitation
Presence of others increases arousal, makes it easier to perform a dominant response but harder to do something complex or learn something new; others cause us to become alert and vigilant, evaluation apprehension, distract us from task at hand
Process loss
Any aspect of group interaction that inhibits good problem solving
Failure to share unique information
Groups tend to focus on shared information, lose opportunity to learn new information
Transactive memory
Combined memory of a group is more efficient than that of individual members
Reasons for group polarization
Persuasive arguments (members bring in arguments others haven’t considered) and social comparison (people will take similar positions to group members)
Great person theory of leadership
Certain personality traits make a person a good leader, regardless of the situation
Transactional leader
Set clear, short-term goals and reward those who meet them
Transformational leader
Inspire followers to focus on common, long-term goals
Contingency theory of leadership
Leadership effectiveness depends on how task-oriented or relationship-oriented the leader is and on the amount of control and influence they have
Task-oriented leader
Getting job done is more important than feelings and relationships; do better in high and low control work situations
Relationship-oriented leader
Feelings and relationships are more important than getting the job done; do well in moderate-control work situations
Glass cliff
Women tend to be placed in crisis and high-risk situations
Social dilemmas
Tit-for-tat strategy
Start with cooperative option, then always respond with the way your partner did on previous trials
Negotiation
Offers and counteroffers made, solution only when both parties agree
Integrative solution
Outcome where parties make trade-offs according to different interests
