Groups Flashcards

1
Q

Entitactivity

A

The property of a group that makes it seem like a coherent, distinct and unitary entity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Common-Bond group

A

groups based upon attachment among members

> Maximising their rewards and minimising their costs with respect to their own contributions
personal goal > Group goal

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Common-identity groups

A

groups based on direct attachment to the group

> altruistic principle of maximising the group’s rewards and minimising its cost
Group goal > personal goal

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Group cohesiveness

A

The property of a group that effectively binds people, as group members, to one another and to the group as a whole, giving the group a sense of solidarity and oneness

by:

  1. attractiveness of group/group members
  2. ind. goals requiring social interaction / social interaction per se
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

personal attraction

A

liking for someone based on idiosyncratic preferences and interpersonal relationships

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

social attraction

A

liking for someone based on common group membership and determined by the person’s prototypicality of the group

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Group socialisation

A

dynamic relationship between the group and its members that describes the passage of members through a group in terms of commitment and of changing roles

three basic processes
1. Evaluation: continuous comparison of the past, present and future of rewards of the group
2. Commitment
3. role transition: a sharp change in the type of role a member occupies in a group
initiation rite: often painful or embarrassing public procedure to mark group members’ movement from one role to another

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Five stage developmental sequence

A
  1. Forming: an orientation and familiarisation stage
  2. storming: a conflict stage, where members know each other well enough to start working through disagreements about goals and practices
  3. norming: having survived the storming stage, consensus, cohesion and a sense of common identity and purpose emerge
  4. performing: a period in which group works smoothly as a unit that has shared norms and goals, and good morale and atmosphere
  5. adjourning: the group dissolves because it has accomplished its goals, or because members lose interest and motivation and move on
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Ethnomethodology

A

Method involving the violation of hero norms to reveal their presence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Frame of reference

A

complete range of subjectively conceivable positions on some attitudinal or behavioural dimension, which relevant people can occupy in a particular context

> to act ‘appropriately’
coordinate the actions of members towards fulfilment of group goals
constitute moral conduct: behavioural activation (approach) and behavioural inhibition (avoidance)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Roles

A

> A division of labour
furnish clear-cut social expectations within the group and provide information about how members relate to one another > furnish members with a self-definition and a place within the group
role identity theory

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Status

A

consensual evaluation of the prestige of a role or role occupancy in a group, or of the prestige of a group and its members as a whole

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

expectation state theory

A

theory of the emergence of roles as a consequence of people‘s status-based expectations about others‘ performance

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

specific status characteristics

A

information about those abilities of a person that are directly relevant to the group‘s task

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Diffuse status characteristics

A

information about a person’s abilities that are only obliquely relevant to the group’s task, and derive mainly from large-scale category memberships outside the group

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Communication network

A

set of rules governing the possibility or ease of communication between different roles in a group
> greater centralisation improves group performance
> degree of autonomy felt by group members > satisfaction

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Subgroup

A

> competition

> Schism: division of the group into subgroups that differ in their attitudes, values or ideaology

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

deviants and marginal members

A

deviation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Subjective group dynamics

A

a process where normative deviants who deviate towards an outgroup (anti—norm deviants) are more harshly treated than those who deviate away from the outgroup (pro-norm deviants)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

reasons for joining groups

A

> Share goals that require behavioural interdependence for the achievement > for mutual positive support and the mere pleasure of affiliatio

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

motivation for affiliation and group formation

A

> terror management theory: the notion that the most fundamental human motivation is to reduce terror of the inevitability of death
reduce fear of death
uncertainty-identity theory: to reduce uncertainty and to feel more comfortable about who they are, people choose to identify with groups that are distinctive, and clearly defined and have consensual norms
motivated to join groups that are consensually positively evaluated and furnish a positive social identity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

reasons for not joining group

A

> social ostracism: exclusion from a group by common consent can be particularly painful and have widespread effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Coacting groups

A

Mere presence of others

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Mere presence of others

A

an entirely passive and unresponsive audience that is only physically present

fishing reel experiment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Social facilitation effect

A

Individuals perform better in the presence ofothers than alone

an improvement in the performance of well-learnt/easy tasks and a deterioration in the performance of poorly learnt/difficult tasks in the mere presence of members of the same species

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Drive theory

A

The physical presence of members of the same species instinctively causes arousal that motivates performance of habitual behaviour patterns

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

audience effects

A

Impact of the presence of others on individual task performance

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

self-presentation

A

to make the best possible impression of themselves to others

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Social inhibition effect

A

Individuals perform worse in the presence of others

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

destruction-conflict theory

A

The physical presence of members of the same species is distracting and produces conflict between attending to the task and attending to the audience > distraction impairs task performance
> attentional conflict produces strife that facilitate dominant responses
> manage easy task but not difficult task

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

self-awareness theory

A

> Focus their attention on themselves as an object
compare actual self and ideal self > Self-discrepancy theory
increases motivation and effort on easy task
give up trying on difficult task

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

Arousal theory

A

A reconciliation of social facilitation and social inhibition effects

mere presence of others > arousing

dominant response is the correct response: social facilitation

dominant response is the incorrect response: social inhibition

the cockroach experiment

Initial arousal changes with task difficulty ­ Easy task : lower initial arousal
­Difficult task : higher initial arousal

The correlation between performance and arousal: inverted U shape
affected by two factors: difficulty of the task and arousal

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

evaluation apprehension model

A

The argument that the physical presence of members of the same species causes drive because people have learnt to be apprehensive about being evaluated
> approval and disapproval > social pressure > acquired arousal

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

Leadership

A

getting group members to achieve the group‘s goals

Autocratic leaders: leaders who use a style based on giving orders to followers
Democratic leaders: leaders who use a style based on consultation and obtaining agreement and consent from followers
Laissez-faire leaders: leaders who use a style based on disinterest in followers, generally intervened minimally

Leaders behaviour description questionnaire:
Scale devised by the Ohio State leadership researchers to measure leadership behaviour and distinguish between “initiating structure” (task-oriented) and “consideration” (relationship-oriented) dimensions > high on both: effective leader

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

Great person theory

A

perspective on leadership that attributes effective leadership to innate or acquired individual characteristics (instead of the context or process of leadership)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

Situational perspectives

A

The view that anyone can lead effectively if the situation is right

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

Contingency theories

A

Theories of leadership that consider the leadership effectiveness of particular behaviours or behavioural styles to be contingent on the nature of the leadership situation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q

Least-preferred co-worker (LPC) scale

A

Fiedler’s scale for measuring leadership style in terms of favourability of attitude towards one’s least-preferred coworker
> high: relationship-oriented
> low: Task-oriented

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
39
Q

Situational control

A

classification of the task characteristics in terms of how much control effective task performance requires

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
40
Q

Normative decision theory

A

A contingency theory of leadership that focuses on the effectiveness of different leadership styles in group decision-making contexts
> autocratic: subordinates input is not sought > fast
> consultative: subordinates input is sought, but the leader retains the authority to make the final decision
> Group decision-making: leader and subordinates are equal partners in a truly shared decision-making process
> contingent on the quality of leader-subordinate relations, and on task clarity and structure

41
Q

Path-goal theory

A

A contingency theory of leadership that can also be classified as a transactional theory - it focuses on how ‘structuring’ and ‘consideration’ behaviours motivate followers

42
Q

Transactional leadership

A

Approach to leadership that focuses on the transaction of resources between leaders and followers
> Creating expectations and setting goals, providing recognition and reward for task completion

43
Q

idiosyncrasy (special) credit:

A

hollander’s transactional theory, in which followers reward leaders for achieving group goals by allowing them to be relatively idiosyncratic > Allow them to be innovative in experimenting with new ideas and new directions

44
Q

Leader-member exchange theory

A

theory of leadership in which effective leadership rests on the ability of the leader to develop good-quality personalised exchange relationships with individual members

45
Q

Vertical dyad linkage model

A

an early form of leader-member exchange theory in which a sharp distinction is drawn between dyadic leader-member relations: the subordinate is treated as either in ingroup member or an outgroup member

46
Q

Transformational leadership

A

approach to leadership that focuses on the way that leaders transform group goals and actions - mainly through the exercise of charisma > individualised consideration: attention to followers’ needs, abilities and aspirations, in order to help raise aspirations, improve abilities and to satisfy needs
> intellectual stimulation: Challenge followers’ basic thinking, assumptions and practices to help them develop newer and better mindset and practices
> charisma/inspiring leadership: provides the energy, reasoning and sense of urgency that transforms followers
Multifactor leadership questionnaire: The most popular and widely used scale for measuring transactional and transformational leadership

47
Q

charismatic leadership

A

leadership style based upon the leaders’ (perceived) possession of charisma

48
Q

Leader categorisation theory / implicit leadership theory

A

we have a variety of schemas about how different types of leaders behave in different leadership situations. When a leader is categorised as a particular type of leader, the schema fills in details about how that leader will behave

49
Q

Status characteristics theory / expectation states theory

A

Theory of influence in groups that attributes greater influence to those who possess both task-relevant characteristics (specific status characteristics) and characteristics of a high-status group in society (diffuser status characteristics)

50
Q

social identity theory of leadership

A

development of social identity theory to explain leadership as an identity process whereby in salient groups prototypical leaders are more effective than less prototypical leaders

51
Q

Group value model

A

view that procedural justice within groups makes members feel valued, and that leads to enhanced commitment to and identification with the group
> leaders: act fairlly

52
Q

Relational model of authority in groups

A

Tyler’s Account of how effective authority in groups rests upon fairness- and justice-based relations between leader and followers

53
Q

Distributive justice

A

The fairness of the outcome of the decision

54
Q

Procedural justice

A

The fairness of the procedure is used to make a decision

55
Q

Social dilemmas

A

Situations in which short-term personal gain is at odds with the long-term good of the group > crisis of trust

56
Q

Glass ceiling

A

an invisible barrier that prevents women, and minorities in general, from attaining top leadership positions

57
Q

Role congruity theory

A

mainly applied to the gender gap in leadership - because social stereotypes of women are inconsistent with people’s schemas of effective leadership, women are evaluated as poor leaders

58
Q

Stereotype threat

A

feeling that we will be judged and treated in terms of negative stereotypes of our group, and that we will inadvertently confirm these stereotypes through our behaviour

59
Q

Glass cliff

A

A tendency for women rather than men to be appointed to precarious leadership positions associated with a high probability of failure and criticism

60
Q

Intellective tasks

A

demonstrable

adopt the truth-wins rule

empirically, the group decision making process is like a “truth-supported win”
­ Groups perform at the level of the second-best member (groups require as least two solvers to solve a problem)

group performance > average ind. performance
for the best person’s performance > Great performance Empirically, the proportion of groups who answer the question correctly is close to that predicted by “truth-supported win” than “truth-win”.

Thus, a group performs better than an average individual, but does not perform at the level of the best member

These results suggest that 3-person groups are necessary and sufficient to perform better than the best individuals on highly intellective problems.

61
Q

Judgmental tasks

A

not demonstrable

adopt the majority-wins rule

Jury decision making
­A typical decision rule is 2/3-majority, hung otherwise

In general, the number of group members that is necessary and sufficient for the collective decision is inversely proportional to the demonstrability of the proposed group response.
i.e., The smaller the demonstrability of the proposed group response, the greater the number of group members required for a collective decision.

62
Q

task demonstrability

A

Group consensus on a verbal and mathematical system eg. degrees, parallel lines etc

Sufficient information for solution within system

Non-solvers can recognize and accept correct solution

Solvers have sufficient time, motivation, and ability to demonstrate the solution to non- solvers

63
Q

social decision schemes

A

The consensus requirement for a group to solve a problem or to reach a decision can be represented by social decision schemes
the rule of combining a set of individual preferences into a group judgment
­Social decision schemes, as inferred from, or as an indication of the underlying group processes need
not be the same as the assigned decision rule.

explicit or implicit decision-making rules that relate individual opinions to a final group decision

64
Q

decision rules also differ in

A
  1. strictness: The amount of agreement required by the rule - unanimity is extremely strict and majority-wins is less straight
  2. distribution of power: How authoritarian the rule is
    > authoritarian: concentrate power in one member
    > egalitarian: spread power among all members
65
Q

social transition scheme

A

method for charting incremental changes in member opinions as a group moves towards a final decision

66
Q

group is better than individuals in

A

rejection of errors
­recognition of truth
­collective information processing

67
Q

Social loafing

A

A reduction in individual effort when working on a collective task (one in which our outputs are pooled with those of other group members) compared with working either alone or I’ll call actively (our outputs are not pooled)

shouting experiment

68
Q

Ringelmann effect

A

Individual effort on a task diminishes as group size increases

69
Q

Free-rider effect

A

Gaining the benefits of group membership by avoiding costly obligations of membership and by allowing other members to incur those costs

70
Q

Process loss

A

deterioration in group performance in comparison to individual performance due to the whole range of possible interferences among members

= potential productivity – actual productivity

71
Q

Coordination loss

A

Members do not organize their efforts optimally

deterioration in group performance compared with individual performance, due to problems in coordinating behaviour

72
Q

Motivation loss (social loafing) ­

A

Not trying hard as in groups as an individual

73
Q

evaluation effects

A

­If individual input cannot be identified, social loafing occurs. Even when an individual works alone, he or she will put in less effort

solution: ask to identify their individual input

74
Q

Reasons of social loafing

A
  1. output put equity: we believe that others loaf
  2. evaluation apprehension: We worry about being evaluated by others
  3. matching to standard: we do not have a clear sense of the group‘s standards or norms, so we hang back and loaf
75
Q

Social compensation

A

Increased effort on a collective task to compensate for other group members‘ actual, perceived or anticipated lack of effort or ability

76
Q

task taxonomy

A

Group task can be classified according to whether a division of labour is possible, whether there is a predetermined standard to be met, and how an individual‘s inputs can contribute

77
Q

Task demands

A

Group performance is determined by task demands (I. Steiner)

  1. task goal
  2. task divisibility
  3. combination procedure
78
Q

 Task goal

A

Maximizing (quantity)
­ how much or how rapidly something is done ­Optimizing (quality)
­ how well something can be done

79
Q

Task divisibility

A

­ Divisible
­ Tasks can be broken down and shared by different members
­
Unitary
­ Tasks have to done concurrently by different
members

80
Q

Combination procedure

A

Additive
­ Sum of group members’ performance determines
group performance

disjunctive
­ Performance of best performing member determines group performance

­Conjunctive
­ Performance of the poorest performing member solely determines group performance

81
Q

Brainstorming

A

A technique to facilitate creative thinking ­ Defer Judgment
­ Quantity Breeds Quality
­ The Wilder the Idea the Better
­ Combine and Improve Ideas
­ Take a Break from the Problem
Group members generate as many ideas as possible ­ To build on other’s ideas when possible
­ Not to criticize other’s ideas

82
Q

Brainstorming problems

A

Production blocking
­ Cannot express ideas when someone else is talking ­ Cannot think while listening to others
reduction in individual creativity and productivity in brainstorming groups due to interruptions and turn taking probably the main obstacle to unlocking the creative potential of brainstorming groups

Social loafing or free-riding
­ Perceive low accountability or value of one’s effort

Evaluation apprehension
­ Afraid of being negatively evaluated

Downward comparison
­ Follow the group norm in maintaining a low level of performance throughout the group session

Production matching
because brainstorming is novel, members use average group performance to construct a performance norm to guide their own generation of ideas > produces regression to the mean

83
Q

illusion of group effectivity

A

experience-based belief that we produce more and better ideas in groups than alone, because:
1. More ideas than any single member would produce alone
2. fun: enjoy groups more > feel more satisfied
3. Only call out some of the ideas, Because others have already suggested the remaining ideas
> attribute relatively low to their own relatively high latent productivity
> seen to have enhanced or confirmed the high level of performance

84
Q

Solutions to production blocking

A
  1. electronic brainstorming: Brainstorm via computer
    > Do not have to listen or wait for a turn to speak
    > can produce more ideas
  2. heterogeneous group: Members have diverse types of knowledge about the brainstorming topic
    > create a particularly stimulating environment that alleviate the effects of production blocking
85
Q

Choice shift

A

The difference between pre-discussion individual decision and group decision

86
Q

Group polarization

A

The difference between individual opinions before participating or listening to group discussion and
after such experience

2 variants:

  1. The bandwagon effect: On learning which attitude pole is socially desirable, people in an interactive discussion may compete to appear to be stronger advocates of that pole
  2. pluralistic ignorance: because sometimes people behave publicly in ways that do not reflect what they actually think, they can be ignorant of what everyone really thinks
87
Q

Reasons of group polarisation (social comparison theory)

A

reasons:

Festinger’s social comparison theory (normative influence)
­ Lacking objective standard to evaluate an individual’s opinion, look to others to seek validation
­ Depending on the task, either riskiness or cautiousness is normatively favored by most people
­ Seeking social approval, individuals want to be more extreme than others
­ Realize not as extreme as they desire upon discussion
­ Adjust opinion to become more extreme

88
Q

reasons of group polarisation (persuasive argument theory)

A

There exists an universal pool of persuasive arguments
­ More persuasive arguments favoring the dominant direction than another
­ During discussion the probability of sampling, and thus being persuaded by, novel arguments favoring the dominant direction is higher
­ Individuals become more extreme in opinion

View that people in groups are persuaded by novel information that supports the initial position, and thus become more extreme in their endorsement of their initial position

89
Q

reasons of group polarisation (social identity theory)

A

theory of group membership and intergroup relations based on self-categorisation, social comparison and the construction of a shared self-definition in terms of ingroup-defining properties
> specifically focuses on the social-categorisation process

90
Q

Group memory

A

> important aspect of group decision-making is the ability to recall information

91
Q

Group remembering

A

> Group recall more than individuals because members communicate unshared information and because the group recognises true information when it hears it
depend on the memory task
Simple and artificial task > Complex and realistic task
Because of process loss, fail to adopt appropriate recall and decision strategies
A constructive process by which an agreed joint account is worked out
Some individuals’ memories will contribute to the developing consensus, while others’ memories will not
The group shapes its own version of truth

92
Q

transactive memory

A

members have a shared memory for who within the group remembers what and is the expert on what
> different members remember different things
> remember significantly more information
> The basis is usually social categorisation: people stereotypically assign memory domains to individuals on the basis of their category memberships
> can also develop:
negotiate responsibility for different memory domains
assign memory domains on the basis of relative expertise assign memory domains on the basis of access to information

93
Q

Group mind

A

people adopt a qualitatively different mode of thinking when in a group

94
Q

Group culture

A

groups develop detailed knowledge about norms, allies and enemies, working conditions, motivation to work, performance and performance appraisal, who fits in and who is good at what

95
Q

groupthink

A

A mode of thinking in highly cohesive groups in which the desire to reach an unanimous agreement overrides the motivation to adopt proper rational decision-making procedures

96
Q

effect of group size

A

Group size DOES matter (found in simulation studies) even though it was not
demonstrated in empirical studies due to limited sample sizes

Consider a criminal trial, the simulation shows that
­ When the proportion of people in the population favoring a guilty verdict (pg) is low, 6-person groups are more likely to convict than 12-person groups.
­ When pg is high, 12-person groups are more likely to convict than 6-person groups

97
Q

Order effects

A

3 charges in a criminal trial
­ Criminal damage to property [CD] ­ Aggravated battery [AB]
­ Reckless homicide [RH]

Orders to consider the three charges ­ RH, AB, CD (descending severity)
­ CD, AB, RH (ascending severity)

Conviction rate on the AB charge ­ Descending = .22 > ascending = .04

98
Q

straw poll

A

Empirical results
­ Strong effect of local majority at the individual level ­ But no effect at the group decision level

2 ways:
> together
> one-by-one

straw poll: one-by-one
3-person majority > conformity
facing local majority: majority influence

Compared with simultaneous polling, there were more participants shifting their opinions in sequential polling

99
Q

cyclical majority

A

3 options

A vs C