Reaching A Verdict - Reaching A Verdict

Question 1

Which study is on stages in decision making?

Answer 1

Hastie

Question 2

What did the orientation period in Hastie’s study include?

Answer 2

• relaxed and open discussion
• set the agenda
• raise questions and explore facts
• different opinions arise

Question 3

What does the open confrontation period in Hastie’s study include?

Answer 3

• fierce debate
• focus on detail
• explore different interpretations
• pressure on the minority to conform
• support for the group decision is established

Question 4

What does the reconciliation period in Hastie’s study include?

Answer 4

• attempts to smooth over conflicts

- tension released through humour

Question 5

Which was the study on majority influence?

Answer 5

Asch

Question 6

What was the aim of Asch’s study?

Answer 6

To investigate the effects of conformity to a majority when the task is unambiguous.

Question 7

What was the method of Asch’s study?

Answer 7

A laboratory experiment.

Question 8

What was the procedure of Asch’s study?

Answer 8

A naïve participant was asked a question to which several stooges of the experimenter had already given clearly the wrong answer. (‘Which of the three lines, A, B or C matches the stimulus line X?’) He was interested to see if even a crystal-clear decision, an individual would defer to the majority.

Question 9

What were the results of Asch’s study?

Answer 9

In individuals conformed on one of three occasions (32%). If just 1 stooge disrupts this conformity this number falls to 5%. Also, majorities bigger than 3 make very little difference to the conformity effect. This may be because 3 is enough to create a group norm whereas 2 would be insufficient.

Question 10

What was the discussion of Asch’s study?

Answer 10

In a jury a person may feel more inclined to do what they believe to be right rather than be in the majority as they do in this study.

Question 11

What was the study on minority influence?

Answer 11

Nemeth and Wachtler

Question 12

What was the aim of Nemeth and Wachtler’s study?

Answer 12

To investigate the influence of perceived autonomy (choosing where to sit on a table) and consistency on minority influence.

Question 13

What was the method of Nemeth and Wachtler’s study?

Answer 13

A laboratory experiment as a mock trial.

Question 14

Who were the participants in Nemeth and Wachtler’s study?

Answer 14

Groups of five participants (one is a stooge) drawn from an adult sample of students.

Question 15

What was the procedure of Nemeth and Wachtler’s study?

Answer 15

The group had to deliberate on the amount of compensation due for a victim of a injury. After hearing the facts, everyone made an individual verdict and was taken to another room where there is a rectangular table with two seats at either of the long sides of the table and one at the head of the table. In half the groups the participants are asked to sit at the table with the stooge picking the head and in the other groups the experimenter picks where everyone sits. They then deliberate on the case. During the discussion the stooge consistently adopts a deviant position, suggesting a figure of $3000 in compensation rather than $10,000-$20,000 as was the view of the rest.

Question 16

What were the results of Nemeth and Wachtler’s study?

Answer 16

The confederate exerts influence when he is consistent and when he is perceived as autonomous, because he has chosen his seat, whereas when seated by the experimenter he has little influence (measured by the difference between the original individual verdicts and the later group ones). Moreover, when he has been influential, this effect continues into a second case. When he sits at the head of the table he is seen as more consistent and confident.

Question 17

What was the discussion of Nemeth and Wachtler’s study?

Answer 17

Many examples exist where minorities have influenced majorities by being consistent over time. Does this have reprocusions in a jury room where people sit around a long table? However, it is possible that in the jury room this effect is weakened by the need for unanimity in a limited time.