Group Influence 2

HideShow resource information
View mindmap
  • Group Influence 2
    • Group Polarisation
      • Group Polarisatiion in Schools
        • Also called the 'Accentuation effect'.
        • Over time, initial differences between groups of college students become accentuated
        • Pascarella + Terenzini (1991)
      • Group Polarisation in Communities
        • People self segregate e.g. conservative places attract conservative people + become more conservative
          • David + Brooks (2005)
          • Communities become self echo chambers
        • Politically speaking, this results in a more politically divided country
      • Explaining Group Polarisation
        • Informationalnfluence
          • Group discussion = pooling of ideas
          • If ideas are out across that others had not previously thought of, others may shift their opinion
          • Burnstein + Vonokur (1977)
        • Normative Influence
          • We are most persuaded by those in groups who we identify with
          • Self-serving bias: We suggest writing the novel if the chance is 4/10 but think others would say 5/10 or 6/10.
          • Therefore we voice opinions more strongly to prevent ostracism
          • Myers (1978)
      • Group discussions often strengthen a member's intial inclinations
        • Moscovici + Zavalloni (1969)
      • The belief that groups are more cautious than individuals was tested
        • Ppts were presented with decision dilemmas + were asked to decide how much risk to take
        • They did this for 12 items then 5-6 ppts would discuss to reach a final score that was usually lower than individual scores
        • This is call the Risky Shift Phenomenon
        • Stoner (1961)
      • 140 secondary school ppts has their attitudes to President de Gaulle + America measured (via attitude survey)
        • Moscovici + Zavalloni (1969)
        • They were then split into 4 groups and told to reach a unanimous decision
        • They then filled out the attitude survey again alone
        • The group + individual decision after discussion was more extreme, in the direction they supported before
      • Groups of prejudice + non-prejudice students were set up.
        • Like-minded groups were asked for their responses before/after this
        • Round two of discussions increased the gap between the groups
        • Myers + Bishop (1970)
    • Group Think
      • Symptoms
        • Janis (1971)
        • 1) An illusion of invulnerability
        • 2) Unquestioned belief in group morality
        • 3) Rationalisation
        • 4) Stereotyped view of opponents
        • 5) Conformity pressure
        • 6) Self censorship
        • 7) Illusion of unanimity
        • 8) Mind guards
      • Critique
        • For It
          • Directive leadership = poorer decisions made
            • McCauley (1998)
          • Groups prefer supporting info to challenging info
            • Schulz-Hardt et al (2000)
        • Against It
          • Based on case studies, Janis could hand pick positive results
          • Families voice disagreement all the time
            • Packer (2009)
      • Definition:
        • The tendency of decision making groups to suppress dissent in the interest of group harmony
        • Janis (1971)
      • Groupthink can occur in amiable, isolated groups with a directive leader
    • Minority Influence
      • Consistency
        • A minority that is consistent to a certain opinion is more influential
        • To reduce cognitive dissonance by repeatedly hearing something else, majority shift to the dark side
        • 32 groups of ppts were shown 36 slides that were shades of blue
          • 2 confeds were in each group, said all the slides were green, or 2/3 were green
          • In condition 1, 8% agreed with the minority, 2.5% in condition 2
          • Private responding increased agreeing with the minority
      • Self-confidence
        • The more confident a minority is, the more doubts are raised in the majority
          • If people take the head seat of the table, they know they will win
          • Nemeth + Wachtter (1974)
      • Defection from the Majority
        • A defector is anyone who initially agrees with the majority but switches to minority viewpoint
        • A defector is more persuasive than a consistent minority
        • Levine (1989)
      • Influence
        • 108 undergrads were presented with a booklet against a son accused of killing his father + a summary of jury discussion
        • Minority supported defendant. More students switched if they heard of other defectors
        • Clark Et al (2001)
      • "All of history is a record of the power of minorities" Ralph Emerson

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Social Psychology resources »