Soc- People in groups
- Created by: Amy
- Created on: 01-01-22 19:05
View mindmap
- People in groups
- Entitativity
- A collection of people who are perceived to be bonded (unitary entity)
- Low entitativity: a mere collection of people, High entitativity: shared goals and outcomes
- What predicts entitativity for an observer: Degree to which members interact, Apparent importance of group to members, Shared outcomes and common goals, Similarity
- Likel et al's taxonomy of entitativity
- Effects presence of others on individual performance: no prior relationship between the people involved
- Effects of task groups on team/group performance
- A collection of people who are perceived to be bonded (unitary entity)
- Intragroup and interpersonal processes
- Terms
- Roles- behaviours specific members are expected to undertake
- Cohesiveness- forces group members to remain in the group eg liking it and desire to belong in the 'right group' (groups that improve status)
- Status- position or rank within a group; high and low status members, high status= greater access to resources
- Norms- rules within a group suggesting how members should behave, following norms= increased status
- Social aggregates- collections of unrelated individuals
- Hazing
- Initiation rituals increase cohesiveness - activity is excusive and so outgroup members wouldn't understand
- Involves initiation rituals ostensibly voluntarily
- Membership of a given groups is reliant upon completing the activity
- Often degrading and can include drinking games, sleep dep, physical assault etc
- Used to gain access to status groups
- Social facilitation/inhibition- effects performance due to presence of others,improves when individual is highly skilled at task, interferes when not eg learning
- Harvard Uni study- 5,000 English Premier League matches away teams gave away more penalties, particularly crowd effect pronounced in inexperienced referees
- Improvement in performance on well learnt/ easy tasks when in the presence of others of the same species (Allport 1920)
- Harvard Uni study- 5,000 English Premier League matches away teams gave away more penalties, particularly crowd effect pronounced in inexperienced referees
- Social facilitation/inhibition- effects performance due to presence of others,improves when individual is highly skilled at task, interferes when not eg learning
- Presence of others makes simple tasks easier and complex tasks harder, 3 possible explanations
- Triplett (1898)- children showed improvement in winding a fishing reel
- Evaluation apprehension
- Concern of being judged by others
- Cottrell et al (1968)- the mere presence of others does not always create arousal and is sometimes calming
- Animals show facilitation effects- lay more eggs
- Nonsense word pronunciation in front of blindfolded vs seeing audience
- No facilitation effect on well learned tasks when the audience was blindfolded- can't be mere presence
- Support for eval app over mere presence
- Social loafing- reduction in effort when individuals work in groups compared to alone- increases with group size (Ringelman 1913, Latane et al 1979, Latane 1979)
- Earphones with shouting voices being played (blindfolded), told to shout as loud as possible, told they were shouting with 1 other person vs with a group (actually always just p shouting)
- More intensity when told shouting with 1 other person than in a group because of diffusion of responsibility & individual differences
- Williams & Sommers (1997)- ostracized men but not women loaf more
- Karau & Williams (1993) Collective effort model- identifies a number of ways to reduce loafing: evaluation, smaller groups, meaningful tasks, undermine expectancy of fellow workers to perform poorly
- Free rider effect- gaining benefits of group membership by avoiding costly obligations of group membership and by allowing other members to incur those costs- exploit and contribute nothing
- Geen (1991) reasons for social loafing- Output equity (believe others loaf), Eval app, Matching to standard (no clear norm)
- Earphones with shouting voices being played (blindfolded), told to shout as loud as possible, told they were shouting with 1 other person vs with a group (actually always just p shouting)
- Distraction conflict theory
- The physical presence of members of the same species is distracting and produces conflict between attending to the audience
- Even an audience who cannot see what you're doing can be distracting and impact your performance
- Baron (1986)
- Creates attentional conflict (don't know what to attend to)
- The physical presence of members of the same species is distracting and produces conflict between attending to the audience
- Leadership
- Leadership style
- Lippitt & White (1943)- Autocratic (aloof, liked less, high productivity), Democratic (discuss, liked more, relatively high pro), Laissez-faire (less interest in group, liked less, low pro)
- Transformational leaders (unique personality characteristics)
- Charismatic (inspire), Individualised(respect for all group members), Intellectual stimulation (encourage novel approach)
- Leader- most influential or powerful person in a group
- Chemers (2001)- Leadership is a 'process of social influence through which an individual enlists and mobilises the aid of others in the attainment of a collective goal
- Personality factors- Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Intelligence, Extraversion, Emotional stability
- Individual differences- taller
- Leadership style
- Entitativity
Comments
No comments have yet been made