Textbook Notes (369,137)
Canada (162,407)
Psychology (1,899)
PSY220H5 (98)
Chapter 7

Chapter 7-PSY220.docx

8 Pages
101 Views

Department
Psychology
Course Code
PSY220H5
Professor
Dax Urbszat

This preview shows pages 1,2 and half of page 3. Sign up to view the full 8 pages of the document.
Description
Ch. 7 Group Influence Chapter 7: Group Influence WHAT IS A GROUP What is a group? And why do groups exist? Group: two or more people, for longer then a few moments, interact with and influence one another and perceive one another as “us”  All groups have one thing in common: their members interact Group influence: 1. social facilitation 2. social loafing 3. de-individuation  these three phenomenon can interact in “minimal group situations” but they also influence ppl’s behavior while interacting  Four examples of social influence in interacting groups: 1. group polarization 2. groupthink 3. leadership 4. minority influence SOCIAL FACILITATION: HOW ARE WE AFFECTED BY THE PRESENCE OF OTHERS? Let’s explore one of social psychology’s most elementary questions: Are we affected by the mere presence of another person? “Mere presence” means that the people are not competing, do not reward or punish, and in fact do nothing except be present as a passive audience or as co-stars. Would the mere presence of others affect a persons jogging, eating, typing, or exam performance? The search for the answer is a scientific mystery story. Co-stars: a group of people working simultaneously and individually on a non- competitive task Social facilitation: (1)Original meaning: the tendency of people to perform simple or well learned tasks better when others are present (2)Current meaning: the strengthening of dominant (prevalent, likely) responses owing to the presence of others  Arousal enhances whatever response tendency is dominant  Increased arousal enhances performance on easy tasks for which the most likely – “dominant”- response Is correct Ch. 7 Group Influence  On complex tasks for which the correct answer is not dominant, increased arousal promotes incorrect responding  Social arousal facilitates dominant responses, whether right or wrong CROWDING: THE PRESENCE OF MANY OTHERS  Crowding enhances arousal, which facilitates dominant responses WHY ARE WE AROUSED BY THE PRESENCE OF OTHERS? Evaluation apprehension: concern for how others are evaluating us  Enhancement of dominant responses is strongest when people think they are being evaluated  We are “driven by distraction” A good theory offers clear predictions that: 1. helps confirm or modify the theory 2. guide new exploration 3. suggest practical application  Social facilitation theory has definitely generated the first two types of predictions: (1)the basics of the theory (that the presence of others is arousing and that this social arousal enhances dominant responses) have been confirmed. (2)The theory has brought new life to a long dormant field of research SUMMING UP: SOCIAL FACILITATION: HOW ARE WE AFFECTED BY THE PRESENCE OF OTHERS PG. 238 Ch. 7 Group Influence SOCIAL LOAFTING: DO INDIVIDUALS EXERT LESS EFFORT IN A GROUP  Social facilitation usually occurs when people work toward individual goals and when their efforts, can be individually evaluated MANY HANDS MAKE LIGHT WORK Social loafing: the tendency for people to exert less effort when they pool their efforts toward a common goal then when they are individually accountable Free riders: people who benefit from the group but give little in return  the group situation decreases evaluation apprehension  So when being observed increases evaluation concerns, social facilitation occurs; when being lost in a crowd decreases evaluation concerns, social loafing occurs SOCIAL LOAFING IN EVERYDAY LIFE  Asia revealed that people in collectivist cultures exhibit less social loafing then people in individualistic cultures SUMMING UP: SOCIAL LOAFING: DO INDIVIDUALS EXERT LESS EFFORT IN A GROUP  Social facilitation researchers study people’s performance on tasks where they can be evaluated individually. However, in many work situations, people pool their efforts and work toward a common goal without individual accountability  Group members often work less hard when performing such “additive tasks”. This finding parallels everyday situations where diffused responsibility tempts individual group members to free-ride on the groups effort  People may, however, put forth even more effort in a group when the goal is important, rewards are significant, and team spirit exists. DEINDIVIDUATION: WHEN DO PEOPLE LOSE THEIR SENSE OF SELF IN GROUPS?  In certain kinds of group situations, people are more likely to abandon normal restraints, to lose their sense of individual responsibility and to become labeled deindividuated Deindividuation: loss of self-awareness and evaluation apprehension; occurs in group situations that foster anonymity and draw attention away from the individual Ch. 7 Group Influence  Being anonymous makes one less self-conscious, and more responsive to cues present in the situation whether negative or positive DIMINISHED SELF AWARENESS  Group experiences that diminish self-consciousness tend to disconnect behavior from attitudes  Self-awareness is the opposite of deindividuation  In japan where ppl more often imagine how they might look to others, people are no more likely to cheat when not in front of a mirror SUMMING UP: DEINDIVIDUATION: WHEN DO PEOPLE LOSE THEIR SEND OF SELF IN GROUPS?  When high levels of social arousal combine with diffused responsibility, people may abandon their normal restraints and lose their sense of individuality  Such deindividuation is especially likely when people are in large groups, are physically anonymous, and are aroused and distracted  The resulting diminished self-awareness and self-restraint tend to increase people’s responsiveness to the immediate situation, be it negative or positive  Deindividuation is less likely when self-awareness is high GROUP POLARIZATION: DO GROUPS INTENSIFY OUR OPINIONS? IMPACT ON GROUP DISCUSSION ON INDIVIDUALS’ OPINIONS Group polarization: group produced enhancement of members’ preexisting tendencies; a strengthening of the members’ average tendency, not a split within the group Pluralistic ignorance: a false impression of how other ppl are thinking, feeling, or responding SUMMING UP: GROUP POLARIZATION: DO GROUPS INTENSIFY OUR OPINIONS?  Potentially positive and negative results arise from group discussion. While trying to understand the curious finding that gro
More Less
Unlock Document

Only pages 1,2 and half of page 3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Unlock Document
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Unlock Document

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit