Textbook Notes (368,566)
Canada (161,966)
Psychology (4,907)
Chapter 102070

Chapter 10 2070 final exam.docx

19 Pages
Unlock Document

Psychology 2070A/B
James M Olson

Chapter 10 2070 final exam 12/15/2012 7:16:00 PM Group Dynamics & Intergroup Relations Liberal party was dominant political party in Canada in 20thcentury Canadians known as “middle-of-the-road” (stereotype) Most famous and best prime minister is Pierre Elliot Trudeau (“Trudeaumania”) Group- two or more people who are interacting and/or influencing one another Norman Triplett- Social Facilitation -people perform better in the presence of others (kids pulling faster on fishing reel) Robert Zajonc -improved Triplett’s theory -IMPROVEMENT in front of audience with simple tasks -DECREASE in performance in front of audience with complex tasks -Presence of other people increases the probability of the dominant response (most likely to occur) -Dominant response will be correct when simple or has been done many times -Dominant response is incorrect when complex or new -Presence of others is physiologically arousing (increase heart rate) – in turn the increase heart rate restricts range of attention AND narrows focus of attention and block out distraction when few simple cues -When the task is complex, the narrowed focus makes it difficult for the individual to attend to all of the cues Two-digit number experiment (Trial & Error) -when participants were allowed to practice this task (made task easy), performed better in front of an audience than alone -the harder task resulted in a worse performance in front of an audience If the material is very simple/familiar you can study in the library because the presence of others should narrow your focus of attention -BUT if unfamiliar or new, students are better off studying alone Social Loafing- idea that people may slack off in groups Relaxation or reduced motivation because personal contribution is unidentifiable -larger the group, the less effort and the greater the individual annonymity -if you make persons performance identifiable, social loafing DISAPPEARS Blind Cheer Experiment -Participants cheered the loudest when they thought they were performing alone (1 person) -when believed there was 1 other participant, cheered 82% as loud -when believed there was 5 other participants, cheered 74% as loud Factors affecting Social Loafing 1) People are less likely to loaf when the group is important/meaningful to them (members of a political party) 2) Cohesiveness or attractiveness of the group itself (friends, people you want to be with, social loafing declines) Sometimes social loafing is intentional (group project) and sometimes its not (cheer experiment) Gender & Cultural Differences in Social Loafing -MEN are more likely to loaft than women -groups of women generally found no evidence of social loafing at all -difference occurs because WOMEN are more GROUP-ORIENTED and more concerned about collective outcomes than are men (who are individualistic) -social loafing exists in individualistic cultures (Canada/U.S) and not in collectivistic countries (China) Deinviduation- loss of personal identity and a sense of immersion in a group (Prison guards or inmates) -occurs on the internet, immersion into online groups, diminishment of personal identity -uniform or costumes that conceal identities increases deinviduation -more likely to engage in socially undesirable behavior Three processes:  weakens people inhibitions against performing harmful/socially disapproved actions;  deinviduation increase peoples responsiveness to external cues (can be negative or positive) (Experiment at U of Georgia, women dressed up in nurse or KKK cloaks, had name tags or didn’t. deinviduation- no nametags led to more aggression in the KKK cloak condition, but less aggression in the nursing uniform condition)  increase peoples adherence to norms that emerge in a group (protest rally turning into a riot, norm of aggression forms like its okay to damage property or attack police to make a political statement) -hypothesized to “release” people from their normal ethical constraints (explains some theft, vandalism, interpersonal violence) Halloween & Children experiment -children were more likely to break the rules when they were anonymous rather than non anonymous when they were in a group rather than alone Zimbardo Lab Prison experiment -randomly gave participants roles of guard or inmate -supposed to last 2 weeks but ended after 6 days because guards and prisoners became so aggressive and insulting -guards justified that prisoners would not otherwise obey the rules Groupthink- when pressure to agree leads to biased appraisal of options and poor decisions (because highly motivated to agree with the leader) -thinking that “two heads are better than one” not necessarily true -bad decision can be made if decision is hard or information is missing -BUT even if all information is present, bad decision can still be made Three factors to Groupthink 1) Group cohesiveness- must be highly cohesive, the strength of the forces acting on group members to stay in the group  highly cohesive groups, members are strongly motivated to remain  do not want to be excluded so members conform 2) Directive leader- openly expresses their own opinions before any discussion takes place  Puts pressure for the rest of the group to agree 3) High stress- when group faces external threats, stress makes members feel ever more pressure to follow leaders opinion and to avoid “rocking the boat” 8 Symptoms of Groupthink 1) Illusion of invulnerability (group feels invincible, takes risky decisions) 2) Rationalization of warnings (warnings are discounted as being harmless) 3) Unquestioned belief in morality of group (assumes its morality of members and fails to recognize flaws) 4) Stereotyped view of enemy leaders (may underestimate or unwilling to negotiate if leader believed to be evil) 5) Pressure on group members who challenge the consensus (upsetting when someone criticizes leaders thoughts) 6) Self-censorship of misgivings, questions, counterarguments (don’t express doubts about ideas) 7) Illusion of unanimity (members often believe that everyone agrees with a tentative decision) 8) Emergence of self-appointed mindguards (people who protect the mind of the leader by shielding them from criticism) Drinking water in Walkerton became contaminated after “unrealistic beliefs about the potential for contamination” - e.coli was found - viewed system as invulnerable (1) - numerous rationalizations of warning (2) - didn’t realize moral responsibilities to public (3) - no one disagreed with PUC decisions (5) - PUC members believed everything was okay (7) Three recommendations to reduce groupthink 1) Leaders should be nondirective and allow other group members to express their opinions before stating his or her view 2) Norm of openness should be established in the group  leader must encourage discussion (desirable)  members could be rewarded for raising questions  designate a “devil’s advocate” whose specific role is to question everything 3) People from outside the group should be included in the decision- making process (experts, different views) Researchers have found that HIGHLY cohesive groups discourage dissent and produce more confident decisions -BUT members of cohesive groups report LESS self-censorship which is INCONSISTENT with researchers predictions Groups with confederate directive leaders used less information and produced fewer possible solutions than did groups with nondirective leaders -open leadership style is likely to produce a better and more broadly based decision -Parliamentary system puts pressure on MP’s to support their party’s agenda even if they do not personally agree with it MORE INFORMATION is CONSIDERED when there is a norm of critical thinking rather than a norm for consensus thinking -although some people respond better to direct leadership Group Polarization- tendency for group discussion to strengthen the initial leaning of the members in a group E.g., of 2 situations, group polarized towards encouraging a coach to use a risky play (nothing to lose) and discourage the father from buying risky stocks (lots to lose)  After discussion, the positions that most people initially preferred tend to become even more widely endorsed when two candidates are favored in an interview of three people -not a single committee member included the least preferred candidate in his or her set of two choices Polarization of stereotypes -some discussed fictitious information about boys which negated them, and some just read the information -those who discussed reported stronger stereotypes than the latter -people who share a common stereotype, discussing it will reinforce it Group polarization may also be problematic in; Prisons- antisocial attitudes may be intensified by interactions and conversations amongst prisoners Internet- people expressing their opinions on racist or sexually exploitative web sites might strengthen each others attitudes Causes of group polarization 1) People usually argue in favor of their own view on an issue (most likely to support predominant view) also informational influence 2) Desire to appear knowledgeable and intelligent (social pressure to move in the direction of the preferred view) also normative influence Conditions of expert testimony -the case of “battered woman syndrome” (trials of women who are accused of murdering their abusive husbands) -when experts presented the case juries were more significantly more lenient in their judgments about the woman defendant Jury Deliberations -most likely to produce group polarization -pre-dominant verdict among jurors prior to discussion predict final outcome quite well -group polarization occurs more strongly for verdicts of INNOCENT than verdicts of guilty (less likely to convict because they must be sure that there is no reasonable doubt they are guilty) Minority Influence -Majority tends to become more strongly supported after discussion but does not always carry the day -Moscovici argued that minorities can be successful in their influence only if they are firm and resolute in their position  Must be confident  Must not yield to majority pressure BUT  Must avoid appearing too rigid, extremist, or impervious to information -One way minority to achieve these appearances is by agreeing with the majority on other issues, because when the minority disagrees with the majority on virtually everything, their views are likely to be dismissed exposure to a minority view stimulates divergent thinking- novel creative thoughts that consider alternative approaches to a problem -even if the minority does not convince the majority, it may elicit delayed effects on other judgments or tasks majority views are characterized to elicit convergent thinking- standard or typical approaches to a problem exposure to minority view increases peoples subsequent willingness to take an unpopular position themselves -much less likely to conform to asch’s line-judging task Social Impact Theory – social influence is the result of psychological forces acting on an individual -factors include  number  strength  immediacy (proximity) both majorities and minorities experience this -minorities sometimes appear to have unusual impact, it may be because the strength or closeness of their influence is heightened in some way Leadership -most important part of the group is the leader Trait Approach- focus on the characteristics of people who become leaders Great Person Theory – great leaders are assumed to possess rare qualities that make them effective (also known as trait approach to leadership, charisma, intelligence, decisiveness) -people emerge as leaders who tend to be taller (more physically intimidating) -more capable or intelligent Gender leadership- leaders are more likely to be MALE than female -although women received higher ratings of empathy and likeability -Men are considered agentic (assertive, controlling) -Women are considered communal (sympathetic, helpful) -leaders performed BETTER when the role demands of the leadership position MATCHED their gender (male- task leader, female- socioemotional leader) -task leadership is most common form of leadership, led by men Personality & Leadership -Leaders are more; (ECO-acronym)  extraverted (outgoing)  conscientious (reliable)  open to new experiences (flexible) can also be known as openness -results show that extrav
More Less

Related notes for Psychology 2070A/B

Log In


Join OneClass

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

Sign up

Join to view


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.