80 terms

Chapter 8 - Group Processes

STUDY
PLAY

Terms in this set (...)

Group (textbook definition)
a collection of 3 or more people who interact with one another and are interdependent in the sense that their needs and goals cause them to rely on one another
Group (lecture definition)
a set of individuals who have at least 1 of the following characteristics:
1 - direct membership in a social category based on sex, race, or other attributes
2 - a shared, common fate, identity, or set of goals
Entitative
who is a group and who isn't
Low End OR Collective
people existing in the same place at the same time, interacting in the same activity but not together

ex. Concert goers
High End
a close-knit team with lots of direct interaction, clear boundaries of who is/isn't in the group, and whose members gain a social identity from

ex. sports team
Groups can be: (3)
- large or small
- short-lived or enduring
- voluntary or involuntary
Why join a group? (2)
- gain a personal and social identity
- provides a survival advantage (we have an innate need to be in a group)
Reasons for homogeneity in groups (2)
- groups attract similar others to join
- groups operate in ways that encourages similarity
Explicit Adjustment/Socialization
initiation, orientation
Implicit Adjustment/Socialization
subtle observations
Social Roles
shared expectations by group members about how particular people in the group are supposed to behave
Instrumental Role
helps the group achieve its tasks
Implicit Role
provides emotional support and maintains morale
Stanford Prison Study
- originally supposed to be a 2 week study, shut down after 5-6 days
- male Stanford students paid to be either guards or prisoners in a mock prison set up in the basement of a university building
- guards became very abusive and sadistic
- prisoners became helpless/withdrawn or had breakdowns and were released

Termination:
- experimenter/warden brought his girlfriend (also his grad student) to see the study and she caught all sorts of ethics violations and forced him to shut down the study early
Group Norms
- established norms/rules of conduct for members
- can be formal or informal
- usually exert strong conformity pressures on members who deviate from the group norms
Group Cohesiveness
qualities of a group that bind members together and promote liking among them
What is the relationship between group cohesiveness and group performance
causal relationship

more cohesiveness = better performance

better performance = more cohesiveness
Social Facilitation
the tendency for people to do better on simple tasks, but worse on complex tasks, when they are in the presence of other people and their individual tasks/performances can be evaluated
Norman Triplett's Social Facilitation Experiment (1897)
hypothesis: people perform better in front of others that alone

- cyclists racing
- kids winding up a fishing rod

conflicting research results post-Triplett (sometimes enhance, sometimes impair)
Robert Zajonc's (pronounced Zions) Social Facilitation Hypothesis
arousal is key
Why does the presence of others cause arousal? (3)
- causes us to be particularly alert/vigilant
- makes us apprehensive about how we're being evaluated/judged
- distracts us from the task at hand
Dominant Response
the action that comes easiest
Who has to over-train to be able to bypass social impairments?
- firefighters
- police
- military
- doctors
Violin Example
- if you're good at the violin or are playing a well practiced piece, having an audience will enhance your performance

- if you're learning how to play the violin or a new piece, having an audience will impair your performance
Cockroach Study
- timed how long it took cockroaches to run from one side of a maze to another
- easy maze (straight line) = go faster with "spectator" cockroaches present
- hard maze (right turn) = go slower with "spectator" cockroaches present
Mere Presence Theory
the simple presence of others will enhance the performance in speed and accuracy in easy tasks, but will impair performance in difficult tasks
Evaluation Apprehension Theory
the presence of others makes us concerned over what they will think of us, which can either enhance or impair our performance
Distraction Conflict Theory
attention conflict between focusing on the task and inspecting the distracting stimulus creates arousal
Blindfolded Confederates Study
- pairs to perform tasks in front of each other
- Evaluation Apprehension Theory = independent variable
- Mere Presence Theory = constant

- no blindfold = EAT
- blindfold = MPT
True or False: people will cheer louder when they cheer as part of a group than when they cheer alone
False
Social Loafing
the tendency for people to do worse on simple tasks, but better on complex tasks, when they are in the presence of others and their individual performance cannot be evaluated
Individually Identifiable Results
your individual result can be identified from the results of a group
Who loafs more? (2)
- men loaf more than women
- western cultures loaf more than Asian cultures
Blindfold Rope Test
- participants blindfolded and put on a rope pulling machine (can test the force exerted)
- 2 conditions:
1 - told they were pulling alone
2 - told they were pulling as part of a group

results: those who thought they were pulling alone pulled stronger than those who thought they were pulling as part of a team
When will social loafing NOT occur? (6)
if 1 of the following is present:
- people believe their own performance can be identified
- the task is important
- people believe their efforts are necessary for the success of the group - missed this one
- the group will be punished for poor performance
- the group is small
- the group is cohesive
How do you reduce social loafing in academics? (3)
- limit the scope of the project
- keep the groups small
- use peer evaluation
Individual Evaluation Pathways (2)
Easy Task --> Social Facilitation --> Enhance

Hard Task --> Social Facilitation --> Impaired
Group Evaluation Pathways (2)
Easy Task --> Social Loafing --> Impaired

Hard Task --> Social Security --> Enhanced
Deindividuation
the loosening of normal constraints on behaviour when people are in a group, leading to an increase in impulsive and deviant acts
What causes deindividuation? (4)
- arousal
- anonymity
- lack of individual responsibility
- lowered self-awareness (not focused on morals)
Examples of Deindividuation
- Internet Trolls
- Mob Mentality
- Collective Phenomena
Trick or Teat Experiment
- study of 1300 kids trick or treating
- 2x2 study
- alone vs in a group
- anonymous vs identified
- researcher left the kid(s) alone with a bowl of candy that said "take 1" after either identifying the kids or leaving them anonymous

results: alone and in a group, kids took more candy if they were anonymous
Costume Experiment
- female participants asked to put on a costume (either a nurse uniform or a robe that resembled the KKK)
- half were identified, half remained anonymous
- told they were to deliver shocks to a confederate (who was very obnoxious and annoying)

- KKK outfits = deliver stronger shocks (almost the same for identification levels)
- Nurse outfits = deliver weaker shocks (4x weaker if anonymous)

Why? Anonymous nurses were less self-aware and therefore were more conscientious to others
Process Loss
Any aspect of group interaction that inhibits good problem solving
Group Candidates Test
- groups given information packets on 2 candidates
- Group A = everyone has the same information packets with the 8 positives, and 4 negatives
- Group B = everyone has different information packets (4 negatives, 2/8 positives)

results:
- 81% of Group A pick candidate 1
- 24% of Group B pick candidate 1

Why? groups tend to focus on the information they all share and ignore the unique information the individuals alone possess
Group Think
a kind of thinking in which maintaining group cohesiveness and solidarity is more important than considering the facts in a realistic manner
What are the preconditions to Group Think? (5)
- highly cohesive group
- isolated from contrary opinions
- directive leader
- high stress situation
- poor decision-making procedures
What are the symptoms of Group Think? (7)
- illusion of invulnerability
- belief in the moral correctness of the group
- stereotyping out-groups
- no self-censorship
- direct pressure on dissenters to conform
- illusion of unanimity
- mind-guards
What makes up defective decision making? (4)
- incomplete survey of alternatives
- failure to examine risks of favoured alternative
- poor information search
- failure to develop contingency plans
How to avoid the Group Think Trap? (4)
- remain impartial
- seek outside opinions
- create sub-groups - missed this one
- seek anonymous opinions from within the group
Risky Shift
alone, individuals will pick a risky option, but as a group will pick an even riskier option

ex. alone, a 50% success rate is enough to get the individual to participate in an activity. As a group, the success rate drops to 30%
Conservative Shift
alone, individuals will choose a conservative option, but as a group, will choose an even more conservative options

ex. alone, a 70% success rate is enough to get the individual to participate in an activity. As a group, the success rate rises to 90%
Group Polarization
the tendency for groups to make decisions that are more extreme than the inclinations of the individual members
Great Person Theory
the theory that certain key personality traits (ex. intelligent, extroverted, charismatic, confidence, etc.) make a person a good leader, regardless of the situation the leader faces
Integrative Complexity
the ability to recognize more than one perspective on an issue and to be able to integrate various perspectives
Transactional Leaders
leaders who set clear, short-term goals and reward people who meet them
Transformational Leaders
leaders who inspire followers to focus on common, long-term goals
Contingency Theory of Leadership
leadership effectiveness depends both on how task-oriented and relationship-oriented the leader is, and on the amount of control and influence the leader has over the group
Task-Oriented Leader
a leader who is concerned more with getting the job done than with the feelings of the workers and their relationship with them
Relationship-Oriented Leader
a leader who is concerned primarily with the feelings of the workers and their relationship among them
High-Control Situations
situations where the leader has excellent interpersonal relationships among the workers, their position is clearly perceived as powerful, and work by the group is structured and well defined
Low-Control Situations
situations where the leader has poor relationships with workers and work is not clearly defined
Moderate-Control Situations
situations where work is smooth but the leader can sooth any discomfort that arises
Agenic Traits
traits that are typically associated with men

ex. assertive, controlling, dominant, independent, self-confident
Communal Traits
traits that are typically associated with women

ex. concerned for the welfare of others, warm, helpful, kind, affectionate
Glass Cliff
women break the glass ceiling only to be put in charge of units/groups that are in crisis or are doomed to fail
True or False: groups are less likely than individuals to invest more and more resources into a project that is failing.
False
Escalation Effects
occurs when commitment to a failing course of action is increased to justify prior investments

also called:
- entrapment
- the sunk-cost trap/fallacy
Boston Big Dig
- high-speed underground tunnel to be built in Boston
- original scope: $2.6 billion, to be finished in 1995
- end scope: $28 billion, finished in 2008
Social Dilemma
a conflict in which the most beneficial action for an individual, if chosen by most people, will have harmful consequences for everyone
Prisoner's Dilemma
- a one-time, two-person dilemma
- you are better off competing (confess) and hope that your opponent cooperates (don't confess)
- drawback is that if your opponent confesses too, then you get a larger punishment
Bachelor Pad Video
- Both Share = split the $250 000
- 1 Share, 1 Keep = keeper gets all the money
- Both Keep = the $250 000 is split between the evicted house-guests (winners get nothing)
Tit-for-Tat Strategy
a means of encouraging cooperation by at first acting cooperatively but then always responding the way your opponent did on the previous round

ex.
A = cooperate, B = compete
A = compete, B = compete
A = compete, B = cooperate
A = cooperate, B = cooperate
Trucking Game
- get your delivery truck to the destination the fastest
- get paid 60 cents - time
- fastest way is to use the 1-lane road
- eventually, opponents share the one-lane road

Variation: each opponent has a gate on the 1-lane road that they control - you lose significantly more $ in this variation
Why the Tit-for-Tat Strategy elicits cooperation (4)
- it is nice
- it is not exploitable
- it is forgiving
- it is transparent
Negotiation
a form of communication between opposing sides in a conflict, in which offers and counter-offers are made and a solution occurs only when both parties agree
Integrative Solutions
a solution to a conflict whereby the parties make trade-offs on issues according to their different interests; each side concedes the most on issues that are unimportant to it but more important to the other side

ex. kids trading Halloween candy
Resource Dilemmas
concern how two or more people share a limited resource
Commons Dilemma
limited by a non-replenishing resource

ex. Tragedy of the Commons (everyone has 1 cow in the commons, someone adds a second cow so then everyone does and suddenly there's no more grass and everyone's cows die)

ex. ocean dumping, deforestation
Public Goods Dilemma
resources that the public contributes to

ex. blood bank, food bank
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE...
STUDY GUIDE