Exam 2- Lecture 8 Flashcards Preview

Psyc 140- Social > Exam 2- Lecture 8 > Flashcards

Flashcards in Exam 2- Lecture 8 Deck (17):

What is a group?

A collection of individuals who have RELATIONS with one another and are INTERDEPENDENT to a significant degree.

On e continuum of "groupiness" based on degree of interdependence.


Triplett (1898)- String in fishing reel study

Concluded: mere presence of others can ENHANCE performance
-also occurred when others NOT COMPETING
-universal (animals)

Social facilitation
-enhanced performance in the presence of others


Social facilitation

Triplett (1898)- String in fishing reel study

Zajonc (1965)
-effect, POSITIVE or NEGATIVE, of presence of others on performance


Dashiell (1930)

Mere presence of others DISRUPTS or HINDERS performance (completing maze, complex math, etc.)

Social inhibition
-hindered performance in presence of others


Zajonc (1965)

Presence of others -> arousal (physiological state)

Arousal -> increase likelihood of dominant response (easy or well-learned task)

Social facilitation
-effect, POSITIVE or NEGATIVE, of presence of others on performance


Dominant response

Responses that are most likely to occur in a situation (habits, automatic behaviors)


Why does the presence of others affect performance?

1. Evaluation apprehension (concern over how others are viewing us)
-blindfolded audience
-powerful audience

2. Distraction (conflict between paying attention to others and to the task)
-overloads cog resources

3. Heightened attention (presence of others increases likelihood of something important happening)
-evolutionary expectation


Evaluation apprehension

Concern over how others are viewing us

Blindfolded audience -> no social facilitation (reduced effects)
-Jogger and woman on grass study
->facing path- joggers ran faster
->away- no effect

Powerful audience -> increased social facilitation



Conflict between paying attention to others and to the task

Overloads cognitive resources and leads to arousal

Bursts of light and noises also increase dominant responses


Heightened attention

Presence of others increases likelihood of something important happening

An evolutionary expectation


Social loafing

Tendency for people to exert LESS EFFORT when pool efforts toward common goal, then when individually accountable

Ringelmann- Tug of war study
-asses amount of pull
-1:1 exert more individual force then when in group

Latane et al. (1979)- Shouting and clapping study
-when believed group- less load than believed alone


How can we eliminate social loafing?

Make individuals accountable
Make task challenging and involving
Make the goal compelling/important to all
Make individuals feel their contribution is important
Provide consequences for success and failure


Group polarization

Risky shift:
Decisions become riskier after group discussion
Not just normative influence, individuals later made riskier decisions on their own (internalization)

group became more cautious

Conclusion: group polarization
Group-produced enhancement of members' preexisting tendencies

-persuasive arguments account
-social comparison account


Persuasive arguments account

In group discussions, participants are exposed to ADDITIONAL arguments in FAVOR of original position

Conformation bias
*Informational influence*


Social comparison account

People think they're more risk-seeking OR risk-adverse than others
->prompts people to try to STAND OUT in group

*Normative influence*


Group think

Deterioration of group judgement produced by striving for CONSENSUS

Janis (1971, 1982)- Case studies


Prevent group think

Leaders should NOT endorse particular position
Minimize time pressure
Encourage and welcome input and criticism from OUTSIDER
Appoint a "devils-advocate"
Subdivide to encourage development of conflicting positions
Before implementing, call a second-chance meeting