group processes Flashcards

1
Q

define group

A

set of individuals with at least one characteristic:

  • direct interaction over period of time
  • joint membership in social category
  • shared, common fate, identity or set of goals
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

define collective

A
  • assembly of people engaging in a common activity, little interaction with each other.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

why join a group?

A
  • human life requires groups
  • social brain hypothesis
  • protect from physical health, and gain personal, social identity
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

social brain hypothesis

A

human intelligence did not evolve primarily as a means to solve ecological problems, but rather as a means of surviving and reproducing in large and complex social group

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

group roles

  • ways to define
  • two fundamental types of roles
  • match characteristic to?
A
  • defined as formal (title) or informal
  • instrumental role - help group achieve tasks
  • expressive roles to provide emotional support and maintain morale.
  • match characteristic to skill set = beneficial.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Power of roles - Stanford prison experiment

A

randomly assigned roles. prisoners were abused by guards. prisoners had mental breakdowns.
- controversial: Zimbardo mixed roles. experimenter and prison guard. Z wouldnt let ppl out, tried to encourage them to stay.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

group norms

  • defined?
  • weak or strong conformity?
A

formal - explicit rules
informal - what to wear to party
strong conformity pressures, deviation can have consequences.
norm can be free-thinking = more heterogenous

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

group cohesiveness - define

- relationship btw cohesive & group performance

A

the forces exerted on a group that push its members close together
- causal relationship: more cohesive = better performance & vice versa. But, stronger evidence for better performance = better cohesiveness.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

social facilitation - define

- two researchers, their findings

A

what impact does the presence of others have on our performance

  • triplett: enhance performance when biking with ppl.
    • competitive instinct; nervous energy increases performance.
  • zajonc = arousal is key. arousal affects performance depending on type of task.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

the zajonc solution

- 3 steps

A
  1. presence of others
  2. arousal
  3. strengthen dominant response = quality of performance varies by difficulty of task
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

dominant response

- difficult vs easy

A

=> easy: correct response, performance enhancement

=> difficult: incorrect response, performance impairment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

is social facilitation merely a human thing?

-study?

A

no. cockroaches show better performance in an easy task with presence of others.
worse performance on difficult task in presence of others

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

3 theories for social facilitation

A

zajonc mere presence theory
evaluation apprehension theory
distraction conflict theory

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

what is zajonc mere presence theory

A

presence enough to facilitate social facilitation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

evaluation apprehension theory

A

others mut be in position to evaluate one’s performance to effect performance.
*concern for judgement => increased arousal => increase dominant response

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

distracttion conflict theory

A

attentional conflict between focusin on task and inspecting the distracting stimulus creates arousal.
- nothing uniquely social about “social” facilitation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

which theoyr is correct

- what are they again?

A

mere presence, evaluation apprehension, distraction conflict.

  • one study: blind-fold vs non blind fold = blind-folded = did better. evaluation is key.
  • certain explanations work better under certain circumstances.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

what is social loafing

A

group produced reduction i individual output on easy tasks in which contributions are pooled

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

when does social loafing occur

A

when - task is easy, individual efforts cannot be ID’d.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

social loafing conditions

- when will it not occur

A
  • people believe their own performance can be Id’d
  • task is important
  • efforts necessary for success
  • group punished for poor performance
  • group is small
  • group is cohesive
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

3 factors to reduce social loafing

A
  1. limit scope of project.
  2. keep group small
  3. peer evaluations
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

social loafing vs social facilitation

- depends on 2 things

A

type of evaluation

  • individual Id-able.
  • easy task = social facil = enhance
  • difficult task = social facil = impair
  • group eval-
  • easy = social load = impair
  • difficult = social security = enhance

type of task : easy vs difficult

23
Q

when does social security come into play?

A

when the type of evaluation if group & it is a difficult task.

24
Q

deindividuation -define

- caused by?

A

loss of person’s sense of individuality and reduction of normal constraints against deviant behaviour

  • caused by:
  • arousal (pressence of others)
  • anonymity
  • lack of individual responsibility
25
2 types of environmental cues in deindividuation
accountability: affect cost-reward calculations. less likely to get caught/punished. attentional cues: focus away from self, less attention to self/morals. less sensitive to consequences.
26
trick or treat study | * nurse/KKK study
halloween - arousaed: wearing masks high on sugar. some ID'd, some not. anonymous in group more likley to take more pieces. nurse/KKK. some ID'd some anon. - KKK increase shock when ID'd or anon. - nurse decreased shock MORE when anon. = more responsive to group norm - helping.
27
Social identity model of deindividuation effects (SIDE)
characteristics/norms affect whether deindividuation occurs -personal ID decrease, group ID increase. if group ID negative - deindividuation = violence group ID positive = deindividuation = more good.
28
groups are good when? | advantage of group?
good when motivated to search for answer that is best for entire group. advantage = group can divide up tasks
29
group polarization -define
exaggeration through group discussion of group member's initial tendencies.
30
risky shift?
tendency for group to be riskier than individual decisions
31
group polarization factors (3)
1. persuasive arguments theory 2. social comparison 3. social categorizaiton
32
group polarization factor - persuasive argument theory
greater number and persuasiveness of argument - more extreme attitude.
33
group polarization factor - social comparison
new extreme norms are established. compare self to others extreme attitudes
34
group polarization factor | - social categorization
overestimate group's position to distinguish from outgroup
35
- ?-?-?- occurs when commitment to failing course of action is increased to justify prior to investments - - individual or group more likely?
escalation effect AKA sunk cost fallacy AKA entrapment groups more likely.
36
social dilemma
situation in which what is good for one is bad for all if everyone pursues self-interest.
37
prisoner's dilemma - discuss - what's key?
one-time, two-person dilemma cooperate or compete with other player both compete = both get 10 years. you compete, he doesnt = you go off free, he gets 30 years. you cooperate, he competes = you get 30 years, he gets 0. you both cooperate = 3 years. - key = trust. high trust, cooperate, low trust, compete
38
iterative mixed-motive problem
- social dilemma repeated many times - develop tit-for-tat strategy. cooperate, if other competes, you compete back.
39
4 reasons tit-for-tat elicits cooperation
1. Nice - choose cooperative first 2. not exploitable - respond with same action to ensure partner doesnt abuse or defect from cooperation 3. forgiving - cooperate when they cooperate - not trying to compete continually 4. transparent: other perosn realized what you're doing
40
2 types of resource dilemmas
1. commons dilemma | 2. public goods dilemma
41
commons dilemma
limited, non-replenished resource | - tragedy of commons. if everyone takes a little bit extra = resources depleted = harmful for everyone
42
public good dilemma
resource that public contributes to. service continues if everyone continually contributes.
43
social dilemma influenced by psych and structural arrangements
psych: trusting is key, easier to trust individual than small or big group. - good mood = more likely to cooperate structure: payoff that rewards cooperative, private resources, establish authority to control resources
44
groups can differ from?
the sum of their parts. | shared common fate = more constructive solutions
45
process loss
any aspect of group interation that inhibits good problem solving. ie. communication issue, leader wasn't good.
46
what is groupthink
kind of thinking in which maintaining group cohesiveness and solidarity is more important than considering the facts. in a realistic manner
47
most informed decision by pooling all information together. | - funny thing about groups
groups tend to focus on shared inffo, forget about unique info avoid: long discussion, assign members to areas of expertise.
48
when is groupthink most likely to occur?
``` high cohesive isolated ruled by direct learder high stress poor decision-making procedures. ```
49
how to avoid groupthink trap
- remain impartial seek outside opinions create subgroups seek anonymous opinions
50
2 theories of leadership
great person theory: key personality traits made a good leader. *weak* only dominance was found integrative compelxity - indicator of ability to recognize more than 1 perspective on an ssue to be able to integrate these various perspectives
51
2 leadership styles
transactional leaders: clear short term goals, reward those who meet. transformational leaders - focus common, long-term goals. - high job satisfaction, positive attitude.
52
contingency theory of leadership. 2 oriented leaders
task-oriented leader - good in high control situations. focus on task. - good in low control situations: take charge and impose disorder relationship-oriented leader: feelings & relationships among workers. - good in moderate control situations.
53
gender and leadership | - stereotypical good leader "traits"
agentic - assertive, dominant. usually assoc w male. not female. - often women get placed in failing position.