Group Processes: Influence in Social Groups Flashcards

1
Q

Defining a Group:

A

Two or more people who interact and are
interdependent in the sense that their needs
and goals cause them to influence each other

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

Why Do People Join Groups?

A

Groups have a number of other benefits
–Important source of information
▪Help us resolve ambiguity in the social world
–Important aspect of identity
▪Help us define who we are
▪Help us feel distinct from other groups
–Establishment of social norms

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

*Social roles:

A

Shared expectations in a group about how
particular people are supposed to behave in
that group
–Potential costs to social roles
▪If enmeshed in a role, individual identities and
personalities can get lost.

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

Zimbardo and colleagues (1973) randomly
assigned male volunteers to play roles for
two weeks as

A

–Prisoners
–Guards
Students quickly assumed these roles.
*Researchers had to end the experiment
after only six days.

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

When Stanford Became a Prison

A

Philip Zimbardo and his colleagues randomly assigned students to play the role of
prisoner or guard in a mock prison. The students assumed these roles all too well.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

The Guard Role

A

One of the guards from Zimbardo’s prison experiment at Stanford.

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

The Stanford Prison Study
*Guards

A

–Abusive
–Verbally harassed, humiliated prisoners

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

The Stanford Prison Study
*Prisoners

A

–Passive
–Helpless
–Withdrawn

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

Prison Abuse at Abu Ghraib

A

In 2004, American military guards routinely
abused prisoners in Abu Ghraib, a prison in
Iraq.
–Physical beatings, sexual abuse, and
psychological humiliation
*The American public was shocked by
pictures of
these abuses
A few “bad apples” happen to end up in the
unit guarding the prisoners?
–“What’s bad is the barrel.” (Zimbardo)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Group cohesiveness:

A

–Qualities of a group that bind members
together and promote liking between
members

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

The more cohesive a group is, the more its
members are likely to:

A

–Stay in the group
–Take part in group activities
–Try to recruit new like-minded members

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

If task requires close cooperation

A

–Cohesiveness helps performance

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

If maintaining good relationships most
important

A

Cohesiveness can interfere with optimal
performance

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

Group Diversity

A

Group members tend to be alike in age,
sex, beliefs and opinions.
*Why are they similar?
–Attracted to and likely to recruit similar others
–Groups operate in ways that encourage
similarity in the members.

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

Group Diversity

A

*Homogenous groups are more cohesive
*Diverse groups perform better

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

Social facilitation

A

People do better on simple tasks and worse
on complex tasks when they are in the
presence of others and their individual
performance can be evaluated.

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

Social Facilitation

A

The presence of others can mean one of
two things
1. Performing a task with coworkers doing the
same thing you are
2. Performing a task in front of an audience that
only observes you

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Social Facilitation

A

If task is simple, well-learned
–The mere presence of others improves
performance.
–This phenomenon is found in humans as well
as other species!

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

Simple vs. Difficult Tasks

A

When working on a more difficult task
–Opposite results
▪A task can take longer to solve when others are
present than when performing alone.
▪People and animals do worse in the presence of
others when the task is difficult.

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

Arousal and the Dominant Response
(Zajonc, 1965)

A

The presence of others increases
physiological arousal
▪i.e., our bodies become more energized
*When such arousal exists
–It is easier to do something that is simple.
–It is harder to do something complex or learn
something new.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Why the Presence of Others
Causes Arousal

A

Three theories to explain the arousal and
social facilitation
1. Other people cause us to become
particularly alert and vigilant.
2. Other people make us apprehensive about
how we’re being evaluated.
3. Other people distract us from the task at
hand

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Why the Presence of Others
Causes Arousal

A

Other people cause us to become
particularly alert and vigilant.
–Because other people can be unpredictable,
we are in a state of greater alertness in their
presence.
▪Causes mild arousal

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Why the Presence of Others
Causes Arousal

A

They make us apprehensive about how
we’re being evaluated.
–When other people can see how you are
doing, you feel like they are evaluating you.
▪Evaluation apprehension can cause mild arousal.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

They distract us from the task at hand.

A

–Divided attention produces arousal.
–Consistent with this interpretation, nonsocial
sources of distraction, such as a flashing light,
cause the same kinds of social facilitation
effects as the presence of other people.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
They distract us from the task at hand.
–Divided attention produces arousal. –Consistent with this interpretation, nonsocial sources of distraction, such as a flashing light, cause the same kinds of social facilitation effects as the presence of other people.
26
Social Loafing
When in the presence of others, individual efforts often cannot be distinguished from efforts of those around them. *If being with other people means merging into a group and becoming less noticeable than when alone –Increase relaxation
27
Social Loafing
Ringelmann (1913) –When a group pulled on a rope, each individual exerted less effort than when doing it alone.
28
Social Loafing
People 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.
29
Slacking Off in Class
Sometimes being surrounded by others allows us to slack off (or “loaf”), demonstrating that there’s not a single, simple answer to the question of how the presence of other people affects individual performance.
30
Social Facilitation and Social Loafing
Arousal enhances performance on simple tasks but impairs performance on complex tasks. *Becoming relaxed impairs performance on simple tasks but improves performance on complex tasks.
31
Gender and Social Loafing
In a review of more than 150 studies –Social loafing is more likely among men. –Women tend to be higher than men in relational interdependence. ▪Focus on and care about personal relationships with other individuals ▪May make women less likely to engage in social loafing when in groups
32
Culture and Social Loafing
Tendency to loaf stronger in Western cultures than in Asian cultures *Why? –Self-definitions ▪Asian cultures: Interdependent self –Reduces social loafing tendencies
33
Predicting If Presence of Others Will Help or Hurt Performance
Need to know two things 1. Can individual efforts be evaluated? 2. Is the task simple or complex?
34
Deindividuation: Getting Lost in the Crowd
Deindividuation: –The loosening of normal constraints on behavior when people cannot be differentiated (such as when they are in a crowd), leading to an increase in impulsive and deviant acts
35
Deindividuation: Getting Lost in the Crowd
Examples –Massacre at My Lai during the Vietnam War –Mobs of soccer fans sometimes attacking each other –Hysterical fans at rock concerts who trampled each other to death –Lynching of African Americans by people cloaked in the anonymity of white robes
36
The KKK: Hiding Under Robes and Hoods
The robes and hoods of the Ku Klux Klan cloak its members in anonymity; their violent behavior is consistent with research on deindividuation.
37
Deindividuation Makes People Feel Less Accountable
Why does deindividuation lead to impulsive and sometimes violent acts? –Makes people feel less accountable –Increases obedience to group norm
38
Deindividuation Increases Obedience to Group Norms
Deindividuation does not always lead to aggressive or antisocial behavior. –Depends on what the norm of the group is
39
Deindividuation Online
Deindividuation does not require face-to- face contact. –Example: Feeling less inhibited on social media that’s anonymous *Cyberspace also provides advantages for the free and open discussion of difficult topics.
40
Deindividuation Online
Cost seems to be a reduction in common civility. *The phenomenon of the internet “troll” is a modern example of deindividuation, made possible by the feelings of anonymity that often go along with being online.
41
Group Decisions: Are Two (or More) Heads Better Than One?
A group will do well only if the most talented member can convince the others that he or she is right!
42
Process Loss
Any aspect of group interaction that inhibits good problem solving
43
Failure to Share Unique Information (1 of 2)
Groups tend to focus on the information they share and ignore facts known to only some members of the group.
44
Failure to Share Unique Information
Subsequent research has focused on ways to get groups to focus more on unshared information –Group discussions should last long enough to get beyond what everyone already knows. –Assign different group members to specific areas of expertise so that they know that they alone are responsible for certain types of information.
45
Transactive Memory
The combined memory of two people that is more efficient than the memory of either individual
46
Groupthink: Many Heads, One Mind
A kind of thinking in which maintaining group cohesiveness and solidarity is more important than considering the facts in a realistic manner
47
Groupthink: Many Heads, One Mind
A kind of thinking in which maintaining group cohesiveness and solidarity is more important than considering the facts in a realistic manner
48
Groupthink: Many Heads, One Mind
Groupthink is most likely to occur when group is –Highly cohesive –Isolated from contrary opinions –Ruled by a directive leader who makes his or her wishes known
49
Avoiding the Groupthink Trap
A wise leader can take several steps to avoid groupthink –Remain impartial –Seek outside opinions –Create subgroups –Seek anonymous opinions
50
Group Polarization: Going to Extremes
The tendency for groups to make decisions that are more extreme than the initial inclinations of its members *Joining a group is likely to lead an individual’s attitudes to become more extreme through processes of group polarization.
51
Group Polarization: Going to Extremes
Persuasive arguments interpretation –Individuals bring to the group a set of arguments, some of which other individuals have not considered. 2. Social comparison interpretation –When people discuss an issue in a group, they first explore how everyone else feels.
52
Great person theory:
The idea that certain key personality traits make a person a good leader, regardless of the situation
53
Leadership and Personality
Personality and leadership abilities weakly related *Compared to nonleaders, leaders tend to be slightly more –Intelligent –Extroverted –Confident –Charismatic
54
Leadership and Personality
Surprisingly few personality characteristics correlate strongly with leadership effectiveness.
55
Leadership Styles
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
56
The Right Person in the Right Situation
A leader can be highly successful in some situations but not in others *Comprehensive theory of leadership must focus on the leader, followers, and situation.
57
The Right Person in the Right Situation
Contingency theory of leadership: –The idea that leadership effectiveness depends both on how task-oriented or relationship-oriented the leader is and on the amount of control and influence the leader has over the group
58
Contingency theory of leadership:
The idea that leadership effectiveness depends both on how task-oriented or relationship-oriented the leader is and on the amount of control and influence the leader has over the group
59
Two basic types of leaders
1. Task-oriented leader ▪A leader concerned more with getting the job done than with workers’ feelings and relationships 2. Relationship-oriented leader ▪A leader who is concerned primarily with workers’ feelings and relationships
60
Contingency Theory of Leadership
Task-oriented leaders most effective –High-control work situations ▪Leader-subordinate relationships are excellent ▪The work is structured and well-defined –Low-control work situations ▪Leader-subordinate relationships are poor ▪The work needing to be done is not clearly defined
61
Contingency Theory of Leadership
Relationship-oriented leaders are most effective –Moderate-control work situations ▪Fairly smooth ▪But some attention to poor relationships and hurt feelings is needed
62
Gender and Leadership
Difficult for women to achieve leadership positions –Why? ▪Belief that good leaders have agentic traits –Women stereotyped as having communal traits
63
Double bind for women leaders
If warm and communal Perceived as having low leadership potential If agentic and forceful Often perceived negatively for not “acting like a woman should”
64
Glass cliff
Women are thought to be better at managing crises (especially interpersonal ones) Puts them in precarious positions where difficult to succeed Good news: Prejudice against women leaders lessening over time
65
GM’s First Female CEO Inherits a Recall
In 2014, Mary Barra became the first female CEO of a major global automaker, in this case General Motors. Within months, she had to announce plans for GM to recall over 11 million cars due to defective design components that the company had known about for nearly 10 years. Could Barra become another example of a woman who broke through a “glass ceiling” only to find herself on a “glass cliff”?
66
Culture and Leadership
Cultural differences Autonomous leaders valued more in Eastern European than Latin American Cultural similarities in valued leadership qualities Charisma Team-orientation
67
Conflict and Cooperation
When goals collide Often people have incompatible goals. These incompatibilities place them in conflict with each other. This can be true of individuals, groups, companies, and nations.
68
Counseling for Conflicts
Sometimes people are able to resolve conflicts peacefully, such as a couple that has an amicable divorce. At other times conflicts escalate into rancor and violence. Social psychologists have performed experiments to test ways in which conflict resolution is most likely to occur.
69
Social Dilemmas
A conflict in which the most beneficial action for an individual, if chosen by most people, will have harmful effects on everyone
70
Prisoner’s Dilemma (1 of 2)
Two people must choose one of two options without knowing what the other person will choose.
71
Prisoner’s Dilemma (2 of 2)
Payoff depends on the choices of both Example If you and your friend both choose option X You both win $3 If, however, you choose option Y and your friend chooses option X You win $6 You friend loses $6
72
Increasing Cooperation in the Prisoner’s Dilemma (1 of 3)
People are more likely to adopt a cooperative strategy if Playing the game with a friend Expecting to interact with their partner in the future
73
Increasing Cooperation in the Prisoner’s Dilemma (2 of 3)
Change norms about expected behavior Changing name from “Wall Street Game” to “Community Game” Increased the percentage of people who cooperated from 33% to 71% in one study
74
Tit-for-tat strategy:
A means of encouraging cooperation by at first acting cooperatively but then always responding the way your opponent did (cooperatively or competitively) on the previous trial
75
Threats not an effective means of reducing conflict
Trucking game studies Retaliate against threats
76
Effects of Communication (1 of 2)
Deutsch and Krauss trucking game does not approximate real life Two sides could not communicate with each other Ran another version of the study where participants were required to communicate
77
Effects of Communication (2 of 2)
Results? Reduced losses somewhat in the unilateral threat condition Failed to increase cooperation in the other two conditions Communication in the trucking studies did not foster trust
78
Negotiation and Bargaining (1 of 3)
Negotiation: A form of communication between opposing sides in a conflict in which offers and counteroffers are made and a solution occurs only when both parties agree
79
Integrative solution:
A solution to conflict whereby parties make trade-offs on issues according to their different interests; each side concedes the most on issues that are unimportant to it but important to the other side When negotiating, integrative solutions are often available Work on gaining trust and communicating. Remember people often construe situation differently. Neutral mediators often help solve labor disputes, legal battles, and divorce proceedings by recognizing that there are mutually agreeable solutions to a conflict.
80