Chapter 14 - Groups

• Obedience/Cooperation

• What Groups Are and Do

• Groups, Roles, and Selves

• Group Action

• How Groups Think

• Power and Leadership

Tradeoffs - Prisoner’s Dilemma

• Choice is between cooperative response and an antagonistic response

• Choice is between what is best for one person versus what is best for everyone

• Non-zero-sum game

Obedience

• Following orders from an authority figure

• Milgram (1963)– Majority of participants delivered extreme

shocks to a screaming victim in obedience to an authority figure

The Milgram Experiments:Results

• Approximately 65% punished learners with the highest shock intensity (450 volts)

Learners’ Responses

• Learner protests more and more as shock increases

• Experimenter continues to request obedience even if teacher is unsure

120

150

300

330

“Ugh! Hey this really hurts.”

“Ugh! Experimenter! That’s all. get me out of here. I told you I had heart trouble. My heart’s starting to bother me now.”

(agonized scream) “I absolutelyrefuse to answer any more.get me out of here You can’t hold me here. Get me out.”

“(intense & prolonged agonized scream) “Let me out of here. Let me out of here. My heart’s bothering me. Let me out, I tell you…”

Factors in Blind Obedience

• Propaganda

• Socialization

• Lack of Social Comparison

• Perception of legitimate authority

• The foot-in-the-door technique

• Inaccessibility of values

• Buffers

Obedience

• Milgram’s research represented obedience as a negative (negative outcome)

• Without obedience, society would not function

• Obedience fosters– Social acceptance– Group life

What Groups Are

• Groups are two or more people doing or being something together – Groups feel similar to one another– Presence of an outgroup– Direct interactions with each other over a

period of time– Joint membership in a social category based

on sex, race, or other attributes– A shared, common fate, identity, or set of

goals

What Groups Do

• In human evolution– Safety in numbers– Help others find food– Accomplish tasks that are too difficult for

the individual

Why Join a Group?

• The complexities and ambitions of human life require that we work in groups

• Humans have an innate need to belong to groups– Social brain hypothesis

• May not only protect against physical threat, but also help gain personal and social identity

Stages of Group Development

What Groups Do

• Cultural groups– Preserve information and pass it along to

future generations– Use information to organize themselves– Benefit from role differentiation and division

of labor

Group Roles

• People’s roles in a group can be formal or informal.

• Two fundamental types of roles:– An instrumental role to help the group

achieve its tasks– An expressive role to provide emotional

support and maintain morale

• Beneficial to match roles to each member’s characteristics and skill set

Groups, Roles and Selves

• One main function of a group is to accomplish something.

• Having unique roles help us work together

• Roles are defined by the system; exist independent of the person in that role

• People need to be flexible to take on and drop roles

Groups, Roles, and Selves

• Deindividuation vs. Differentiation– Is it best to be anonymous or openly

identified?

• Example– Voting – We keep our vote private to

protect ourselves

• Problems with Deindividuation– Aggression, Antisocial behavior– Individual beliefs become lost

Groups, Roles, and Selves

• Optimal distinctiveness theory– Tension between the need to be similar to

group members and distinctive from them– If we feel too similar, we try to become

different. If we feel too different, we try to become similar.

• Identifying people in groups and holding them accountable produces better results

Deindividuation and Mob Violence

• Problems with Deindividuation– Aggression, Antisocial behavior– Individual beliefs become lost

• Deindividuation can lead to antisocial behavior– Being anonymous to outsiders makes

people more willing to violate norms– Stop worrying about what others think of

them – more willing to behave badly

• Accountability is best predictor of aggression

Deindividuation Theory

• Deindividuation theory is a social psychological account of the individual in the crowd

• Deindividuation is a psychological state of decreased self-evaluation, causing anti-normative and disinhibited behavior

• Zimbardo, Haney, Banks, & Jaffe (1973)– One of the all-time great psychological

experiments– Illustrates deindividuation

If you could be totally invisible for 24 hours and were completely assured that you would not be detected or held responsible for your actions, what would you do?

Question…

Stanford Prison Experiment

• Thirty years ago, a group of young men were rounded up by Palo Alto police and dropped off at a new jail -- in the Stanford Psychology Department

These were just like real arrests…

• On a quiet Sunday morning... each was arrested for violation of Penal Codes 211, Armed Robbery or Burglary, a 459 PC

• Some arrested still vividly remember the shock of having neighbors come out to watch the commotion as TV cameras recorded the hand-cuffing for the “nightly news”

The deindividuation process starts

• Guards– Uniforms– “Weapons”– Glasses

• Prisoners– Stripped– Numbered– Humiliating attire

Treated poorly from the start…

• Strip searched, sprayed for lice and locked up with chains around their ankles, the "prisoners" were part of an experiment to test people's reactions to power dynamics in social situations

Don’t mess with us…

• Other college student volunteers -- the "guards" -- were given authority to dictate 24-hour-a-day rules

Soon, they were humiliating the prisoners

And it got worse and worse…

It didn’t take long…

• Less than 36 hours into the experiment, Prisoner #8612 began suffering from acute emotional disturbance, disorganized thinking, uncontrollable crying, and rage…he was released

A final note…

• No guards left the experiment – most seemed to enjoy it

• The prisoners were abused – some sobbed their way out

It’s all in the “uniform”?

• Does the traditional police or military uniform bring about a sense of deindividuation?

When else do people wear uniforms?

Group Norms

• Groups establish norms or rules of conduct for members.

• Norms may be either formal or informal.

Group Cohesiveness

• The forces exerted on a group that push its members closer together.

• Cohesiveness and group performance are causally related.– But relationship is complex

Individuals in Groups:The Presence of Others

Groups Action

• Theory of social facilitation (Zajonc, 1965)– Presence of others increases arousal– Arousal increases dominant response– Triplett’s study of cyclists

• Presence of others can improve people’s performance, especially familiar, easy tasks

Groups Action

• Theory of social facilitation (Zajonc, 1965)– Social Inhibition– Presence of others increases arousal– Arousal decreases a non-dominant

response– Study of cockroaches (1969)

• Presence of others can decrease people’s performance on unfamiliar, difficult tasks

Social Loafing“Free Rider Problem”

• Ringelmann (1913)– Farm workers – as number of workers

increased, output did not increase as much.

• People reduce effort when working in a group– Not individually identified or accountable– Not wanting to be a ‘sucker’– Bad apple effect

Social Loafing“Free Rider Problem”

• Loafing is more likely to occur – When members are deindividuated: No

individual accountability– When others are loafing– In men

• Loafing is less likely to occur– When one’s cooperation is unique to the

group– When the group is meaningful & cohesive

Punishing Cheaters and Free Riders

• Altruistic punishment– People will sometimes sacrifice their own

gain, to benefit all, by punishing free riders– Goes against Economic theory which

suggest we want to maximize our payoffs

• May be considered guarding the culture– Culture depends on a system; cheat the

system, ruin it for all

Shared Resources and the Commons Dilemma

• Costs of private ownership– Inequality– Ambition, greed

• Cost of communal ownership– Lack of preserving care– Commons dilemma

• Squandering of shared resources

Shared Resources and the Commons Dilemma

• Conflicts within commons dilemma– Social conscience versus selfish impulse– Time (Now versus tomorrow)

• Factors influencing commons dilemma– Communication– Behavior of others

How Groups Think

• Brainstorming– A form of creative thinking– People enjoy the process and evaluate it

favorably– Individuals want to participate in

brainstorming

– BUT: Output is lower than individuals working alone

Group Decision Making

• Most major decisions in the world are made by groups– United Nations, Courts (e.g. U.S. Supreme Court)– Elected bodies (e.g. Parliament, Congress)– Presidents rarely make decisions completely alone

• WHY?

• Are groups always better than single individuals?– Huge scientific literature on exactly this question!

Group Decision Making

• Collective wisdom of group is better than individual experts

– People must act as independent members of a group and share their diverse information

Teams/Committees

• Many people believe teams – Make better decisions– Improve performance

• People enjoy working on teams– Satisfies their need to belong– Feel confident, effective and superior

Groupthink

• Tendency of group members to think alike

– Specifically group clings to shared but flawed view rather than being open to the truth (Janus, 1972, 1982)

– Based in desire to get along (Normative Social Influence)

Groupthink

• Probably most famous process loss

• Definition: people begin to value group cohesiveness and solidarity more than the need to consider the facts in a realistic manner.

• Can lead to disastrous decisions– JFK’s decision to invade Cuba– Challenger disaster (1986)– Possibly, Columbia accident (2003)

The road to groupthink

Antecedents– Group is (already)

cohesive– Isolated– Directive leader– Stress– Poor decision-making

rules

Symptoms– Illusion of invulnerability – Moral certainty– Stereotyped view of outgroup– Self-censorship– Direct pressure to conform– Illusion of unanimity– Mindguards

Defective decision making– Incomplete survey of alternatives– Failure to examine risks of favored alternative– Poor information search– Few contingency plans

Groupthink

• Factors that encourage groupthink– Fairly similar and cohesive group to start– Strong, directive leader– Group is isolated in some sense from others– Group regards itself as superior– High Stress

Groupthink

• Signs of groupthink– Pressure toward conformity– Appearance of unanimous agreement

• Self-censorship– Illusion of invulnerability– Sense of moral superiority– Tendency to overestimate opponents

Avoiding Groupthink

• Leader should be nondirective

• Norm of openness should be established

• Outside evaluators should make unannounced visits to observe group dynamics

Group Polarization and Risky Shift

• Risky shift– Group is willing to take greater risks than

individuals (on average)

• Group polarization effect– Movement toward either extreme (risk or

caution) resulting from group discussion

Committees

• Why aren’t committees effective?

– The desire for group harmony stifles free exchange of information

– Focus on common knowledge rather than unique information people have

Committees

• How can they be effective?

– Respect each other’s knowledge– Share individual knowledge– Allow each member to be individually

responsible for one task / piece of information

Leadership

• Defining a leader

– someone who holds a formal position of authority

– someone who is identified as such by the group members

– someone who has impact on the group

• transformational leadership describes this last characteristic

Leadership Functions

• Task leadership

– getting the job done

• Socioemotional leadership

– maintaining group harmony and cohesiveness

Measuring Leadership Effectiveness

• Production

– is the job getting done?

• Satisfaction

– are the group members happy?

• Impact

– does the leader move the group toward achieving its goals?

Great Person Approach to Leadership

• “Great leaders are born to their leadership”

– leaders possess some trait that followers do not

– height and intelligence are examples

– extraversion, conscientiousness, flexibility predict the emergence of leaders

Situational Explanations for Leadership

• Situational factors influence the selection of a leader

– seating arrangements

– external threat

– seniority

Leadership: Person X Situation Interaction

• Contingency model of leadership effectiveness

– the effectiveness of a particular style of leadership is dependent on situational factors

Leadership

• Traits of successful leaders– Humble and modest– Extreme persistence

• Traits of people perceived as good leaders– Decisive– Competent at group tasks– Possess integrity– Honest and good moral character– Have vision

Power

• One person’s control over another

• Many powerful seek additional power– Relation between power and belongingness

Morgenthau (1963)

Effects of Power on Leaders

• Five crucial effects– Feels good– Alters attention to rewards and punishment– Changes the relationships between people– Makes people rely more on automatic

processing– Removes inhibitions against taking action

Effects of Power on Followers

• Followers pay extra attention to the powerful person and try to understand him/her

• People with less power will be prone to fostering peace and harmony

• People low in power adapt to the expectations of high-power people

Legitimate Leadership

• Maintenance of power is often dependent on legitimizing myth– Explanation and justification of why powerful

people deserve to be in power