GROUP PROCESS Characteristics of a group Direct interactions over a period of time Joint membership in social categories Shared common fate, identity and set of goals Collective- people engaging in common activity with little direct interaction with one another

GROUP PROCESS Robert Zajonc -the presence of others increased arousal which can affect performance The essence of his work which is called the Zajonc Solution; Social Facilitation

GROUP PROCESS Zajonc Solution; Social Facilitation Presence of others increases arousal which strengthens the dominant response to a stimulus On an easy task, the dominant response is usually correct – presence of others enhances performance On a difficult task – the dominant response is often incorrect – presence of others impairs performance

GROUP PROCESS Social Facilitation occurs in several ways 1. Evaluation Apprehension Theory A theory holding that the presence of others will produce social facilitation effects only when others are seen as potential evaluators. Fear of others laughing at me; public humiliation

GROUP PROCESS 2. Distraction-Conflict Theory Being distracted while we are working on a task creates attentional conflict – torn between working on the project and examining the distraction

GROUP PROCESS Social Loafing Individual output on easy tasks where contributions are pooled- specific performance of any one individual cannot be determined. Max Ringlemann – 1980’s Compared with what people produced when they worked they worked on their own, individual output declined when they worked on simple tasks like pulling a rope or pushing a cart.

GROUP PROCESS Steven Karau and Kipling Williams conducted a meta analysis of seventy-eight studies and found social loafing to be a reliable phenomenon displayed across numerous tasks and in countries around the world. Social loafing is less likely to occur when People believe their own performance can be identified and thus evaluated The task is important or meaningful to those performing it People believe their own efforts are necessary for a successful outcome The group expects to be punished for poor performance The group is small The group is cohesive- membership is important to members.

GROUP PROCESS 1.Collective Effort Model Individuals try hard on a collective task when they think their efforts will help them achieve outcomes that they personally value. 2. Social Loafing Less prevalent among woman that men Less prevalent among people from eastern, collectivist cultures

GROUP PROCESS Destructive capacity of collectives – Deindividuation – the loss of a person’s sense of individuality and the reduction of normal constraints against deviant behavior. How does this happen – what are the environmental cues-

GROUP PROCESS Accountability Cues- affect the individual’s cost –reward calculations Accountability low Less likely to be caught and punished- Engage in gratifying but generally inhibited behavior. The riots after Dan White’s sentencing for example

GROUP PROCESS Attentional Cues Focuses a person’s attention away from the self Self awareness declines Change in consciousness Individual attends less to internal standards of conduct Reacts more to the immediate situation Less sensitive to long-term consequences of behavior Impulse rather than cognitively motivated

GROUP PROCESS Loss of personal identity does not always produce anti-social behavior Study with nurses and KKK robes Social Identity Model of deindividuation (SIDE) effects: As personal identity and internal controls are submerged social identity emerge and conformity of group increases.

GROUP PROCESS Group Dynamics: Interacting with Others Why to join a group One’s self worth comes from identification with particular groups

Stages of group development Forming – members orient themselves to the group Storming- members try to influence the group to fit their own needs. Conflict/hostility/ imposition of will Norming – members try to reconcile the conflict that emerged during storming and develop a common sense of purpose. Performing- perform tasks and maximize group performance Adjourning – disengage from the group, reduce activities within the group

GROUP PROCESS 3 Essential Components of Groups Roles – set of expected behaviors can be formal or informal Instrumental – help the group achieve its tasks Expressive – provide emotional support and maintain morale Set of clear roles help the group function

GROUP PROCESS Norms – rules of conduct for members; can be positive or negative Cohesiveness – forces exerted on a group that push its members closer together. Commitment Group Pride Engagement Stanley Gully and others (1995) Positive relationship between cohesiveness and performance is much stronger for tasks that require interdependence

GROUP PROCESS Breaking norms can be difficult – whistle blowers in the recent financial crises. Groups are generally very homogenous

GROUP PROCESS Group Polarization Effect Group discussion tends to enhance or exaggerate the initial leanings of the group. If group leans toward risky – group decisions lean toward risky If group leans toward cautious- group decisions lean toward cautious Three process create group polarization Persuasive arguments theory social comparison social categorization

GROUP PROCESS Group Think – a group decision-making style characterized by an excessive tendency among group members to seek concurrence. Emerges when the need for agreement takes priority over the motivation to obtain accurate information and make appropriate decisions

GROUP PROCESS Janis (1982) three characteristics to the development of group think 1. Highly cohesive groups – reject people with deviant opinions 2. Group structure – similar backgrounds/strong leader/lacking systematic procedures for making and reviewing decisions 3. Stressful situations – urgency can overrule accuracy Example – Bay of Pigs/ NASA –Challenger

GROUP PROCESS Preventing Groupthink (Janis) 1. Avoid isolation 2. Reduce conformity pressures –leaders should encourage criticism 3. Establish a strong norm of critical review.

GROUP PROCESS Group Performance Ivan Steiner (1972) Group’s performance compares to the potential of its individuals depends on the type of task 1. Additive task – group product is the sum of all members contributions –(United Way) 2. Conjunctive tasks – group product is determined by the individual with the poorest performance. (mountain climbing) 3. Disjunctive task – group product is determined by the performance of the individual with the best performance.

GROUP PROCESS Brainstorming Express all ideas that come to mind More ideas the better Don’t edit the ideas All ideas belong to the group

GROUP PROCESS Cautions with Brainstorming Don’t get too attached to your ideas Make room for everyone to speak Keep an atmosphere of non judgment so everyone will feel comfortable speaking

GROUP PROCESS Diversity Miscommunications and misunderstandings are more likely to arise among heterogeneous group members. (Levine & Moreland) Diversity has a positive impact on patterns of socialization, classroom dynamics, complexity of group discussion.(Antonio et al.,2004) Most likely to succeed when individuals feel that their personal identity is verified and accepted by other group members (Swann, 2003,2004) Military teams – when groups are committed to their tasks they tend to perform well even if the members do not like or feel comfortable with each other.(Mullen 1991)

GROUP PROCESS Mixed motives and Social Dilemmas What is good for one is bad for the rest of the group Prisoner’s Dilemma – a type of dilemma in which one party must make either cooperative or competitive moves in relation to another party; typically designed in such a way that competitive moves are more beneficial to either side…. But if both sides make competitive moves, they are both worse off that if they both cooperated.

GROUP PROCESS Resource Dilemmas How two or more people share a limited resource. Commons - take as much as you want and nothing is left for anyone else Public goods – all contribute to a common pool

GROUP PROCESS The basis for all reality TV shows Sets up the groups against one another and then present one dilemma after another. The behavior of the participants supports the research Groups tend to be more competitive in mixed- motive situations Competitiveness of groups has its roots in fear and greed – fear of exploitation/greed for resources.

GROUP PROCESS Creates conflict between groups Group polarization effect Pressures for conformity Escalation of commitment Premature use of threat capacity Negative perceptions of the ‘other’

GROUP PROCESS DEBATE GUIDELINES Preparations for our debate:  The debate question is: If we allowed all countries to have equal opportunity to develop nuclear capability our world would be safer. Therefore we should allow all countries that the opportunity to develop these arms.

GROUP PROCESS For example if you are to argue the point that  there is a need for monitoring nuclear capability then you need to back up your stand with clear arguments as to why that would make the world a safer place to live. You can look at economics, resources, longevity etc on both sides. After the debate we will analyze your group participation based on the principles/research/concepts in the text. If you are to argue the point that equal opportunity should be granted you will need to back up what specifically points to that need.  

GROUP PROCESS You will be divided into two groups. One group will argue yes and the other no to the question.  Each group prepares: 1 opening statement 3 main argument points 1 closing statement

GROUP PROCESS Guidelines: Choose 5 students to represent the group in the debate Each statement is limited to one minute Between each argument your group will have one minute to prepare your rebuttal The entire group is necessary to revise the rebuttal