GROUPTHINK in Archived Chapter, 3rd ed.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
GROUPTHINK in Archived Chapter, 3rd ed.
Advertisements

Chapter 12 Group Dynamics Groups and Social Groups and Social Exchanges Exchanges The Group Development The Group Development Process Process Roles and.
Social Psychology David Myers 10e Copyright 2010 McGraw-Hill Companies1.
Chapter 8 – Groups Part 2: March 22, Groupthink Janis’ 1972 research – analyzed historical group decisions –Pearl Harbor, Bay of Pigs Recent examples?
Themes in 12 Angry Men Groupthink Obedience to Authority Conformity
Organizational Behaviour Individual and Social Behaviour
© 2011 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. Chapter 10 Decision Making by Individuals & Groups Learning Outcomes.
Chapter 8 – Groups Part 2: Oct. 22, Group Performance Process loss can reduce group perf. –How? –Brainstorming example –
Group and Social Influence on Behavior and Decision Making.
Chuck Millstead – Master Student University of Michigan, Flint
Chapter 17 Decision Making
Lecture 10 Group Behaviour. Outline Introduction: What is a “group”? Effects of Mere Presence Social facilitation Social loafing Working in Groups Leadership.
Chapter 15 Decision Making and Organizational Learning
Bipartisan Reports Cite Groupthink
Chapter 8 – Groups Part 1: Oct. 21, Groups and Social Processes Groups are 2 or more people who interact and perceive themselves as a unit/”us”
Re-designing Decision-Making Processes (Kennedy Cases) Prof. Morten Hansen MIIC, April
Prepared by Charlie Cook The University of West Alabama © 2012 South-Western, a part of Cengage Learning All rights reserved. Group and Interpersonal Behavior.
Chapter 8 – Groups Part 2: March 28, Group Polarization Group discussion strengthens members’ initial attitudes  polarization Typical Group Study:
Social Psychology Alive, Breckler/Olson/Wiggins Chapter 10 Chapter Ten Group Dynamics and Intergroup Conflict.
Decision Making and Problem Solving
“Patrice Zagame’s Team Leadership of Novartis Brazil” Case Study for Chapter 11 “Developing and Leading Teams” by Mohammad Khadim.
Chapter 7 The Manager as Decision Maker.
Ethics in Human Communication Part III. Organizations Organizational Culture and Climate Organizational Culture and Climate Values, beliefs, symbols and.
Beyond the Realist Model. Realist Model National interests Dominate National security Policy-Making ● States have clear unambiguous goals ● Changes in.
1 PSY 321 Dr. Sanchez Obedience/Group Influence. 2 Chapter 8: Group Processes How do groups effect individual effort? How do groups effect individual.
Introductory Psychology Concepts Instructor name Class Title, Term/Semester, Year Institution © 2011 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Social Influence.
GroupThink Embracing the Power of the Group Elaine Seat, PhD, PE.
Groupthink What is it? Why should we care about it? What can we do about it?
Abilene Paradox Group members adopt a position because they feel that other group members desire it Team members do not challenge suggestion because they.
Decision Making in Groups. Outline I. Problems in Decision Making Failure to share information Risky shift/polarization II. Video: GroupThink.
Defective Decision Making & Problem Solving Small Group Communication.
Chapter 8 Group Processes. Why Join a Group? The complexities and ambitions of human life require that we work in groups Humans have an innate need to.
GROUP DECISION MAKING ADVANTAGES BROAD REPRESENTATION TAPS EXPERTISE MORE IDEAS GENERATED EVALUATION OF OPTIONS COORDINATION HIGH ACCEPTANCE DISADVANTAGES.
G r o u p I n f l u e n c e Copyright 2016 © McGraw-Hill Education. Permission required for reproduction or display Purestock/Superstock.
Groupthink Clip art.
Abilene Paradox Group members adopt a position because they feel that other group members desire it Team members do not challenge suggestion because they.
Foundations of International Foreign Policy.  Definition  Issues – Group versus individual genius  Issues – individual versus group acceptance  Issues.
Do people try less hard when working in groups? If so, why do they do so? Ringleman Effect --- (e.g., with rope pulling task) The average performance (input)
1 Team Dynamics Son Dang Dan Huynh How to form teams Common problems and solutions Brainstorming tips Team activity: Build the highest tower of plastic.
Foreign Policy Decision Making Part II: Decision-Making Biases
Groupthink When group members striving for agreement (norm for unanimity), fail to realistically appraise alternative courses of action A means for a group.
Eight Main Symptoms of Group Think.
Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2007
Chapter 15: Decision Making and Organizational Learning
Chapter 6: Social Influence and Group Behavior
Foundations of Interpersonal and Group Behavior
Processes that Occur in Group Decision Making
Groups.
Groupthink: The Desperate Drive for Consensus at Any Cost Irving L
Decision Making Pitfalls, Foibles, and Techniques
GROUPTHINK in Archived Chapter, 3rd ed.
Interpersonal & Group Perspectives
Chapter 8 – Group Influence
Characteristics of Effective Teams
Decision Making in Groups
Groupthink and board dynamics: Some evidence from the field
Why should we care about it?
Team Dynamics Chapter 16.
Group Behavior and Influence
Social Facilitation The improved performance of tasks in the presence of others When is social facilitation most noticeable? When the tasks are simple.
Groupthink What is Groupthink?
Re-designing Decision-Making Processes (Kennedy Cases)
Group-Think.
Groupthink.
Group think A Potential Steel Barrier to Becoming Your Future You
To Know from Kramer & Dougherty (2013)
Decision Making Pitfalls, Foibles, and Techniques
Chapter 8 – Groups Part 2: Oct. 22, 2010.
Group Behavior and Influence
Presentation transcript:

GROUPTHINK in Archived Chapter, 3rd ed. OF Irving Janis in Em Griffin, A First Look at Communication Theory (1st ed.) 5/27/2019

CLICKER Groupthink occurs when there is: High cohesiveness ; A shared “we feeling” of solidarity; Desire to maintain relationships within the group at all costs; D. All of the above 5/27/2019

WHAT THE THEORY IS ABOUT Janis wanted to understand how a blue-ribbon group (or any group) could make a terrible decision, such as happened in the Bay of Pigs decision during JF Kennedy’s presidency;

Bay of Pigs Invasion During President Kennedy’s presidency, a group of respected minds deliberated and decided to support a military invasion of Cuba; The invasion was a massive disaster, with all the soldiers either dead or captured;

The Decision Everything went wrong: the secret nature of the plan was revealed quickly; The air attack failed; U.S. supply ships were sunk or driven off; Our troops were bombed as soon as they hit the beach;

Errors in the Decision Kennedy’s group of advisors miscalculated the effect of the invasion on the population of Cuba, expecting uprisings; Later, the U.S. had to pay Cuba $53,000,000 to get the captured soldiers released from prison; The whole effort was a grand fiasco;

Irving Janis Janis wanted to understand how a blue-ribbon group could make such a terrible decision; Janis believed that group dynamics were responsible for the poor decision making: he called it groupthink; He suspected that other bad decisions made in the government were due to the same forces: The Challenger Launch;Pearl Harbor; invasion of North Korea;Vietnam war; Watergate coverup;

Groupthink: A Concurrence-Seeking Tendency Janis defines groupthink as: “a mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members’ strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action.” (p. 220, Griffin, 1991)

Groupthink Occurs When cohesiveness is high; A shared “we feeling” of solidarity and desire to maintain relationships within the group at all costs; Yet, typically it has been thought that high-cohesive groups are more effective than low-cohesive groups in achieving their goals;

Cohesive Issue Janis thinks that the high-cohesiveness of a policy making group endangers independent and critical thinking; Janis’ position is that the consensus-seeking tendency of close-knit groups can cause them to make inferior decisions;

SYMPTOMS OF GROUPTHINK 1. Illusion of invulnerability: members feel that they cannot be wrong; 2. Belief in inherent morality of the group: the group never questions that it is on the side of truth, justice, and goodness; 3. Collective rationalization: Members reassure one another of certain beliefs [that are incorrect] ; 4. Out-group stereotypes: Cuban air force was seen as obsolete, the army as weak, & Castro as stupid--all wrong;

Symptoms of Groupthink 5. Self-Censorship: An individual may not want to be an isolated, dissenting voice--there is a pressure toward uniformity; 6. Illusion of Unanimity: An atmosphere of assumed consensus--silence is taken for consent;

Groupthink Symptoms 7. Direct Pressure on Dissenters: the discussion is structures so as to suppress negative reactions; the agreement to do X becomes associated with some value--e.g., manhood; 8. Self-Appointed Mindguards: “Mindguards” protect a leader from assault by troublesome ideas (e.g., “now is the time to just stand by the leader”); 1 5/27/2019

GROUPTHINK IN EVERYDAY LIFE Groupthink theory maintains that groupthink can occur in any group where members consider loyalty to the group more important than the action it decides to take; Not all cohesive groups end up succumbing to groupthink; Cohesiveness is a necessary but not sufficient condition for excessive concurrence seeking;

Antecedent Conditions of Groupthink A Cohesive Group of Decision-Makers [just discussed]; Structural Faults of the Organization; Situational Context;

Cohesive Group + Structural Faults + Situational Context = A tendency for groupthink concurrence-seeking: Overestimation of the Group: symptoms 1 & 2; Closed-mindedness: symptoms 3 & 4; Pressure toward uniformity: symptoms 5, 6, 7, & 8; (p. 224)

The 8 Symptoms of Groupthink Lead to Defective Decision-Making 1. Incomplete survey of alternatives; 2. Incomplete survey of objectives; 3. Failure to examine risks of preferred choice; 4. Failure to reappraise initially rejected alternatives; 5. Poor information search; 6. Selective bias in processing information at hand; 7. Failure to work out contingency plans; Low probability of successful Outcome

Situational Context 1. High stress from external threats with low hope of a better solution than the leader’s ; 2. Low self-esteem temporarily induced by: a. Recent failures; b. Excessive difficulties on current decision making task that lowers members’ self efficacy; c. Moral dilemmas: Apparent loss of feasible alternatives except ones that violate ethical standards;

Structural Faults of the Organization 1. Insulation of the group; 2. Lack of tradition of impartial leadership; 3. Lack of norms requiring methodical procedures; 4. Homogeneity of members’ social background and ideology; 5. Etc.

IT DOESN’T ALWAYS HAPPEN Cohesiveness is one element; When the structural faults are present, and the context facilitates not trusting in your own ability to choose, the probability of groupthink increases; 2

To Reduce the Groupthink Taking Over Changes can be made in: Insulation of the group; Impartial leadership; Procedural methods (e.g., encourage dissent);