1. Chapter 9 Group Processes: Influence in Social Groups

2. What Is a Group? A group is two or more people who interact with each other and are interdependent, in the sense that their needs and goals cause them to influence each other.

3. What Is a Group? Why Do People Join Groups? Group membership offers many benefits including offering an important source of information, resolving ambiguity, helping us form an identity, and establishing social norms and rules.

4. What Is a Group? The Composition of Groups Members of a group tend to be similar in age, gender, beliefs, and opinions. This is because people are attracted to similar others and because groups operate in ways that encourage similarity among members.

5. What Is a Group? The Composition of Groups Influential aspects of groups include social norms, social roles, which are shared expectations about how particular people in the group are supposed to behave, gender roles, and group cohesiveness or the qualities of a group that bind members together and promote liking between them.

6. Chapter Outline II. Groups and Individuals' Behavior

7. Groups and Individuals' Behavior Social Facilitation: When the Presence of Others Energizes Us Social facilitation is the tendency for people to 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.

8. Groups and Individuals' Behavior Social Facilitation: When the Presence of Others Energizes Us Zajonc and colleagues (1969) did a study with cockroaches that demonstrated that roaches run a simple maze faster when they are in the presence of an audience of other roaches than when they are alone.

9. Groups and Individuals' Behavior Social Facilitation: When the Presence of Others Energizes Us Whether a task is simple versus difficult affects our performance in the presence of others. In the roach experiment, the roaches ran a complex maze more slowly in the presence of others than they did alone. Many other studies show that simple tasks are performed more quickly in the presence of others but complex tasks are performed more slowly.

10. Groups and Individuals' Behavior Social Facilitation: When the Presence of Others Energizes Us Zajonc hypothesized that the presence of others increases physiological arousal which facilitates dominant, well-learned responses, but inhibits performance on more difficult tasks.

11. Groups and Individuals' Behavior Social Facilitation: When the Presence of Others Energizes Us Three theories try to explain why the presence of others leads to arousal: The presence of others makes us more alert. The presence of others makes us concerned about what others think of us. The presence of others distracts us.

12. Groups and Individuals' Behavior Social Loafing: When the Presence of Others Relaxes Us In social facilitation (kolaylaştırma) research, the activities studied are ones where people are performing individually, and these individual efforts are easily observed.

13. Groups and Individuals' Behavior Social Loafing: When the Presence of Others Relaxes Us

14. Groups and Individuals' Behavior Social Loafing: When the Presence of Others Relaxes Us

15. Groups and Individuals' Behavior Social Loafing: When the Presence of Others Relaxes Us In other social situations, being around others means that our individual efforts are less easily observed and merge to be part of the group. In these situations, social loafing often occurs. The relaxation that results impairs performance on simple tasks but enhances performance on complex ones.

16. Groups and Individuals' Behavior Social Loafing: When the Presence of Others Relaxes Us Latané and others have found that social loafing disappears if each person’s performance can be individually evaluated.

17. Groups and Individuals' Behavior Gender and Cultural Differences in Social Loafing: Who Slacks Off the Most? Karau and Williams (1993) found that the tendency to loaf is stronger in men than in women. Similarly, the tendency to loaf is stronger in Western than in Asian cultures.

18. Groups and Individuals' Behavior When performing a simple task, a little evaluation apprehension can improve performance. However, if the task is complex, being evaluated can impair people’s performance.

19. Groups and Individuals' Behavior Deindividuation: Getting Lost in the Crowd Deindividuation is the loosening of normal constraints on behavior when people are in a crowd, leading to an increase in impulsive and deviant acts.

20. Groups and Individuals' Behavior Deindividuation: Getting Lost in the Crowd Mullen (1986) examined news reports of lynchings in the U.S. from 1899-1946 and found that the larger the mob, the greater the savagery with which they killed their victims.

21. Groups and Individuals' Behavior Deindividuation: Getting Lost in the Crowd There are two factors that are important to deindividuation. One is that deindividuation makes people feel less accountable for their actions. Another factor is that deindividuation increases obedience to group norms.

22. Groups and Individuals' Behavior Deindividuation: Getting Lost in the Crowd An important qualification is that not all impulsive behavior is negative or antisocial. Deindividuation may result in prosocial or antisocial behavior, depending on what the norm of the group is.

23. Chapter Outline III. Group Decisions: Are Two (or More) Heads Better than One?

24. Group Decisions Most of us assume that two (or more) heads perform better than one. Sometimes, though, two or more heads do not perform better than one, or at least no better than two heads working alone.

25. Group Decisions Process Loss: When Group Interactions Inhibit Good Problem Solving Process loss is any aspect of group interaction that inhibits good problem solving.

26. Group Decisions Process Loss: When Group Interactions Inhibit Good Problem Solving Process loss may result because group members fail to share unique information. This type of process loss can be prevented if people learn who is responsible for what kinds of information.

27. Group Decisions Process Loss: When Group Interactions Inhibit Good Problem Solving Transactive memory, the combined memory of two people that is more efficient than the memory of either individual, can help groups avoid process loss.

28. Group Decisions Process Loss: When Group Interactions Inhibit Good Problem Solving

29. Group Decisions Process Loss: When Group Interactions Inhibit Good Problem Solving Another example of process loss is groupthink, when group cohesiveness is more important than considering the facts in a realistic manner. Groupthink can lead to defective decision making.

30. Group Decisions Process Loss: When Group Interactions Inhibit Good Problem Solving

31. Group Decisions Process Loss: When Group Interactions Inhibit Good Problem Solving Antecedents of groupthink include a highly cohesive group, group isolation, and a directive leader. Symptoms of groupthink include the illusion of invulnerability, self- censorship, and the illusion of unanimity.

32. Group Decisions Process Loss: When Group Interactions Inhibit Good Problem Solving To avoid groupthink, a leader should be impartial, outside opinions should be invited, the group should be divided into subgroups, and the members should be encouraged to speak openly and/or privately about their concerns.

33. Group Decisions Group Polarization: Going to Extremes Group polarization is the tendency for groups to make decisions that are more extreme than the initial inclinations of its members.

34. Group Decisions Group Polarization: Going to Extremes Group polarization occurs for two main reasons. One is the persuasive arguments interpretation and the other is the social comparison interpretation.

35. Group Decisions Group Polarization: Going to Extremes The degree of risk versus caution a group is comfortable with depends on culture, according to the culture-value theory.

36. Group Decisions Leadership in Groups Much research has focused on what makes a good leader. The great person theory states that certain key personality traits make a person a good leader, regardless of the situation.

37. Group Decisions Leadership in Groups Research indicates that personality traits are surprisingly unrelated to leadership. However, certain attributes do display a modest association with leadership success. These are intelligence, morality, motivation for power, small family size, and height.

38. Group Decisions Leadership in Groups Rather than deeming personality traits unimportant, social psychologists suggest that good leadership is determined by a person having the right personality characteristics for the situation.

39. Group Decisions Leadership in Groups Fiedler’s (1967, 1978) contingency theory of leadership states 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.

40. Group Decisions Leadership in Groups A task-oriented leader is a leader who is concerned more with getting the job done than with workers’ feelings and relationships. A relationship-oriented leader is concerned with workers’ feelings and relationships.

41. Group Decisions Leadership in Groups Task-oriented leaders are most effective in situations that are either very high or very low in control. Relationship-oriented leaders are most effective in situations that are moderate in control.

42. Group Decisions Leadership in Groups Eagly and colleagues (1990) found that, consistent with the stereotype, women do tend to lead more democratically than men. However, the gender differences reported are small. Research has found that many men are uncomfortable with women leaders who use the same leadership techniques that men usually adopt.

43. Group Decisions Leadership in Groups

44. Chapter Outline IV. Conflict and Cooperation

45. Conflict and Cooperation Often people have incompatible goals that place them in conflict with each other. The nature of conflict, and how it can be resolved, has been the topic of numerous social psychological studies.

46. Conflict and Cooperation Social Dilemmas A social dilemma is a conflict in which the most beneficial action for an individual will, if chosen by most people, have harmful effects on everyone. A common way to study social dilemmas is with a game called the prisoner’s dilemma.

47. Conflict and Cooperation Social Dilemmas The optimal strategy for encouraging cooperation is the tit-for-tat strategy: at first, the person acts cooperatively, but then always responds the way the opponent did on the previous trial.

48. Conflict and Cooperation Social Dilemmas Another kind of social dilemma is the public goods dilemma, a social dilemma in which individuals must contribute to a common pool in order to maintain the public good. The commons dilemma is a dilemma in which everyone takes from a common pool of goods that will replenish itself if used in moderation, but will not if overused.

49. Conflict and Cooperation Using Threats to Resolve Conflict A classic series of studies by Deutsch and Krauss (1960, 1962) indicates that threats are not an effective way to reduce conflict.

50. Conflict and Cooperation Effects of Communication

51. Conflict and Cooperation Negotiation and Bargaining Negotiation and Bargaining: Negotiation is 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.

52. Conflict and Cooperation Negotiation and Bargaining Integrative solutions to conflict have the 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.