Comm Group&Team-Chap 9-Effective Decision Making and Problem Solving

What are the five conditions that reduce resistance to change?

1.Group members have a part in the planning and decision making. This gives them part ownership of the change. Imposing change produces psychological reactance (see Chapter 4). 2.Change does not threaten group members. The larger concern on the smoking issue was whether students would drop out of Cabrillo College because the policy was too restrictive. 3.The need for change affects individuals directly. The great majority of students at Cabrillo College are nonsmokers directly affected by a permissive smoking policy. 4.Change is open to revision and modification. The smoking policy change was presented as a temporary fix, subject to revision, which did occur. 5.The three factors—degree, rate, and desirability of change—are considered. The smoking policy at Cabrillo College addressed substantial degree of change by initially not banning smoking entirely, considered too rapid a rate of change by phasing in the policy (designated areas were tried first), and addressed desirability by conducting open hearings.

What are the solutions when groups do not plan on its implementation?

1.Force Field Analysis 2.Groups Brainstorm

A question of policy

A question of policy asks whether a specific course of action should be undertaken to solve a problem, such as "Should the campus smoking policy be changed?" Once the problem is phrased as a question of fact, value, or policy, any ambiguous terms should be defined. "Quality of life," for example, would require some further description (no strong odors, freedom from pollutants that might trigger respiratory difficulties, etc.).

A question of value

A question of value focuses on the desirability of an object, idea, event, or person. For example, "Does permitting smoking on campus raise any quality-of-life concerns?" Quality of life is a subjective value judgment, and it can't be determined scientifically or statistically. Smokers might find the smell of smoke innocuous, whereas nonsmokers may find it grossly unpleasant.

guideline for assuring statistics are representative is that the sample must be randomly

A second guideline for assuring statistics are representative is that the sample must be randomlyrandomly selected, not self-selected. A random sample is a part of the population chosen in such a manner that every member of the entire population has an equal chance of being selected.

self-selected sample

A self-selected sample is one in which the most committed, passionate, or otherwise atypical parts of the population studied are more likely to participate. For example, the California Public Interest Research Group contacted almost 80,000 students 18 to 24 years old to complete an online survey on voter participation. A mere 1,057 students responded. When asked "Do you plan to vote in the June primaries?" a surprising 75% said yes. Historically, a primary in a nonpresidential election year has low voter turnout. Not surprisingly, only 25.2% of 18- to 24-year-olds ultimately voted (Manjikian & Rusch, 2014). Good intentions explain part of the discrepant statistics, but the self-selected sample represented mostly motivated young voters. Sufficiency

participation

As important as participation of group members is to group synergy, no one wants to encourage participation from bad apple members. The quality of member participation is more important than the mere quantity (Dowell et al., 2017). Low quantity of participation from group members, however, especially from those who are merely shy or reticent to contribute, can impact group effectiveness.

What are ways we can evaluate credible information?

Consider several guidelines to determine credibility—trustworthiness of information. First, consider the source. Second check for bias. Third watch for authorities quoted outside of their field of expertise. Fourth beware implausible statistics

Functional Perspective:Being Systematic-unstructured vs structured procedure

Discussions that follow some systematic procedure tend to be more productive and result in better decisions than relatively unstructured discussions (Bohn, 2017).

What was the outcome of Smokers policy?

Finally, the suggestion that smoking be restricted to parking lots protected the health of nonsmokers; was a simple, easily understood policy; cost less than $5,000 for signs and ashtrays; and mostly avoided alienating smokers because smoking was still permitted. Only the maintaining a comfortable environment criterion was not met completely because smokers were still not totally sheltered from the elements. They could, however, smoke in their cars or smoke in the two massive parking structures on campus that provide some shelter, especially from rain.

principal path is solution oriented.

Finally, the third principal path is solution oriented. Here the group launches prematurely into discussion of solutions before adequate focus on the problem.

Solution Implementation Follow-Through, what are the two challenges when groups arrive at a decision?

First is Murphy's law A second problem is that, once a decision has been made, groups don't plan its implementation.

What are the guidelines to help achieve a consensus?

Follow the Standard Agenda. Structured group discussion, not aimless conversation, improves the chances of achieving consensus. 2.Establish a cooperative group climate. Supportive patterns of communication encourage consensus; defensive patterns discourage it. 3.Identify the pluses and minuses of potential decisions under consideration. This discourages confirmation bias. 4.Discuss all concerns of group members and attempt to resolve them. Try to find alternatives that will satisfy members' concerns. This avoids groupthink. 5.Avoid adversarial, win-lose arguments. Don't stubbornly argue for a position to achieve a personal victory. Avoid the "enemy-friend" competitive false dichotomy. 6.Request a "stand aside." A stand aside means a team member has reservations about the group decision but does not wish to block the group choice. This avoids the blocker role. 7.Avoid conflict-suppressing techniques such as coin flipping and swapping ("I'll support your position this time if you support mine next time"). Conflict-suppressing techniques will not usually produce commitment to the group decision. 8.If consensus is impossible, seek a supermajority (a minimum two-thirds vote). It captures the spirit of consensus by requiring substantial, if not total, agreement.

First, consider the source.

For example, if an article on the Internet cites no author, be dubious. A slick looking website can seem authoritative, but be a front for some questionable, even despicable viewpoints. A source's expertise should be apparent. An author's name without citation of his or her expertise lacks credibility. Wikipedia, the popular online encyclopedia, ironically cautions against using Wikipedia as a primary source because "anyone in the world can edit an article, deleting accurate information or adding false information"

Fourth, beware implausible statistics.

Fourth, beware implausible statistics. For example, consider the statistic that 81% of white victims of homicide are "killed by blacks," attributed to the Crime Statistics Bureau in San Francisco and circulated on the Internet during the 2016 presidential campaign. First, there is no Crime Statistics Bureau in San Francisco. Second, according to the FBI, the actual statistic is 14% of white victims are killed by African Americans (Fang, 2016). The original source for the wholly implausible 81% statistic was a neo-Nazi Twitter account

unanimity rule-group consensus

Group consensus is based on the unanimity rule. Consensus is "a state of mutual agreement among members of a group where all legitimate concerns of individuals have been addressed to the satisfaction of the group" Consensus usually requires some give and take. If all members can agree on an acceptable choice, even if this alternative is not each member's preference, then you have come close to achieving a true consensus.

Groups brainstorm

Groups brainstorm a list of driving forces (those that encourage change) and restraining forces (those that resist change). Driving forces that encouraged implementation of the new smoking policy at Cabrillo College included multiple complaints from students, stated concerns about the health risks to nonsmokers, and a fear that many nonsmokers would stop enrolling at the college. Restraining forces working against implementation mostly involved concerns about enrollment and a more general resistance to change itself.

Unitary Sequence

Groups on this path proceed in a rigid, step-by-step fashion toward a decision.

Pros of Unanimity

Groups that use a consensus approach tend to produce better decisions than groups using other decision rules. This occurs because full discussion of issues is required, every group member must embrace the decision, and minority members are heard. Women, who often are reticent to participate during group discussions when badly outnumbered by men, are more vocal when the unanimity rule is used

Third watch for authorities quoted outside of their field of expertise.

Iben Browning predicted a "major" earthquake for December 3 and 4, 1990, along the New Madrid Fault located in the Midwest. Schools in several states were dismissed during these two days because of his prediction. Browning had some scientific expertise, but not on earthquakes. In fact, earthquake experts, with geotechnical engineering degrees and experience in seismology, denounced Browning's predictions because earthquakes cannot be predicted ("Can Earthquakes Be Predicted?" 2018). There wasn't a sizable earthquake on the New Madrid Fault until April 17, 2008, and it was considered "moderate" by quake experts and caused minimal damage.

why is currecy being up to date important ?

Information should be as current as possible, especially when a phenomenon is volatile (e.g., weather, tech product prices), or all the facts are not known yet. 1.What used to be taken as fact may be called into question with new information. For example, news media erroneously reported that voter turnout in the 2016 presidential election was the lowest in at least 20 years. The claim was predicated on "news outlets trying to pin down voter turnout figures quickly in a system that doesn't count millions of votes until weeks after the election" (Bialik, 2016). Final vote totals showed a significant increase in voter turnout compared to the 2012 election.

why relavance and looking for logical connections important?

Information should logically support claims made. Claiming that the public education system in the United States is the world's best because America spends more money in total than any other nation is irrelevant. Total spending doesn't necessarily equate with educational excellence, especially if the money is largely wasted or spent on the wrong priorities. The ad populum fallacy—basing a claim on popular opinion alone—lacks logical relevance. For example, a 2016 Chapman University survey found that almost a quarter of respondents do not believe astronauts landed on the moon, almost half believe in haunted houses, and more than half believe the U.S. government isn't telling the truth about the 9/11 terrorist attack (Poppy, 2017). More than 40% of Americans do not know (Rothwell 213-214) Rothwell, J. D. In Mixed Company, 10th Edition. Oxford University Press, 20180914. VitalBook file.

The Standard Agenda:Structuring Group Discussion

John Dewey (1910) described a process of rational decision making and problem solving that he called reflective thinking—a set of logical steps that incorporate the scientific method of defining, analyzing, and solving problems. The Standard Agenda is a direct outgrowth of Dewey's reflective thinking process. The Standard Agenda, composed of six steps, focuses on the problem before considering solutions. This section explains these steps by discussing the evolution of the smoking policy on the Cabrillo College campus. Note that, unlike the college president's consolidated registration proposal, this was a problem handled effectively through systematic group discussion.

Murphy's law

Murphy's law—which states that anything that can go wrong likely will go wrong, somewhere, sometime—is often not considered. Failing to make a backup copy of a final written report for a group project is flirting with Murphy's malevolence. NASA specializes in redundant systems in its spacecrafts because it expects the unexpected to occur.

Cons of Unanimity

Nevertheless, there are two principal limitations to consensus decision making. First, achieving unanimous agreement from group members is very difficult. Some groups seem unable to agree even that gravity exists. Members who resist siding with the majority lengthen the deliberations and increase secondary tension. Second, consensus is increasingly unlikely as groups grow larger. Groups of 15 or more rarely achieve a consensus. (Try getting 15 family members and friends to agree on a movie.) Seeking a consensus, however, even if never quite achieved, can still be beneficial.

Functional Perspective-Is there a single systematic discussion procedure that grantees effective decision making?

No,"What happens at each stage and how well necessary functions are executed are the real determinants of success" Rigidly following a set of prescribed steps, such as the unitary sequence path, can stifle discussion and seem robotic

why should Groups should establish criteria for evaluating solutions before solutions are suggested?

Not all criteria, however, are created equal. The group must consider the relevance and appropriateness of each criterion. For example, ranking films based on criteria such as "buckets of blood spilled" or "number of sex scenes" would be dubious at best except perhaps for those with extremely narrow (some would say questionable) interests.

Force Field Analysis

One study found that only 30% of strategic initiatives in businesses are successfully implemented (Davis et al., 2010). Force field analysis, suggested by the work of Kurt Lewin (1947), is one method for planning implementation of a group solution or decision.

What is a helpful decision-making method that stipulates systematically how to implement SMALL GROUP decisions once resistance to change has been addressed?

PERT (Program Evaluation Review Technique). The steps in the PERT method are: 1.Determine what the final step should look like (e.g., restrict smoking to parking lots). 2.Specify any events that must occur before the final goal is realized (e.g., obtain endorsement from the board of trustees). 3.Put the events in chronological order (e.g., the committee must secure the support of the student and faculty senates, then the college president, before going for board endorsement). 4.Generate a list of activities, resources, and materials that are required between events (e.g., hold a strategy session before making presentations). 5.Develop a timeline for implementation. Estimate how long each step will take. 6.Match the total time estimate for implementation of the solution with any deadlines (e.g., end of school year approaching). Modify your plan of action as needed. 7.Specify which group members will have which responsibilities. This prevents confusion.

What is the Functional perspective of Standard Agenda?

Whatever path groups choose, the quality of decisions depends on the ability of members to use systematic procedures to accomplish five critical functions: -problem analysis, -establishment of evaluation criteria, -generation of alternative solutions, -evaluation of positive consequences of solutions, and -evaluation of negative consequences of solutions

How did group for smokers case generate alternatives?

Some possibilities on the smoking issue that emerged from the committee deliberations included mandating a total ban on smoking across the campus, designating certain locations outside for smoking, building outside shelters in designated locations around the campus to protect smokers from weather, permitting smoking only in automobiles, and allowing smoking only in parking lots both in cars and outside.

why should Groups should establish criteria for evaluating solutions before solutions are suggested? in the smokers case

Some relevant and appropriate criteria on the smoking question devised by an ad hoc campus committee included: protect the health of nonsmokers, be simple to understand and enforce, avoid alienating either group (smokers or nonsmokers), cost less than $5,000, and maintain a comfortable environment. -The criteria should be ranked in order of priority. The committee prioritized the criteria on the smoking policy in the order just listed.

results of logical connections -The ad populum fallacy

The ad populum fallacy—basing a claim on popular opinion alone—lacks logical relevance. For example, a 2016 Chapman University survey found that almost a quarter of respondents do not believe astronauts landed on the moon, almost half believe in haunted houses, and more than half believe the U.S. government isn't telling the truth about the 9/11 terrorist attack (Poppy, 2017). More than 40% of Americans do not know (Rothwell

Functional Perspective-Drawbacks of unstructured

The drawbacks to unstructured, free-floating group discussions are aimless deliberations that are time-consuming and inefficient, premature focus on solutions (solution oriented path), inclination to accept the first plausible solution that may not be the best option, discussion tangents and topic-hopping, talkaholics' wind-baggery, and failure to address group conflict

Groups take three principal paths in reaching decisions

The first path is called the unitary sequence. complex cyclic. principal path is solution oriented.

Problem Analysis:Causes and Effects

The group researches and gathers information on the problem defined, tries to determine how serious the problem is, what harm or effect the problem produces, and what causes the problem. Smoking on campus was a contentious issue at Cabrillo College for many years. The conclusion of the student senate, after much research and debate, was that the smoking policy was too permissive, causing numerous hazards and significant unpleasantness for students. One note of caution: although analyzing the problem is important and should be undertaken before exploring potential solutions, analysis paralysis, or bogging down by overly analyzing the problem, can prevent a group from ever making a decision.

Functional Perspective-Why Steps in any systematic discussion procedure should be looked as guidelines, not commandments?

The more complex the task being discussed, the more likely the complex-cyclic path will emerge. Flashes of insight don't necessarily follow a preordained sequence of discussion steps. The group may need to backtrack occasionally.

complex cyclic.

The second path is called complex cyclic. This path repeats cycles of focusing on the problem, then the solution, and back again to the problem, and so forth.

Why should we Explore both the MERITS and DEMERITS (avoid confirmation bias) of suggested solutions.

The story of a military briefing officer asked to devise a method for raising enemy submarines off the ocean floor illustrates the importance of this step. The briefing officer's solution? Heat the ocean to the boiling point. When bewildered Pentagon officials asked him how this could be done, he replied, "I don't know. I decided on the solution; you work out the details." The devil is in the details. Explore both the merits and demerits (avoid confirmation bias) of suggested solutions. -Devil's advocacy and dialectical inquiry (are useful techniques for accomplishing this.

curtural diversity

The year 2009 marked the beginning of Japan's first jury system since World War II. The idea of participating in jury deliberations and deciding court cases does not immediately appeal to Japanese citizens (Johnson, 2016). There is a deep cultural reticence to expressing opinions in public discourse, to arguing different points of view, and to questioning authority (Onishi, 2007; Tabuchi & McDonald, 2009). In keeping with the respect for authority, the new system combines three trained judges and six citizens picked by lottery to make decisions (Tabuchi & McDonald, 2009; Watanabe, 2012). Hundreds of mock trials were held prior to the official start of jury trials in Japan, but despite the training, polls revealed that about 80% of Japanese dread serving on juries (Onishi, 2007). During the mock trial exercises, jurors remained mostly silent, failing to participate in deliberations despite prodding from judges. The value of verbal participation in decision making is perceived differently across cultures. As already noted, silent individuals are not seriously considered for the role of leader in American culture. Speaking is highly valued in the United States. Talking in an individualist culture is a way of showing one's uniqueness and importance (Samovar et al., 2017). In collectivist cultures and co-cultures, by contrast, speaking is not highly prized. Among Cambodians, Chinese, Japanese, Thais, and Vietnamese, among others, emphasis is given to minimal vocal participation. A Chinese proverb by Lao Tzu states "Those who know do not speak; those who speak do not know." A Thai proverb says, "A wise man talks little; an ignorant one talks much." A Japanese proverb states "It is the duck that squawks that gets shot" (Samovar et al., 2017). Cultural value differences concerning verbal participation in small groups pose a challenge. Finding ways to boost the verbal participation rates of cultural minorities in an American culture that values speech is a worthy undertaking. The methods outlined in the next section for encouraging constructive participation from low contributors in general apply well. (Rothwell 215-216) Rothwell, J. D. In Mixed Company, 10th Edition. Oxford University Press, 20180914. VitalBook file.

A question of fact

asks whether something is true and to what extent. Objective evidence can be used to determine an answer to the question, "Are there serious dangers to nonsmokers from secondhand smoke?"

Drawbacks of Unitary Sequence

can stifle discussion and seem robotic

two principal guidelines for determining whether statistics are representative

There are two principal guidelines for determining whether statistics are representative. First, the sample size (in polls, surveys, and studies) must be adequate. This can be determined most easily by the margin of error, which is the degree of sampling error accounted for by imperfections in selecting a sample. As the margin of errorthe representativeness of the statistic decreases. If the margin of error reaches more than plus or minus 3%, the representativeness of the statistic becomes questionable. A margin of error of say plus or minus 7% means that a survey reporting that a majority of college students (51%) smoke marijuana could vary from a high of 58% (+7%) to a low of 44% (-7%). So, within that range, either a substantial minority or a sizable majority of college students smoke marijuana

When Enough Really Is Enough When do you have enough information to support your claims?

There is no magic formula. Nevertheless, remember that correlations alone are insufficient to assert causal relations (see Chapter 8). Also, inferences based on examples, anecdotes, or one or two easily accessed articles on Google are insufficient support for claims. Finally, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof (Shermer, 2013). Despite the "moon landing was a hoax" crowd, astronauts landed on the moon six times, collected rocks, and returned to tell the story. Denying it is an extraordinary claim based mostly on raising mundane questions (Millis, 2017), and it ignores the fact that the moon landing is one of history's most thoroughly documented events. (See Appendix B for additional relevant material on critically examining information and claims.) (Rothwell 214-215) Rothwell, J. D. In Mixed Company, 10th Edition. Oxford University Press, 20180914. VitalBook file.

Cons on Why should gather and evaluate information be our primary concern?

To limit information overload, it is critical to narrow your search so that you don't access thousands of websites on a topic. The quickest way to learn how to do this is to locate the "Help," "Frequently Asked Questions," or "Search Tips" button on the Internet search tool's home page. When you click on one of these buttons, instructions will appear on-screen identifying how to use the search engine or virtual library effectively. Despite the popularity of the Internet, the library is still a key information source. Libraries have access to many electronic databases such as the general-purpose InfoTrac and EBSCOhost, and education-related ERIC. Libraries also have numerous standard references.

Why should we evaluate Information:Countering "Truth Decay"

fake news, fabricated studies, "alternative facts," and fruit-loopy conspiracies disseminated on social media. A Rand Report dubs this deterioration of critical thinking practices as "truth decay" (Kavanagh & Rich, 2018). Jonathan Swift long ago noted, "Falsehood flies, and the truth comes limping after it." Researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology confirmed this by conducting a study on lies and false information spread on Twitter. Their results are troubling: Fake news is 70% more likely to be retweeted than real, substantiated news, and it takes the truth six times as long as misinformation to reach 1,500 people.

what are the three primary group decision-making rules?

majority, minority, and unanimity.

analysis paralysis,

or bogging down by overly analyzing the problem, can prevent a group from ever making a decision

Cons of Majority Rule:Tyrannical or Practical

popular method of group decision making, the quality of the group's decision is a particularly troublesome problem. Majorities can sometimes take ludicrous, even dangerous positions. Racism, sexism, and other bigotry in the United States have been the products of majority rule. Studies comparing juries using unanimous and majority rule (Oregon requires a 10-2 majority and Louisiana a 9-3 split for felony convictions) found several deficiencies in majority rule applicable to most small groups (Abramson, 1994). First, deliberations are significantly shorter and less conscientious. Deliberations typically end once a requisite majority is reached (Hoe, 2017). Consequently, less error correction takes place, sometimes resulting in faulty decisions (Lee & Paradowski, 2007). Second, minority factions participate less frequently and are less influential, thereby underutilizing the group's resources. Third, members' overall satisfaction with the group is lower. Minorities feel the "tyranny of the majority" when their point of view is ignored and deliberations become combative and bullying.

representatives-presenting the facts

single example, study, or statistic may or may not accurately reflect what is true in a particular instance. A single scientific study proves very little until thoroughly replicated by different experts. There are two principal guidelines for determining whether statistics are representative. these are the facts. First, the sample size A second guideline for assuring statistics are representative is that the sample must be randomly

how should Groups establish criteria for evaluating solutions before solutions are suggested? in the smokers case

the criteria should be ranked in order of priority. The committee prioritized the criteria on the smoking policy in the order just listed.

Drawback of Complex Cyclic

the more complex the task being discussed, the more likely the complex-cyclic path will emerge.

Poole's (1983) multiple sequence model of decision emergence.

the most widely accepted phasic model of group decision All decision-making and problem-solving groups exhibit recognizable phases.

Phases of Decision Making

the multiple sequence model pictures groups moving along three activity tracks: task, relational, and topic. Some groups may devote a significant amount of time to the relational (social) activities of groups before proceeding to a task discussion; other groups may start right in on the task. Groups may also be sidetracked during discussions on task by relational conflicts that need to be addressed.

Critical thinking and Effective Decision Making-Why should we gather and evaluate information be our primary concern?

the output of groups is likely to be no better than the input available to its members. Faulty or insufficient information easily produces collective inferential error Information gathering should be a focused effort by all group members. Once problem identification has concluded, the search for relevant information can proceed. The group should divide the labor. Some members may concentrate on certain issues (problem causes and effects), while other members research different ones (potential solutions). For the most up-to-date information, use the Internet. Learning to use the proper search engines and focusing your search take time to master. Because much of the information on the Internet is irrelevant, erroneous, or plain nutty, virtual libraries were created to provide more selective, higher-quality information.

Unanimity rule-true consensus

true consensus, however, requires not just agreement, but commitment and satisfaction. Members show commitment by defending the unanimous decision to outsiders, not undermining it by agreeing in the group but disagreeing outside of the group. Group members feel satisfaction with the decision-making process when a cooperative group climate and reasonable opportunities for all members to participate meaningfully in the decision making occur.

Cons of Minority Rule

-First, the group designates one of its members as an expert to make the decision- This method relieves group members from devoting time and energy to solving problems. Decision by designated expert, however, is mostly ineffective because determining who is the expert in the group is often difficult and contentious. Lack of group input also fails to capitalize on synergy. -Second, a designated authority (usually from outside the immediate group) makes the decision for the group, either after hearing discussion from group members or without their consultation. -The president of Cabrillo College primarily instituted the consolidated registration proposal, despite opposition from student and faculty senates. Sometimes the group advises the designated authority, and sometimes not. If group advice is treated as a mere formality, or the designated authority is a poor listener, then none of the benefits of group deliberations will accrue. Group members are also likely to vie competitively for attention, seek to impress the authority, and offer what the authority wants to hear, not what should be said. Third, in some instances, executive committees must be delegated responsibility for making certain decisions because the workload for the larger group is overwhelming or the time constraints are prohibitive. The challenge here is to persuade the group to get behind the decision. Finally, minority rule can take the form of a forceful faction deciding for the group by dominating less forceful members. On rare occasions this may be advisable when the minority faction consists of the most informed, committed members. Too often, however, dominant group members focus on personal gain more than on what's good for the group (Maner, 2017).

The Standard Agenda-reflective thinking

-John Dewey (1910) described a process of rational decision making and problem solving -a set of logical steps that incorporate the scientific method of defining, analyzing, and solving problems. The Standard Agenda is a direct outgrowth of Dewey's reflective thinking process. -One way this was used was discussing the evolution of smoking

Which sequence model is most popular?

.The multiple sequence model mostly describes the principal paths that groups often take. The functional perspective, however, prescribes procedures for effective decision making and problem solving.

Check for Bias

Second, check for bias (gains something by taking certain positions). Research shows that ideologically leaning Internet news sources (e.g., Daily Kos; Drudge Report) have a strong biasing effect that produces "a distorted understanding of evidence, potentially promoting inaccurate beliefs" (Garrett et al., 2016). A Stanford University study showed that more than half of the college students participating thought the American College of Pediatricians (APC) was a reliable source after accessing the group's website and given the opportunity to do a wider search online to check on this group. The Southern Poverty Law Center identifies the APC as a hate group because of its "history of propagating damaging falsehoods about LGBT people, including linking homosexuality to pedophilia, and claiming that LGBT people are more promiscuous than heterosexuals, and . . . a danger to children" ("Meet the Anti-LGBT Hate Group," 2015). A quick Google search easily reveals these details. Also, almost two thirds of the same college student participants failed to recognize the political bias of a tweet about the National Rifle Association by the liberal group MoveOn.org (Wineburg et al., 2016). When using the Internet, search for websites that have no profit motive or ideological bent. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, an evidence-based, scientifically credible, nonpartisan site is such a source. The website address of a source can provide hints about possible bias. If it contains .gov or .edu, the site is sponsored and maintained by a governmental or educational institution with a reputation to protect. Sites with .com or .org in their address are commercial ventures whose credibility varies.

Advantages of Majority Rule

When issues are not very important, when decisions must be made relatively quickly, when groups become large, and when commitment of all members to the final decision is unimportant, majority rule can be useful. Majority rule is efficient and provides quick closure. First, the group designates one of its members as an expert to make the decision. This method relieves group members from devoting time and energy to solving problems. Decision by designated expert, however, is mostly ineffective because determining who is the expert in the group is often difficult and contentious. Lack of group input also fails to capitalize on synergy. Second, a designated authority (usually from outside the immediate group) makes the decision for the group, either after hearing discussion from group members or without their consultation. The president of Cabrillo College primarily instituted the consolidated registration proposal, despite opposition from student and faculty senates. Sometimes the group advises the designated authority, and sometimes not. If group advice is treated as a mere formality, or the designated authority is a poor listener, then none of the benefits of group deliberations will accrue. Group members are also likely to vie competitively for attention, seek to impress the authority, and offer what the authority wants to hear, not what should be said. Third, in some instances, executive committees must be delegated responsibility for making certain decisions because the workload for the larger group is overwhelming or the time constraints are prohibitive. The challenge here is to persuade the group to get behind the decision. Finally, minority rule can take the form of a forceful faction deciding for the group by dominating less forceful members. On rare occasions this may be advisable when the minority faction consists of the most informed, committed members. Too often, however, dominant group members focus on personal gain more than on what's good for the group (Maner, 2017).