psyc 201 quiz #5

preventing groupthink

1. Group leaders need to remain impartial If they make their opinions known, members try to please them 2. Group members must seek divergent opinions Designate someone to play the devil's advocate Solicit feedback from outsiders (non-members) 3. Create subgroups that meet separately beforehand 4. Seek anonymous opinions (e.g. use secret ballots)

group

A collection of individuals who have relations to one another that make them interdependent to some significant degree

Groupthink

A style of thinking in which maintaining group cohesiveness and solidarity is more important than considering facts in a realistic manner

Distraction-Conflict Theory

Awareness of another person's presence creates a conflict between attending to the person and the task If the task is well-learned, decreased attention to the task leads to good dominant response But if the task is novel or difficult, decreased attention leads to poor dominant response.

In which situation would you expect better performance with vs. without an audience? A. Practicing a new cello piece B. Reciting your favorite poem C. Saying out loud the ink color, rather than the word of stimuli like these: Yellow D. Reading a Middle English story about King Arthur out loud

B. Reciting your favorite poem

However, even if a group's most important goal is a correct decision, individual members may be more concerned with...

Being judged by others Pleasing the leader Not hurting people's feelings Avoiding responsibility if things go wrong

Triplett (1898): The fastest times were recorded when cyclists competed directly against each other on the same track at the same time

Cyclists pedaled faster when they were around other people than when they were alone.

Zajonc (1965)

Enhanced performance in the presence of others when performing a simple or well-learned task. Impaired performance in the presence of others when performing a difficult or novel task.

Social Loafing

Exerting less effort when working on a group task in which individual contributions cannot be monitored due to presence of others

Group polarization

Group decisions tend to be more extreme than those made by individuals

Risky shift

Groups tend to make riskier decisions than individuals would make

Evaluation Apprehension

If others can evaluate us, we have increased arousal We don't want to look bad, so we get amped up/nervous

Do groups make better decisions than individuals?

If the problem has a precise, factual answer, then yes. 1) Pooling unique knowledge = Best chance of hitting the right answer 2) Aggregation

When other people are around, do you... Perform better? Perform worse?

It depends on what you're doing

More likely to happen in Eastern Cultures

Japanese scientists familiar with Western norms of science recognize this; Japanese research underperforms on a per dollar basis (French, 2001) Counteracted by different / additional communication norms

Cottrell et al. (1968): Participants given a list of 10 nonsense words and asked to pronounce two of the words 1, 2, 5, 10, or 25 times (making some more familiar than others) Then given a pseudorecognition task Words flashed on screen too fast to recognize Told to identify the words, or guess if they could not None of the presented words were actually in the study list Completed this task either Alone, in the presence of 2 students who watched attentively, or 2 blindfolded observers

Only an evaluative audience affected the dominance response rate. Responses in front of a blindfolded audience were comparable to those when the participant was alone. Note: The "alone" condition wasn't psychologically alone, because participants knew the researchers would be aware of their responses.

Is yet another mechanism possible? Participants in dual-task experiments show social facilitation effects

Participants are less attentive to additional tasks when others are present - their attention is divided (Baron et al., 1978; Sanders & Baron, 1975) Not really enough evidence to settle this issue

why groups?

Protection from predators Efficiency in acquiring food Assistance with rearing children Defense against human aggressors

Stoner (1961) Gave participants 12 scenarios where they could make a "cautious" or "risky" decision (e.g. taking on a new job at volatile tech start-up) Participants first responded individually, then met with other participants to discuss each dilemma and arrive at a consensus

Results: On 10/12 scenarios, the group recommended riskier options than the average of the individual recommendations. Furthermore, when participants were given a chance to re-evaluate each of the scenarios at the end and change their recommendations, they became even more extreme.

Mere Presence (Zajonc's original theory)

Simply having others around makes us very alert/vigilant Other agents can be unpredictable; we need to be able to act fast

Mterm-13ichaels et al. (1982): Researchers secretly watched pool players who were playing alone at a student union; rated as "skilled" or "unskilled." The researchers then walked up to the pool table and watched them.

Skilled players started playing better Unskilled players started playing worse

Practical application

Study alone: Learning new material is a complex task and the material is unfamiliar...the presence of others will decrease performance Review together: only helpful if you've already studied, or at least started studying Test together: (unless you didn't study in the first place)

Markus (1978): Participants told to go into an adjacent room to wait for other participants to arrive While they were in there, had to put on "special experiment gear" Take off shoes Put oversized socks on top of own socks Put oversized lab shoes on Put oversized lab coat on While changing, participants were either... Alone, With another person who was watching attentively, or With a repairman who was working with his back to the participant

The amount of time, in seconds, participants took to change each item of clothing varied based on whether they were changing their own clothing or novel lab clothing and whether they were alone or in the presence of another person who was ignoring them (merely present) or evaluating them (attentive audience).

Triplett (1989) brought 40 kids into his lab and had them turn fishing reels as fast as they could

The children turned the reels faster when they were around other kids doing the same thing (Same effect is found when the others are not doing the same task, but are simply there)

social facilitation

The effect of the presence of others on performance

Moscovici & Zavalloni (1969): French participants expressed opinions about (a) General Charles DeGaulle and (b) Americans First, individually Then, as a group

The group opinion of CDG was even more positive as a group The group opinion of Americans was even more negative as a group Group polarization more likely occurs when individuals already have strong opinions.

Dashiel, 1993; Pessin, 1993

The presence of others can also inhibit performance on arithmetic, memory tasks, and maze learning

Allport (1920) asked Harvard and Radcliffe students to refute philosophical arguments as best as they could in a 5-minute period

The students did better at this task when they worked alone than when they worked in the presence of others

Valued Traits

US Americans value risk-seeking, so risk elicits a halo effect (Levinger & Schneider, 1969). Individuals from other cultures who do not value risk-seeking would not show the same effects. US Americans as genetically inclined to risk (?) (Farley, 1986).

The Persuasive Arguments Account

When people share their ideas, everyone gets exposed to new arguments You probably didn't think of all possible arguments in favor of your opinion, so these new arguments will strengthen your original opinion

The Social Comparison Account

When you make a decision, you're motivated to think it's good If the decision calls for a risky choice, you want to think you were slightly riskier than the average person (if it calls for a safe choice, you want to be slightly safer)

Reduced in participants who are more interdependent

Women social loaf less than men East Asians social loaf less than Westerners