Presentation on theme: "Chapter 12 This multimedia product and its contents are protected under copyright law. The following are prohibited by law: any public performance or display,"— Presentation transcript:
Chapter 12 This multimedia product and its contents are protected under copyright law. The following are prohibited by law: any public performance or display, including transmission of any image over a network; preparation of any derivative work, including the extraction, in whole or in part, of any images; any rental, lease, or lending of the program. Groups and Individuals: The Consequences of Belonging Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Groups and Individuals Groups: Why We Join…And Why We Leave Effects of the Presence of Others Coordination in Groups: Cooperation or Conflict? Perceived Fairness in Groups Decision Making by Groups
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Groups Group — collection of persons who are perceived to be bonded together in a coherent unit (entiativity) to some degree –Some common characteristics Frequent interaction Group is considered important Shared goals Members are similar to each other
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Groups –Some basic aspects Roles—set of behaviors that individuals occupying specific positions within a group are expected to perform Status: position or rank within a group Norms—rules within a group indicating how its members should (or should not behave) Cohesiveness—forces that cause group members to remain in the group –Influenced by: »Status within the group; effort needed to become a group member; existence of competition; size of group
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Groups –Benefits of joining groups Gain self-knowledge Boost one’s status –Status is more important to people who seek group membership as a way to increase self-enhancement (versus self-transcendence). Accomplish social change –Costs of joining groups Membership often limits personal freedom Groups make demands on members that must be met Members may disapprove of group’s policies –Disapproval and the belief that the group and its members have changed significantly can result in withdrawal from the group.
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Groups What are your thoughts?What are your thoughts? –What are potential consequences of internalizing the roles that groups assign their members? –Is good cohesiveness always a good thing? Why or why not? –What are additional benefits of joining groups? –Are there other costs of group membership? If so, what are they? Why do some people risk their lives to join a group?
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Effects of the Presence of Others Social Facilitation—effects upon performance resulting from the presence of others –Presence of others can either result in better or impaired task performance Drive Theory of Social Facilitation (Zajonc)—mere presence of others is arousing and increases tendency to perform dominant responses –Performance will improve if dominant responses are correct (task is easy for person). –Performance will worsen if dominant responses are incorrect (task is difficult for person).
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Effects of the Presence of Others Presence of others can increase evaluation apprehension Distraction-Conflict Theory—suggests that social facilitation stems from conflict produced when individuals attempt to pay attention to both the audience and the task Social facilitation effects are due to increased arousal and cognitive factors.
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Effects of the Presence of Others
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Effects of the Presence of Others Social Loafing—reductions in motivation and effort when individuals work collectively in a group compared to when they work individually or as independent co-actors –Common with Additive Tasks—tasks for which the group product is the sum or combination of the efforts of individual members Occurs with both cognitive and physical tasks Occurs in children and adults –However, it is slightly less common in women and does not appear to occur in collectivist cultures.
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Effects of the Presence of Others –Decreasing social loafing Increase accountability by making contributions identifiable Increase commitment to the success of the group’s task Increase the importance of the task Increase the perception that contributions of each member are unique and necessary
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Effects of the Presence of Others Deindividuation—characterized by reduced self-awareness and reduced social identity, brought on by external conditions such as being an anonymous member of a large crowd –Increases the tendency to follow the norms of the group (the crowd), which can result in negative or positive behaviors –Results in behaviors that individuals in the group often would not perform by themselves
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Effects of the Presence of Others What are your thoughts?What are your thoughts? –Under which conditions is social facilitation likely to occur? –What can be done to reduce social loafing in academic settings and in the workplace? –Have you experienced the process of deindividuation? What consequences ensued?
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Coordination in Groups Cooperation—behavior in which groups work together to reach shared goals –It often provides benefits to group members, but does not always happen Social dilemmas—situations in which each person can increase his or her individual gains by acting in one way, but if all (or most) persons do the same thing, the outcomes experienced by all are reduced –Involve mixed motives: cooperation or competition –Example is the prisoner’s dilemma
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Coordination in Groups
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Coordination in Groups –Factors influencing cooperation Reciprocity—basic rule suggesting that individuals should treat others as they have treated them (reciprocal altruism) Personal orientation –Cooperative (maximize everyone’s gain) –Individualistic (maximize own gains) –Competitive (maximize own and lower others’ gains) Communication –Can increase cooperation when individuals are committed to cooperate and norms to honor commitment are strong
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Coordination in Groups Conflict—individuals or groups perceive that others have taken or will soon take actions incompatible with their own interests –Causes of conflict (both social and cognitive) Faulty attributions—incorrectly blame others for negative outcome Faulty communication—receiving destructive criticism Belief that own views are objective, while others’ are biased, which is more likely in powerful groups Type A personality (individuals who are highly competitive and irritable) When initial group performance is poor and negatively evaluated
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Coordination in Groups –Resolving Conflicts Bargaining (negotiation)—process in which opposing sides exchange offers, counteroffers, and concessions, either directly or through representatives –Outcomes are influenced by tactics adopted, which tend to focus on reducing the opponent’s aspirations. »To achieve this goal: begin with extreme initial offer; convince other side that break-even point is higher than it is, and that options to negotiate with others are available. »Tactics that are ethically questionable are attacking opponent’s network, making false promises, misrepresentation, and inappropriate information gathering.
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Coordination in Groups –Outcomes also determined by the orientation of the bargainers to the process: negotiations are “win-lose” situations or are potential “win-win” situations. »Example of win-win situations are integrative agreements, in which joint benefits are achieved. Induce superordinate goals—goals that both sides seek that tie their interests together –Can reduce tendencies to exaggerate differences between one’s group and the opposing side and to derogate members of outside groups
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Perceived Fairness in Groups Rules for Judging Fairness –Distributive Justice—individuals’ judgments about whether they are receiving a fair share of available rewards –Procedural Justice—judgments concerning fairness of procedures used to distribute available rewards Based on consistency, accuracy, opportunity for corrections, bias suppression, and ethicality –Interactional (Interpersonal) Justice—extent that decisions regarding the distribution of rewards are explained and courtesy is shown toward those who receive the rewards
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Perceived Fairness in Groups Factors Affecting Judgments of Fairness –Affective states People use their current emotions as a guide –Status Focusing on status in a group leads to a concern about the fairness of procedures used to distribute rewards Reactions to Perceived Unfairness –Change the balance between contributions and outcomes –Engage in covert actions (e.g., employee theft) –Change perceptions about fairness
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Coordination and Fairness in Groups What are your thoughts?What are your thoughts? –What are examples of social dilemmas? –Why is conflict between groups as common as it is? What can be done to reduce it? –In which settings are judgments of perceived fairness important? What factors make it more likely that someone will perceive that a group process is fair?
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Decision Making by Groups Decision Making—processes involved in combining and integrating available information in order to choose one out of several possible courses of action –How groups attain consensus Social Decision Schemes—rules relating the initial distribution of member views to final group decisions –Majority-wins rule—group adopts whatever decision majority agreed with initially –Truth-wins rule—group eventually adopts correct decision –First-shift rule—group adopts decision consistent with direction of first shift in opinion shown by any member
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Decision Making by Groups –Group Polarization—tendency of group members to shift toward more extreme positions after group discussion Causes include: –Social comparison »Attempt to hold views that are “better” (often more extreme) than other group members –Persuasion via the central route due to hearing arguments that favor the group’s initial preference Can interfere with ability to make correct decisions
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Decision Making by Groups
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Decision Making by Groups –Potential dangers of group decision making Groupthink —members of highly cohesive groups assume that their decisions can’t be wrong, that all members must support the group’s decision strongly, and that information contrary to it should be ignored –Why does it occur? »High cohesiveness among group members »Emergent group norms that suggest group is infallible and morally superior (no further discussion is needed) »Rejection of opposing views made by outside sources
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Decision Making by Groups –Potential dangers of group decision making Biased processing of information –Group members process information in ways that allow them to reach desired decisions. Failure to share information –Groups members do not always share information unique to each member and only discuss information known by all. –Improving group decisions Encouraging dissent to slowdown consensus –Devil’s Advocate Technique—one group member is assigned the task of disagreeing with and criticizing whatever plan or decision is under consideration –Authentic Dissent—one or more group members (without assignment) disagree with the group’s initial preference
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon Decision Making by Groups What are your thoughts?What are your thoughts? –Why is group polarization a potential problem? What actions may occur as a result of it? –What are strategies to reduce groupthink? –How can children and adolescents be taught to avoid the potential dangers of group decision making? –Is there hope that the decisions of groups will ever be reliably better than those made by individuals? Why or why not?