1. LECTURE 9 Group Processes 1)Administration 2)Intragroup Processes – Social Facilitation – Social Loafing – Deindividuation – Group Polarization 3)Break – Group Think 4)Intergroup Processes 5)Next Class

2. What is a group? 5 people waiting at the corner for a bus? People attending a worship service? The rolling stones fan club? The students in a seminar class? The students in our class?

3. What is a group? Textbook Definition: A collection of two or more people who interact with each other and are interdependent, in the sense that their needs and goals cause them to rely on each other. (perceive one another as “us”)

4. Intragroup Processes Processes that occur within a group. How others in your own group influence you and how you influence your group. Who likes to work in a group (e.g., job, school projects, committee work)? – Why? – Why not? Who likes to play in a group (e.g., sports, family events, parties)? – Why? – Why not?

5. 1) Intragroup Influence: Social Facilitation Triplett (1898) – The tendency of people to perform simple or well-learned tasks better when others are present. Zajonc (1965) – The presence of others increases physiological arousal. – Arousal enhances whatever response tendency is dominant.

6. Social Facilitation More specifically, social facilitation is … – the strengthening of dominant responses owing to the presence of others – the tendency for people to do better on simple tasks and worse on complex tasks when they are in the presence of others for simple tasks, the correct response is dominant. For complex tasks, it is not.

7. Markus (1978) How quickly participants performed a familiar task (taking off shoes and socks) vs. an unfamiliar task (putting on a robe that ties backwards) when alone vs. with another person in room vs. another person in room and watching.

8. Social facilitation is caused by arousal caused by: Evaluation Apprehension: concern with being evaluated by others Distraction: others distract us and cause arousal by making us nervous Mere presence: simply having others around causes us to be alert and vigilant – These effects are found in the Markus study.

9. 2) Intragroup Influence: Social Loafing The tendency for people to be less productive when they work with others than when they are individually accountable (Ringelmann, 1913).

10. Latane, Williams, & Harkin (1979) Why? When people work in groups and they produce less is it because of coordination issues or social loafing? How can we examine this?

11. Latane, Williams, & Harkin (1979) Participants were instructed to cheer as loud as possible. They were blindfolded and had on headsets with loud music “so their performance could not be influenced by sensory feedback.” They were either – alone – with 1 to 5 other people – they thought they were with 1 to 5 other people but they were actually alone. These pseudogroups were used to check the impact of social loafing. Because no one else is shouting any loss of production can not be due to coordination issues.

12. Latane, Williams, & Harkin (1979) Size of Group Perforrmance 66% 36% 82% 74%

13. Decreasing Social Loafing Class Project Make individual efforts identifiable Reward group productivity Task is appealing, challenging, or involving Friendship

14. 3) Intragroup Influence: Deindividuation Definition: – The loosening of normal constraints on behaviour when people are in a group, leading to an increase in impulsive (and deviant) acts – Groups can: make people feel less accountable for their actions (e.g., mob behaviour, egging on jumpers) decrease self-awareness

15. Deindividuation Johnson and Downing’s (1979) A verbal learning experiment. The subject is the teacher. After each error, the subject can choose to increase or decrease the level of shock to learner (+3, +2, +1, -1, -2, - 3)

16. Deindividuation – Social cue conditions: Everyone is asked to wear white outfits. Told that pictures of each person in their group in their costumes would be given to all members. – Prosocial cues – asked to put on nurses outfits – Anti-social cues – asked to put on KKK outfit – Deindividuation conditions – Told no way to identify who gave what shocks and no name tags – Told other group members could see their selection of shock levels and wore name tags

17. Deindividuation

18. Influences on Deindividuation Group size Physical anonymity Arousing or distracting activities How are these factors related to the Stanford Prison Study? What was the norm in this situation?

19. Stanford Prison Study How are these factors (group size, anonymity, arousing activities) related to the Stanford Prison Study? In this situation students were deindividuated by roles, by groups, by costumes, no names, sunglasses, hats, etc What was the social norm in this situation? Why?

20. Group produced enhancement of groups’ pre- existing tendencies Risky Shift: Group decisions are riskier than individual decisions (Stoner, 1961) Cautious Shift: Group decisions are more cautious than individual decisions Strengthening of the members’ average tendency. 4) Intragroup Influence: Group Polarization

21. Group Polarization 12345678910 _________________________________________________________ Cautious Large chance of Success Risky Small chance of Success midpoint

22. Group Polarization 12345678910 _________________________________________________________ A B C & DEF Decision 1 mean (ABC) Cautious - Large chance of Success Risky - Small chance of Success

23. Group Polarization 12345678910 _________________________________________________________ A B C & DEF Decision 2 mean (DEF) Cautious - Large chance of Success Risky - Small chance of Success

24. Why do we polarize after a group discussion? Persuasive Arguments – Groups generate more arguments that support the position endorsed by the majority of the group. The group persuades itself. – Active participation leads to rehearsal and validation Social Comparisons – Individuals spontaneously compare themselves to others and if they find a difference they move toward the group’s view. Discover the group norm and then take a view that exceeds this norm – to be different from the norm but in the right direction and to the right degree.

25. 5) Intragroup Influence: Groupthink A kind of thinking in which maintaining group cohesiveness and solidarity is more important than considering the facts in a realistic manner.

26. Groupthink Antecedents Groupthink Consequences Group processes that lead to defective decision making. e.g., Let’s reduce our teaching load from 6 courses per year to 3 courses per year.

27. Groupthink - Antecedents Groupthink occurs when groups: – are cohesive and desirable – are relatively isolated from dissenting viewpoints – have a directive leader who signals a favoured decision – high stress – poor decision-making procedures

28. Groupthink - Symptoms – Illusion of invulnerability – Unquestioned belief in group’s morality – Stereotyped view of opponent – Conformity pressure – Self-censorship – Illusion of unanimity – Mindguards Members who protect the group from information that calls into question the quality or morality of their decision.

29. Groupthink - Consequence Groupthink results in defective decision- making because there is – An incomplete survey of alternatives – A failure to examine risks of the favoured alternative – A poor information search – A failure to develop contingency plans

30. Preventing Groupthink 1) Leader should be impartial 2) Encourage critical evaluation - assign a devil’s advocate 3) Occasionally subdivide the group 4) Welcome criticism 5) Implement “second chance” meetings to air any lingering doubts 6) Seek anonymous opinions 7) Seek outside opinions

31. Intergroup Processes Processes that occur between 2 or more groups. How other groups influence your group and how your group influences other groups (the olympics). Who likes to work with an outgroup vs. their own group (e.g., job, school projects, committee work)? – Why? – Why not? Who likes to play with an outgroup vs. their own group (e.g., sports, travel)? – Why? – Why not?

32. According to Realistic Conflict Theory (and results from the Robber’s Cave experiments) To create discrimination/prejudice you need: a) intergroup interaction b) scarce resources c) intergroup conflict (competition)

33. Robber’s Cave Experiments Sherif et al. (1961) Four Phases 1)Spontaneous Interpersonal Friendships 2)Group Formation (Rattlers and Eagles) 3)Intergroup Conflict 4)Intergroup Cooperation – superordinate goals

34. According to Realistic Conflict Theory (and results from the Robber’s Cave experiments) To create discrimination/prejudice you need: a) intergroup interaction b) scarce resources c) intergroup conflict (competition)

35. According to Social Identity Theory (and results from the minimal group experiments) To create discrimination/prejudice you only need: a) categorization into 2 groups (Robber’s Cave) The Importance of Being Positive and Distinct.

36. Minimal Group Paradigm Tajfel & Turner (1979) ■ The procedure. ■ The importance of being positive and distinct.

37. Which picture do you prefer? Joe liked this painting best A. B. Jack liked this painting best You need to split $15 between Joe and Jack. What split do you favor? Amount must be in $$.

38. According to Social Identity Theory People still show discrimination/prejudice even if: a) they are explicitly told that they are classified in an arbitrary way (e.g., coin toss) b) they are never at a personal advantage regardless of how they divide the points c) they never meet members of any of the groups

39. Social Identity Theory & Younger Sister Self-Categorization Theory – We categorize people into groups – We identify with our ingroup (the “we” aspect of the self- concept is our social identity) – We compare our ingroup with outgroups (us vs. them) – We are driven to have a positive and distinct social identity We like to see “us” as being better than “them” We like to see “us” as being different from “them”

40. Summary 1)Intragroup Processes (within groups) – Social Facilitation – Social Loafing – Deindividuation – Group Polarization – Group Think 2)Intergroup Processes (between groups)

41. Next Class Class 10: In-class Exam 2 Chapters 6, 7, and 8 and lecture material Class 11: Stereotyping, Prejudice, and Discrimination Reading material: Chapter 12: Prejudice: Causes and Cures, pp. 372-415.