Chapter 12: Groups

Group

Two or more people who interact & are interdependent in the sense that their needs & goals cause them to influence each other

Why Do People Join Groups?

• Fulfills basic human needs

• Other people can be an important source of info

• Groups become an important part of our identity

• Groups also help establish social norms

Properties of Groups

• Norms: specifies which behaviors, beliefs, and perceptions are “good” and “appropriate”

• Roles: more or less well-defined expectations for one’s behavior

• Cohesiveness: the “entitativity” of a group that binds its members together

Social Facilitation (old definition)

the presence of others enhances individual performance (under some circumstances)

Zajonc et al. (1969) Cockroach Study

How long does it take cockroaches in a simple maze to escape from a bright light?

• Alone: 40.6 seconds

• Audience: 33.0 seconds

Cockroach study using a complex maze; # of seconds to escape light

• Alone: 110

• Audience: 130

Dominant Response

response that is highest in your behavioral repertoire

Nondominant Response

• all other responses

• if you are an expert, or if the task is easy, the dominant response is to perform well

• If you are not an expert, or if the task is hard, the dominant response is to screw up

Social Facilitation: Revised Definition

• the presence of others increases the likelihood that dominant responses will occur

• For easy or well-learned tasks, the presence of others improves performance

• For difficult or unpracticed tasks, the presence of others harms performance

Why does S.F. Happen?

• Mere presence → alertness → arousal

• Evaluation apprehension → arousal

• People’s concern about how they might appear to others, or be evaluated by them

Cottrell et al., 1968

Pronounce 2 nonsense words 1, 2, 5, 10, 25 times (manipulating practice)

• More practiced words = dominant response

Pseudorecognition task alone, the presence of an attentive audience, or the presence of a blindfolded audience

DV: number of dominant responses

• Evaluative: 13

• Blindfolded: 9

• Alone: 8.5

Why does S.F. Happen? Pt 2

Distraction → divided attention → conflict → arousal

Arousal increases the tendency to perform the dominant response

Social Facilitation: Hunt & Hillery, 1973

• Performance of pool players

• Good & bad pool players

• Play pool while alone & while observed

• Good players did better w/ an audience; bad players did worse

Social Facilitation: Does the supportiveness of the observers matter?

Home team advantage in sports:

• Baseball (54% of home games won)

• Football (57%)

• Ice Hockey (61%)

• Basketball (64%)

• Soccer (69%) - fans are closer to the players

Groupthink

a kind of thinking in which maintaining group cohesiveness & solidarity is more important than considering the facts in a realistic manner

Janis’s Groupthink Hypothesis

Look at Slide 25

To Avoid Groupthink

• Remain impartial

• Seek outside opinions

• Create subgroups

• Seek anonymous opinions

Social Loafing

the reduction of individual effort when working w/ others on additive group tasks

Reingelman agricultural experiments: group does not work to maximum efficiency

Unite pulled in a rope-tugging task:

• 1 person → 63 kg

• 3 people → 160 kg (85% capacity)

• 8 people → 248 kg (49% capacity)

Latané, Williams, & Harkins (1979) - Shouting Study

1, 2, 4, or 6 people were asked to shout & clap as loud as possible

• 1: 3.7 dynes/cm^2

• 2: 5.2 (71% capacity)

• 4: 7.2 (51% capacity)

• 6: 9.0 (40% capacity)

To Avoid Social Loafing

• Increase identifiability & evaluation

• Make the task engaging, involving, or challenging

• Increase trust in co-members

Deindividuation

losing oneself in a group, such that inner restraints are loosened

Examples of Deindividuation

• looting

• fan behavior

• dancing at parties

Factors Promoting Deindividuation

• Reduced self-awareness (stemming from being in a group setting)

• Arousal (mere presence of others)

• Anonymity (reduced ACCOUNTABILITY)

• Diffused Responsibility (again, reduced ACCOUNTABILITY)

Deindividuation leads people to obey group norms

• If neg. norms → neg. behavior

• If pos. norms → pos. behavior

Group Polarization

The tendency of individuals to become more extreme in their opinions & behaviors as a consequence of interacting w/ ingroup members

Ex: deciding to go to grad school

Favors w/ the group that is similar to their original thoughts

Why do groups polarize after discussion?

• Persuasive arguments

• Social comparison

Power

• the ability to control one’s own outcomes & those of others; the freedom to act

• Power is relational: an individual’s power varies from one relationship to another

Social Hierarchy

the relational nature of power manifests in a social hierarchy or an arrangement of individuals w/in a group in terms of their relative power

Gaining Power

Power & Empathy Failures

When feeling powerful, participants were less likely to draw a reversed E on their forehead so that it was easy for another person to read

People in high power have less empathy than people with low power

Power & Disinhibited Behavior (Piff et al., 2012)

• What cars stopped for pedestrians on marked crosswalks?

• Categorized cars by status

• Higher status → higher percentage of cutting off pedestrians; not stopping

Diener et al. (1976) Trick or Treaters

Kids were secretly observed as they were asked to take “one piece of candy” from a bowl

Kids were either identifiable (names, alone) vs. non-identifiable (no names, group)

DV: % of kids taking more than 1 piece of candy

• Alone: Individuated (7.5%); Anonymous (21.4%)

• In groups: Individuated (20.8%); Anonymous (57.2%)

Johnson & Downing (1979)

Deindividuation leads people to obey group norms

Participants wear KKK hoods or nurses’ uniforms

Some are anonymous (face covered); some not

Were told that every time their partner makes a mistake; they get shocked & get to pick the level

DV: shock level set for peer who fails a task

• KKK robes: Identifiable (~0.75); Anonymous (~0.9)

• Nurse: Identifiable (~ -0.3); Anonymous (~ -1.3)

Spotlight Effect

We overestimate the extent to which our actions & appearance are noted by others

Gilovich et al. (1997)

• Participants wore Barry Manilow t-shirts

• They predicted 50% would notice their shirt, but only 23% actually did