PSY220 - Group Influence

a group

two or more people who, for longer than a few moments, interact with and influence one another and perceive one another as “us”

collective influence

3 examples: social facilitation, social loafing, deindividuation

social facilitation

• mere presence of others

• they may be passive or co-actors

• tendency of people to perform simple or well-learned tasks better when others are present

• the presence of others hinders performance when the task is difficult

• the strengthening of the dominant responses owing to the presence of others

Triplett (1898)

• Children winding fishing reels Asked to do so by themselves vs. in a group with 5 other kids who aren't interacting

• They were faster when winding with a group than by themselves

• Maybe because they want to impress each other or so that they can follow their examples, feeling like they're contributing to a group effort

co-actors

a group of people working simultaneously and individually on a non-competitive task

the effects of social arousal

others’ presence —> arousal —> strengthens dominant responses —> enhancing easy behavior OR impairing difficult behavior

crowding

the presence of many others

• intensifies positive or negative reactions

• enhances arousal

• the arousal can interfere with well-learned, automatic behaviors such as speaking

reasons for arousal

evaluation apprehension, driven by distraction, mere presence

evaluation apprehension

concern for how others are evaluating us

• the enhancement of dominant responses is strongest when people think they are being evaluated

• the self-consciousness we feel when being evaluated can also interfere with behaviors that we perform best automatically

driven by distraction

• when people wonder how co-actors are doing or how an audience is reacting, they get distracted

• there is a conflict between paying attention to others and paying attention to the task

• this overloads our cognitive system and causes arousal

mere presence

produces some arousal even without evaluation apprehension or arousing distraction

many hands make light work

• Ringelmann created a rope-pulling apparatus

• collective effort of “tug-of-war” teams only about half of sum of individual efforts

• group members may actually be less motivated when performing additive tasks

social loafing

tendency for people to exert less effort when they pool their efforts towards a common goal then when they are individually accountable

free-riders

benefitting from the group but giving little in return

social loafing is less likely to occur when

• the task is challenging, appealing or involving

• when the group members are friends

• when people see others in their group as unreliable

• cohesiveness intensifies effort

social loafing IRL

• effort decreases as group size increases

• exhibited less in collectivist cultures

• women tend to exhibit it less because of being less individualistic

social loafing vs facilitation

social loafing: others’ presence —> individual efforts pooled and NOT evaluated —> no evaluation apprehension —> less arousal

facilitation: others’ presence —> individual efforts evaluated —> evaluation apprehension —> arousal

deindividuation

• loss of self-awareness and evaluation apprehension

• occurs in group situations that foster anonymity and draw attention away from the individual

facilitators of deindividuation

group size, physical anonymity, arousing and distracting activities

group size

• a group has the power not only to arouse its members but also to render them unidentifiable

• “everyone is doing it” can attribute their behavior to the situation rather than to their own choices

physical anonymity

• the internet offers it

• uniforms allows everyone to be depersonalized

• makes one less self-conscious and more responsive to the cues present in the situation, whether negative or positive

• increase cohesiveness in a group

  • tactics like hazing

  • if it is more difficult to become a member of the group, you will like it more once you become a member (cognitive dissonance)

arousing and distracting activities

• aggressive outbursts by large crowds are often preceded by minor actions that arouse and divert people’s attention

• when we see others act as we are acting, we think they feel as we do, which reinforces our own feelings

loss of self-awareness

• group experiences that diminish self-consciousness tend to disconnect behavior from attitudes

• unselfconscious, deindividuated people are less restrained and less self-regulated

• self-awareness is the opposite of deindividuation

group polarization

group produced enhancement of members’ pre-existing tendencies; a strengthening of the members’ average tendency, not a split within the group

group polarization - the case of the “risky shift”

• impact of group discussion on individuals’ opinions

• group discussions were usually riskier than individuals

• the small risky shift effect was reliable, unexpected, and without any immediately obvious explanation 

explaining group polarization

information influence and normative influence

information influence

there is a combining of ideas which likely favor the dominant viewpoint

• ideas that were common knowledge to group members will often be brought up in discussion or even unmentioned will jointly influence their decision

• active participation in discussion produces more attitude change than passive listening

normative influence

we are most persuaded by our “reference groups”

• since we want people to like us, we may express stronger opinions after discovering that others share our views

• when we ask people to predict how others would respond to social dilemmas, they typically exhibit pluralistic ignorance

groupthink

• the tendency for groups, in the process of decision making to suppress dissenting cognitions in the interest of ensuring harmony within the group

• a “mode of thinking” that individuals engage in when concurrence-seeking becomes dominant in a cohesive in-group

• overrides realistic appraisals of alternative courses of action

pluralistic ignorance

a false impression of how other people are thinking, feeling or responding

group think symptoms

overestimate their group’s might and right, group members become close minded, pressure to conform and to be uniform

overestimating the group’s might and right

1. an illusion of invulnerability

2. unquestioned belief in the group’s morality

group members becoming close minded

1. rationalization

2. stereotyped view of opponent

pressure to conform and to be uniform

1. conformity pressure

2. self-censorship

3. illusion of unanimity

4. mindguards

preventing groupthink

• be impartial

• subdivide the group

• assign a devil advocate

• invite critiques from outside experts

• have a “second-chance” meeting as opportunity to discuss lingering doubts

group problem solving

• combine group and solidarity brainstorming

• have group members interact by writing

• incorporate electronic brainstorming

• culturally diverse groups make better decisions

leadership

the process by which certain group members motivate and guide the group

4 types of leadership

task, social, transactional, transformational

task leadership

organizing work, setting standards, focusing on goals, directive style

social leadership

building teamwork, mediating conflicts, being supportive, democratic style

transactional leadership

focus on getting to know their subordinates and listening carefully, they seek to fulfill the subordinates’ needs but maintain high expectations for how subordinates will perform

transformational leadership

engender trust by consistently sticking to their goals, often exude self-confident charisma that kindles the allegiance of their followers

individuals influencing the group

• persuasive forces are powerful

• pressures to conform sometimes overwhelm our better judgement

• the groups we create and belong to influence our behavior

factors of individuals influencing the group

consistency

• minority slowness effect

• a minority that sticks to its position

self-confidence

• consistency and persistence convey self-confidence

• being firm and forceful

defections from the majority

• punctures any illusion of unanimity

minority slowness effect

tendency for people with minority views to express them less quickly than people in the majority