College 3

Group dynamics

informational influence (sherif)

Experiment in donkere kamer waar mensen moesten zien of licht bewoog, maar dit licht bewoog helemaal niet. Toch beïnvloedden mensen elkaar en na enkele sessies zag iedereen dezelfde hoeveelheid beweging

• majority influence

• group influence through answering the question ‘what reality is like’

• in situations where there is a lot of uncertainty about reality

• you believe that the majority is correct

Normative influence (Asch)

• majority influence

• group influence through answering the question ‘what reality seems like’

• in a situation where there is a lot of certainty about reality

• een makkelijke vraag, maar iedereen antwoord heel overtuigend verkeerd, dan gaat proefpersoon ook verkeerd antwoorden, they dont wanna stand out

  • But not always! They also often stay with their own opinion

  • als de groep niet unaniem is, droppen de conformity rates

• individuals adjust their behavior or opinions to align with the group's expectations

conformity in different kinds of tasks

with easy tasks, conformity decreases when the task is important. However, when tasks are difficult, conformity increases with high task importance

referent informational influence

people are more strongly influenced by ingroup members than by outgroup members

what is a norm?

• Scale of values, which defines a range of (un)acceptable attitudes and behaviors for members of a group

• Injunctive norms: how do others think we should think and behave

• Descriptive norms: how do others think and behave

• not necessarily the average of group member’s thoughts or behaviors

functions of norms

• signposts (guides for behavior)

• regulators (coordinate behavior to reach group goals)

• identity markers (distinguishing ‘us’ from ‘them’)

pluralistic ignorance

male students shifted their attitudes in the direction fo what they mistakenly believed to be the norm. (afraid they were too boring if they drank less alcohol than they though to be the norm.)

classic (but incorrect) group decision making idea

the group choice is the average of the individual choices

• often more risky than the average individual choice (risky shift)

• can also be more cautious (cautious shift)

group polarization

• When groups engage in discussions, they often arrive at more extreme decisions than individuals would on their own.

• Group members influence one another by reinforcing shared views, making them more confident in their position, which leads to more extreme opinions or decisions

• Group polarization explains why juries, for example, might make more extreme rulings after deliberation than the initial individual opinions.

polarizing due to social comparison

• norm and values associated with the topic

• use other people’s opinions as reference points and compare your own opinion

• shift in preferred direction as self-presentation technique

polarzing due to arguments

• norms and values associated with the topic determine the dominant position of the group

• in the discussion people discuss mainly the arguments in favour of this position

• because the selective persuasive argumentation, people polarize in this direction

polarizing due to intergroup differentiation

there is another group who thinks differently (competition with an out-group)

polarization online

• echo chambers

• social comparison and persuasive arguments

• exposure to opposing viewpoints should decrease polarization

• polarization increased when people were exposed to tweets from opposing political side. So exposure to different viewpoints can increase polarization

opinion polarization

opinions move away from the neutral point of the scale and toward the pole which was initially supported more by the group → often results in bi-polarization

opinion differentiation

the extent to which opinions in society are divided

structural differentiation

the extent to which society is seen to fission into subgroups rather than fusion into an integrated group

perceiving polarization

Perceiving polarisation stimulates discussion. Perceiving structural polarisation stimulates avoidance.

entrenchment

the belief that opinions can’t be changed

relational threat

if this person has different opinions, they belong to another group, and therefore cannot be my friend

affective polarization

the growing emotional hostility, distrust, and dislike between supporters of different political parties or ideological camps

motives to deviate

• disengagement, disloyalty, disrespect for the group

• loyalty and concern for the group

• moral rebellion: when personal moral convictions take precedence over group norms

• desire to express difference, individuality, uniqueness

• tangible rewards and instrumental gains derived from dissendant deviance

minority influence

• consistency of the minority

• flexibility in discussion

• idiosyncrasy credits (status)

• diligence of dissenters: als je als minority stemt, heb je waarschijnlijk veel beter nagedacht over je keuze

• encourages divergent thinking

sleeper effect

• a psychological phenomenon where a persuasive message paired with a "discounting cue" (such as a disclaimer, low-credibility source, or bias warning) becomes more persuasive over time. The mind seperates the message from the source

• often small groups, with influence that is not immediate but takes a longer time

• decision rules: unanimity rules benefit minority. Majority-wins rules benefit majority

moscovici’s conversion theory

• majorities lead to a comparison process where people focus on ‘what others say, so as to fit in with their opinions and judgements’

• minorities trigger a validation process whereby one will ‘examine one’s own responses, one’s on judgements, in order to confirm and validate them’

processes of minority influence

• Moscovici: deviant opinion of minority evokes arousal → draws attention and results in central and systematic processing of arguments. The minorty needs to be consistent, confident and flexible

• Nemeth: deviant opinion of minority is better ignored → less arousal through inconsistency → open for alternative views

reference groups

groups that people look to for guidance

• play a crucial role in shaping behavior and opinions

groupthink

• a phenomenon that occurs when group members are overly focused on reaching a consensus, leading them to overlook alternative solutions or critical evaluation of the situation.

• The desire for unity and cohesion can stifle dissent and result in poor decision-making, as seen in historical cases like the Bay of Pigs invasion.

• Groupthink is more likely when the group is highly cohesive, insulated from outside opinions, and led by a strong, directive leader.

• can be avoided by e.g. open dialogue and having impartial leadership

bystander effect

• individuals in groups are less likely to help a person in need because they assume someone else will intervene

• Diffusion of responsibility occurs in larger groups, as people feel less personally responsible for taking action. This helps explain why emergencies in public places often result in inaction from onlookers.

manipulating value in diversity

creates more openness to alternative viewpoints

• changes group dynamics: less pressure for conformity, more listening, but also, more searching for agreement

• these group dynamics contribute to changing group norms, and changing personal intentions