Chapter 12 thurs Study Notes on Groups and Social Facilitation in Social Psychology

PSYC 201: Introduction to Social Psychology

Groups

The Nature and Purpose of Group Living
  • Definition of Group:

    • A group is defined as "A collection of individuals who have relations to one another that make them interdependent to some significant degree" (Cartwright & Zander, 1968).

    • Contrast between Group and Non-Group: Groups are characterized by interdependence among members, while non-groups lack this relationship.

Four Drivers of Group Living

  • Key Motivators for Group Living:

    1. Protection from predators.

    2. Efficiency in acquiring food.

    3. Assistance with rearing children.

    4. Defense against human aggressors.

    • Psychological Need: These needs are so crucial that we have an inherent psychological need to be with others (Baumeister & Leary, 1995; Correll & Park, 2005).

Social Facilitation

Definition of Social Facilitation
  • Social Facilitation: Refers to the effect of the presence of others on an individual's performance. The performance can either improve or worsen based on the individual's tasks and the context of others' presence.

Performance Variability
  • The impact of social facilitation varies based on the type of task:

    • When simple tasks or well-learned tasks are performed in the presence of others, performance enhances.

    • When difficult or novel tasks are performed in the presence of others, performance may be impaired.

Historical Studies in Social Facilitation
  1. Triplett (1898):

    • Observations of competitive cyclists showed that cyclists performed faster when racing against others than when alone.

    • Conducted an experiment with 40 children who turned fishing reels faster when in the presence of peers, demonstrating the presence of others facilitates performance.

    • The same observation applies to various animal species: ants dig more earth, fruit flies preen more, centipedes run faster, and dogs eat more when others are present.

  2. Early Contradictory Findings:

    • Allport (1920): Harvard and Radcliffe students performed better on refuting philosophical arguments when alone rather than in the presence of others.

    • The presence of others can inhibit performance in tasks such as arithmetic, memory tasks, and maze learning (Dashiel, 1993; Pessin, 1993).

Conditions Affecting Social (Un)Facilitation
  • Enhanced Performance:

    • Occurs during simple or well-learned tasks in the presence of others.

  • Impaired Performance:

    • Occurs during difficult or novel tasks in the presence of others.

Dominant Response
  • Definition of Dominant Response:

    • This is the response a person is most likely to make from their hierarchy of possible responses in a given context.

Studies on Social (Un)Facilitation
  • Michaels et al. (1982):

    • Research observed pool players categorized as “skilled” or “unskilled”.

    • Skilled players improved their game in the presence of spectators, whereas unskilled players performed worse, indicating varied responses based on skill level and task complexity.

Theories Explaining Social Facilitation
  1. Evaluation Apprehension:

    • When individuals are aware that they can be evaluated by others, heightened arousal occurs.

    • This leads to increased motivation to perform well, potentially causing nervous response.

    • Cottrell et al. (1968):

      • Participants pronounced words 1, 2, 5, 10, or 25 times, with a follow-up recognition task.

      • Performance varied significantly with the presence of evaluative audiences, demonstrating that concern for evaluation drives performance.

  2. Mere Presence:

    • The mere presence of others heightens alertness and vigilance, which may influence performance positively or negatively based on task complexity.

    • Markus (1978):

      • Participants completed simple versus novel tasks in presence of others, showing that mere presence can influence performance outcomes.

Implications of Social Facilitation
  • Social Loafing:

    • Individuals may exert less effort in group tasks where individual contributions are less noticeable.

    • This leads to the concept of "free riders" who benefit from group resources without equal contribution.

    • Variability in social loafing exists, with women and individuals from collectivist cultures (e.g., East Asian) showing lower tendencies to loaf than men or those from individualist cultures.

Examples of Social Facilitation
  • Individual Performance Cases:

    • Example of John, an inexperienced speaker faced with presenting: likely impaired due to his lack of experience.

    • Example of Felipe, an experienced clarinet player: likely facilitated while playing at a friend's wedding.

    • Example of athletic performance in public, like Serena Williams: performance may vary based on her high skill level or familiarity with the audience.

Group Decision Making

NASA Group Decision Activity
  • Items discussed for survival scenarios included:

    • Box of matches

    • Solar-powered heating unit

    • Parachute silk

    • 5 gallons of water

    • Stellar map, etc.

  • Comparative importance of items ranked by NASA include:

    1. Essential Items: 2 100-pound tanks of oxygen, 5 gallons of water, stellar map, food concentrate.

Group Decision Efficiency
  • Groups tend to make better decisions than individuals in fact-based scenarios due to pooling unique information.

  • Individual behaviors may complicate decision-making with regard to group harmony and individual concerns relating to judgment, pleasing leadership, avoiding conflict, and desire for acceptance.

Concept of Groupthink
  • Definition of Groupthink:

    • A mode of thinking where the desire for group cohesiveness outweighs realistic appraisal of facts and alternatives.

  • Antecedent Conditions for Groupthink:

    • High cohesiveness within the group

    • Insulation of the group from outside opinions

    • Lack of procedures for seeking out information

    • Directive leadership style

    • High levels of stress without optimism for better solutions.

Symptoms of Groupthink
  • Motivated Symptoms:

    • Concurrence seeking, illusion of invulnerability, collective rationalization, and belief in the inherent morality of the group.

    • Applies pressure on dissenters and invokes self-censorship.

  • Defective Decision Making Symptoms:

    • Incomplete survey of objectives, alternatives, and risks associated with preferred choices and a failure to reevaluate alternatives.

Historical Examples of Groupthink
  • Noted historical failures tied to groupthink:

    • Bay of Pigs invasion (1961)

    • Decisions regarding Vietnam troop surges and Pearl Harbor.

  • Groupthink has been linked to significant failures, including intelligence assessments leading to the Iraq war.

Preventing Groupthink
  1. Leadership Impartiality:

    • Leaders must refrain from expressing opinions that might influence group members.

  2. Encouraging Divergent Views:

    • Designate a devil’s advocate to present alternative opinions.

    • Seek feedback from non-members.

  3. Subgroup Activities:

    • Create subgroups that brainstorm solutions separately before joining collective discussion.

  4. Anonymous Feedback:

    • Encourage anonymous participation in decision-making processes to mitigate pressure to conform.

Group Polarization
  • Definition of Group Polarization:

    • The tendency of group decisions to become more extreme compared to individual decisions.

  • Persuasive Arguments Account:

    • Exposure to multiple arguments strengthens pre-existing opinions leading to more polarized outcomes.

  • Social Comparison Theory:

    • Individuals aim to align their decisions slightly riskier or safer compared to the perceived average of the group, pushing towards a more extreme position.

Notable Studies on Group Polarization
  • Moscovici & Zavalloni (1969):

    • French participants demonstrated greater positivity towards Charles DeGaulle and increased negativity towards Americans when sharing viewpoints in group settings compared to initial individual sentiments.

Summary

  • Groups serve various foundational purposes, and social psychology provides insight into how group dynamics, such as facilitation and decision-making phenomena, can impact human behavior significantly across contexts.