Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In social psychology, group polarization refers to the tendency for a group to make decisions that are more extreme than the initial inclination of its members. These more extreme decisions are towards greater risk if individuals' initial tendencies are to be risky and towards greater caution if individuals' initial tendencies are to be cautious. [1]
Groupthink can be considered by many to be a detriment to companies, organizations and in any work situations. Most positions that are senior level need individuals to be independent in their thinking. There is a positive correlation found between outstanding executives and decisiveness (Kelman).
Janis defines groupthink as “the mode of thinking that persons engage in when concurrence-seeking becomes so dominant in a cohesive in-group that it tends to over-ride realistic appraisals of alternative courses of action.” [3] In a subsequent article, he elaborates on this by saying: “I use the term "groupthink" as a quick and easy way to refer to a mode of thinking that people engage ...
The social identity approach suggests a more general approach to group decision-making than the popular groupthink model, which is a narrow look at situations where group and other decision-making is flawed. Social identity analysis suggests that the changes which occur during collective decision-making are part of rational psychological ...
The size of the group also has an effect on how susceptible the group will be to polarization. The greater the number of people in a group, the greater the tendency toward deindividuation. In other words, deindividuation is a group-size-effect. As groups get larger, trends in risk-taking are amplified. [3]
Groupthink occurs when the group members are familiar with each other and seek each other's approval, especially in stressful situations. The diffusion of responsibility contributes to groupthink as when the diffusion of responsibility is occurring within a group, each group member feels less of a responsibility to express his or her own ...
Research suggests that people who perceived high levels of political polarization had 52 percent to 71 percent higher odds of developing a depressive or anxiety disorder.
Lee confirmed her hypothesis that the subjects would show stronger group identification and greater opinion polarization when deindividuated than when individuated. Lee found that the more the participants identified with their partners, the more positive their evaluations of the partners' arguments were, manifesting in-group favoritism.