Chapter 2: Groups

1
Chapter 2 Groups

• Social Psychology by Tom Gilovich, Dacher
  Keltner, and Richard Nisbett

2
What is a Group?

• two or more people who
• interact with each other directly or indirectly
• share common goals/share norms
• have a stable relationship
• are interdependent
• perceive they are part of a group
• not a collection of people in a lobby, street
  corner, or elevator

3
Group Formation and Function

• People join groups to
• satisfy important needs (e.g., belonging, safety)
• reach goals they cannot achieve alone
• boost their self-identity
• Groups function through
• roles- expected behavior for different positions
• status- social standing within group
• norms- rules for behaving within group
• cohesiveness- forces that cause members to stay
  in group (attraction, desire for status)

4
Decision-Making in Groups

• Social Decision Schemes- rules comparing initial
  group views to final group decisions
• majority-wins rule- group opts for whatever
  decision majority agreed with initially
• truth-wins rule- group eventually accepts correct
  decision
• first-shift rule- groups adopt decision
  consistent with direction of first shift in
  opinion
• these simple rules predict final outcome 80 of
  time

5
Consequences of Group Decision Making

• Conventional wisdom suggests groups would make
  better decisions than individual
• Greater informational resources
• More likely to identify and correct errors
• Not clear if groups make better decisions than
  individuals
• Group polarization
• Groupthink
• Mixed research support

6
Group Polarization
Group Polarization- tendency to shift toward
more extreme positions after group discussion
7
Groupthink
8
Mixed Research Support

• Most group decision research takes place in lab
• Groups are not real groups
• Group development theories suggest groups need
  time to develop effective interaction patterns
• (e.g., Tuckman and Jensen)
• Forming
• Storming
• Norming
• Performing
• Lab groups dont have time to develop so
  effectiveness could hinge on personality of most
  competent member

9
Social Facilitation

• Definition The effect, positive or negative, of
  the presence of others on performance.
• 1. Initial Research
• a. Triplett (1898)

10
Social Facilitation

• 2. Resolving the Contradictions
• a. Zajoncs theory
• mere presence. Dominant response

11
Fig. 2.2 left
12
Fig. 2.2 right
13
Sources of Arousal

• Evaluation Apprehension
• A concern about looking bad in front of others
• Cottrell, et, al. 1968

14
Sources of Arousal

• Mere presence
• Presence of others is arousing
• Cockroaches probably not worried about looking
  bad
• Markus (1978)

15
Social Facilitation
Distraction-Conflict Theory
Conflict
Organism performing some task
Presence of audience or coactors
Social facilitation effects
Increased arousal
16
Social Loafing
Tendency to slack off when individual effort
cannot be monitored
Latane, Williams, and Harkins (1979)
Potential productivity
Pseudogroup productivity
Actual group productivity
17
Conflict in Groups
Conflictperceived incompatible interests

• Other causes of conflict besides incompatibility
• Faulty attributionserroneous blame
• Poor communicationmisinterpreted criticism,
  grudges
• Tendency to see own views as objective, while
  others have biased views
• Status quo biaspowerful groups often inaccurate
• Type A personalityhighly competitive and hostile

18
Strategies for Dealing With Conflict
Competing
Collaborating
Compromising
Accommodating
Avoiding
19
Perceived Fairness in Groups

• The presence of others affects our judgments of
  fairness
• Judgments typically made by social comparison
• Fairness can be judged in terms of
• outcomes (distributive justice)
• Equity distribution
• Equality distribution
• Need distribution
• procedures (procedural justice)

20
Equity Theory
Perceived inequity creates a state of
unpleasant tension that we are motivated to
reduce How do we perceive inequity
(unfairness)? According to Adams, inequity is
perceived when our perception of the ratio of our
Inputs to Outputs is different from that of a
comparison other .
21
Equity Theory
Perceived inequity creates a state of
unpleasant tension that we are motivated to
reduce How do we perceive inequity
(unfairness)? According to Adams, inequity is
perceived when our perception of the ratio of our
Inputs to Outputs is different from that of a
comparison other . An example
Larry
Moe
Curly
our perception
Inputs amount of work, KSAs, experience
Outputs pay, promotions, perqs
22
Study Smarter Student Website

• http//www.wwnorton.com/socialpsych
• Chapter Reviews
• Diagnostic Quizzes
• Vocabulary Flashcards
• Apply It! Exercises