The Goonies My analysis is on the film The Goonies. While I view the movie and determine the various norms, behaviors, roles and interaction between group members, as well as individuals the examination within the realm of film can present many of the same components. Thus, our group selected this movie to analyze based on its formation of a cohesive problem-solving group full of unforgettable characters. The Goonies portray many different theories and aspects of small group communication. This analysis will examine the following elements. First we will establish the group background by describing the development of the characters and major plot lines in The Goonies. Second, we will describe the techniques/methods our group used to analyze the film to provide the reader with insight into the development of this analysis. The major focus of this analysis examines five major areas of small group communication. Specifically we will identify a) the various group roles that develop throughout the duration of the movie and the relevance they have to the development of the group, b) the gender differences that exist between the members of the Goonies and impact they have on member role and leadership emergence, c) the verbal and nonverbal interaction between members and the impact the various elements have on the development of first impressions of the group members, d) the development of the group as they progress through the primary and secondary tensions, and e) the problem solving techniques used by the group to accomplish their tasks. In addition, we will also compare the Goonies to our own small group. As we conclude our paper, we will provide recommendations for the Goonies group in order to hypothetically improve their communication. To enhance your understanding of the characters and task facing the Goonies, the following section will provide a short background on the group. Group Background The Goonies is film about a group of west coast kids from Astoria California whom are trying to save their homes from being destroyed. Rich people from the town are buying out their neighborhood in order to build a new development. The central characters are two brothers named Mikey and Brandon. Mikey’s friends (Mouth, Chunk and Data) come over to hang out one last time before they all have to move. While at Mikey and Brandon’s house, they venture int... ... middle of paper ... ...group as they face more and more trials. Their small group triumphantly solved an important problem that affected each individual. As a group, they were much more suited to outwit "One-eyed" Willy’s booby traps, to outrun the underhanded Fratelli family, and to out do the rich people of the town by saving their neighborhood. Works Cited Bormann E. G. & Bormann & N. C. (1996). Effective Small Group Communication (6th Edition). Edina, MN: Burgess Publishing. Gamble T. K., & Gamble, M. W. (1998). Contacts: Communicating Interpersonally. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Turman, P. (October 9-10, 2000a). Group Roles: Group Communication [Lecture] Cedar Falls, IA. University of Northern Iowa, Communication Studies Department. Turman, P. (October 13, 2000b). Group Decision Making & Problem Solving: Group Communication [Lecture] Cedar Falls, IA. University of Northern Iowa, Communication Studies Department. Turman, P. (October 25, 2000f). Group Cohesiveness and Conflict: Group Communication [Lecture] Cedar Falls, IA. University of Northern Iowa, Communication Studies Department. Zeuschner, R. (1997). Communicating today (2nd Edition). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
The good characters even though few in number are willing to go the distance (especially for Jerry). Jerry is the main character of the story. He has a struggle with in himself to do the right thing. He mess with the wrong people in the school and they make him pay for it, because no one can mess with the Vigils and get away with it. He was to refuse to take chocolates for ten days. However he still refuses to take the chocolates after the ten days. Brother Jacques is another one of the good guys because he sees that Brother Leon is truely an evil man and abuses his power the power that he has over the kids. He saves Jerry at the of the story from the boxing match. Goober is a good person with a big heart, but is not to smart to get out when in to deep helping Jerry to get out. All that he wanted to do was to play football and to run.
...es your life and everyone around you. No matter what anyone says, you are a lot different after your life (or another’s) has been placed in the hands of others. The boys not only matured a lot, but leadership roles emerged. It became obvious that Gordie was a leader in the group less than halfway through. And as groups tend to do, they relied on his leadership more and more until the end. The group was faced with the additional challenge of dealing with difficult group members. But the group discovered the concept of synergy when they found if they stuck together and used teamwork, they are a lot stronger unified than individually.
The newfound friends are led by a young headstrong rabbit named Hazel who tries to lead with courage and wisdom. While the group travels to their unknown destination they encounter problems like wild animals, but with cooperation they get through their problems. An interesting part is how they figure out a way to transport their injured Fiver and Pipkin across the river to escape the dog. Using his brains, Hazels has the idea to ship the two injured rabbits across the river upon a flat piece of wood. When this act had been done, the other rabbits had a new admiration of Hazel. This new admiration was brought upon, when he had to choose to leave injured rabbits behind he refused and thought of idea to help them across, Hazel has shown himself as a competent, caring, and wise leader.
A. Preventing "Groupthink" Psychology Today. 20 Apr. 2011. The. Psychology Today.
The term groupthink in this report is defined as, the social psychological phenomenon that results in groups during pressure situations. This social psychology theory is broken down into eight signs. Illusion of invulnerability, Collective rationalization, Belief in inherent morality, Stereotyped views of out-groups, Direct pressure on dissenters, Self-censorship, Illusion of unanimity, Self-appointed “mindguards”. According to research conducted by Irving Janis, there are three conditions to groupthink. The first, "high group cohesiveness" which is the direction for a group to be in unity while working towards a goal, or to satisfy the emotional needs of its members. Secondly, the structural faults such as insulation of the group, lack of norms and central leadership, in addition social background of group members. The third, situational context includes the circumstances of the groups meeting, social roles and expected behavior. This notion is exemplified during the movie, "12 Angry Men". The purpose of this essay is to examine the movie content to display the groupthink symptoms in place. Groupthink consists of eight major factors that occur during the film's scenes, as the twelve men debate a premeditated murder court case. All of the factors continue to rise as the jury discusses the young man's fate. During the film, a unanimous vote must be reached, despite this one man refuses to vote guilty. In 1957 the Orson Welles directed film opens as the judge explains the case and its severity. Soon after the group forms as the 12 men enter the jury discussion room. During these scene frames, the case evidence is explained. As the men talk they give details of an old man living beneath the boy testified, that he heard a fight, stat...
Topics explored with this group included; conversational skills, internet safety, bullying, conflict resolution, social media, and personal appearance. Accordingly, I was able to gain insight on how to plan activities tailored to the needs of the group as well as obtain tips on conducting groups effectively. Additionally, I was able to get a sense of the group dynamics, attain knowledge on the stages of a group through observing all the individuals belonging to the group, their uniqueness and how their personality impacted the group itself. Individuals were able to join the group at different stages hence; the forming stage was repeated each time a new member was recruited. This also provided me with the opportunity of gaining first-hand experience of the interaction on the basic dynamics on group stages of forming, norming, storming and
Our book defines a group as a collection of people who are perceived to bond together in a coherent unit to some degree (Baron 241). Making a decision isn’t always easy depending on how many people are in the group and if there is any conflict within the group. The basic aspects of a group include roles, status, norms and cohesiveness but when viewing my soccer team I see only certain obvious aspects being present. When thinking about the process in which we, as a group have to make the decision of where to stop for food after an away game, it is obvious that many theories and/or topics can be applied. These theories or topics include evaluation apprehension, social decision schemas, authentic dissent and conflict. The four subjects listed above help explain how a group can come to a decision together.
The first chapter of “Working in Groups” focuses on group communication, the first aspect being the key elements of group communication (Engleberg and
... Chapter 2: Small Group Communication Theory.Communicating in small groups: principles and practices (9th ed., pp. 42-44). Boston, MA: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.
pp. 309-329, 371-393, 241-259. Engleberg, I., Wynn, D., & Schuttler, R., (2003). Working in Groups: Communication Principles and Strategies (3rd ed.) Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
In our reading this week, Tubbs wrote (2012): “Small group interaction must include decision-making techniques, discussions, an outlet for quiet members, time, and values to meet the needs of all different types of decision makers” (p. 285). My greatest take away is the reminder that we are all different and we should respect and embrace those differences. I am not sure how many times I have to cross this point for it to finally sink in my head.
From the beginning, where we were unfamiliar with each other and became a team, my team and I had started to learn each other name and getting to know each other. Throughout each meeting, we slowly start to feel more comfortable and open minded with each other. Not only are we getting familiar with each other, each meeting that was held we progress of becoming an effective team member, we learn our strengths and weaknesses of everyone. During the meetings, we learn many concepts from the textbook, “Communicating in Small Groups: Principles and Practices” by Steven A. Beebe and John T. Masterson. We were able to learn different types of concept in the textbook and utilized it as a team to complete certain tasks. The three concepts that impacted my team and I are human
Baron, Robert S., Kerr, Norbert K., and Miller, Norman. Group process, Group Decision, Group Action. CA: Brooks/Cole, 1992. Pgs. 4, 61, 2, 140, 237, 140, 141, 7, 6
Working in groups is challenging at times. Other times it is very rewarding. We are so focused on life that we do not take time to reflect on things as much as we should. Being in a Groups class has opened my eyes to a whole new world. I have begun to question, explore, and even understand how things work. I even get how they work sometimes. Not only is there a process involved in making individual decisions, process is involved in group decisions as well. This paper attempts give insight into my reflection of my group decision process.
March 8, 2015 http://www.cob.tamucc.edu/rallen/ Tubbs, S.L. (2004) A Systems Approach to Small Group Interaction. New York: McGraw-Hill Publishing Corporation. Welch, D. (2001). Decisions, Decisions: The Art of Effective Decision Making New York State.