Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Human behavior in social settings
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Human behavior in social settings
Group Mentality: Advantages and Disadvantages
The idea of a “band mentality” has been around since before humans have existed. In chimpanzees, our closest common ancestor, the group follows a dominant male, while interacting among the group based on who they like or dislike. Early humans were separated into small bands of hunters for both protection and aid in killing prey. The most experienced hunter led the attack, and it was important to have people who accepted his opinion and listened to him. Humans, in small groups of friends or family, still show this sort of band mentality. They will interact based upon who shares their same interests and feelings about the other people in the group. This way of thinking changed dramatically when larger groups of people began to aggregate (Ohgushi, 1998, p. 1). These larger and larger groups began to change the way people thought and interacted with each other, and the way they reacted to certain emergencies.
In her article “In Groups We Shrink From Loner’s Heroics”, Carol Tavris states the many disadvantages to the group mentality. She introduces the idea of “social loafing”, which means in large groups, people begin to shun their individual responsibility (Tavris, 1991, p. 17). She says that the larger the group the more irresponsible people get. She cites many cases in which people do not step in to aid in an emergency. One such incident occurred in New Mexico, when someone’s house caught on fire and a large group of people stood watching the house burn, but no one called the fire department. Everyone in the group just assumed that someone else had called the fire station, without taking the responsibility into their own hands. Tavris also states that we are usually afraid to...
... middle of paper ...
...ng for them was to be banished from a group for going against the leader, so they evolved a feeling to wanting to agree with everyone around them so that they were not kicked out of the group.
The group mentality was a trait acquired through years of evolution. It was originally developed through fear of rejection, and used to organize prodigious groups of people. The idea of grouping being the key to our civilization, explains why in our modern societies, individualized or not, we still tend to form groups.
Works Cited
Gruber, Sybille, & (Eds.). (2002). Constructing Others Constructing Ourselves: A Reader.
Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/ Hunt Publishing Company. PP 17-19
Ohgushi, Mikio. Band Mentality and Large Group Mentality. Retrieved February 6, 2003, from http://web4.integraonline.com/~mikio/e-b&lg.html
According to The World Health Organization, “Obesity is the imbalance between declining energy expenditure due to physical inactivity and high energy in the diet (excess calories whether from sugar, starches or fat) …. Increasing physical activity, in addition to reducing intakes of food high in fat and foods and drinks high in sugars, can prevent unhealthy weight gain” (Who). The World Health Organization has recognized that soda and other sugary drinks a...
...derly at work places and at home will improve their mental and social wellbeing. The aging population will affect every single citizen in Canada. Not one citizen wants a raise in taxes; however, if there is not any strategy setup to combat the aging population issues, Canadians will see raises in taxes causing frustration. Implementing these strategies will not only keep the elderly happy, but it will keep them healthy. The healthier an individual is, the less medical expenses, so why not get started on investing on this project which can save citizens several tax dollars. The results obtained in the primary research reinforce the support of the strategies presented. Majority of the participants understand the possible economic and health care issues the aging population will bring, thus getting started on this matter sooner will be beneficial for Canada’s future.
It was a pleasure to see Daniel (age 4 years, 2 months) in clinic on January 9, 2014 as part of his ongoing developmental assessment. Developmental testing was performed to assess his social communication, behavior and interactions, and to identify any restrictive interests or repetitive behaviors. A physical examination and some brief cognitive measures were also obtained. Daniel’s father accompanied him to this visit.
Groupthink was coined by Janis and is defined as “a psychological phenomenon in which people strive for consensus within a group”(Cherry). So people will essentially forgo their beliefs to conform to the group to obtain harmony or if they don’t agree with a group idea they will simply keep quiet about it rather than challenge ideas. Janis classified eight different “symptoms” of groupthink. They are Illusions of invulnerability, which leads the members of the group to take part in risk-taking and become overly optimistic. Unquestioned beliefs, leads the members to ignore the possible aftermath that their decisions can make. Rationalizing, hinders members from recognizing warning signs and from reexamining their own beliefs. Stereotyping, leads the members of the group to criticize or write off any other group who may have differing opinions. Self-censorship, makes group members who may have differing opinions not disclose them to the group. "Mindguards",certain members of the group who are self-appointed censors that withhold information they find may disrupt group consensus. Illusions of unanimity, leads the members of the group to think that everyone believes the same things. Direct pressure, this is put on members to conform when they do end up expressing their own opinions or the rest of the group feels as if they are having differing opinions. Janis’s work was influential because it helped us examine the
In 1972, Irving Janis presented a set of hypothesis that he extracted from observing small groups performing problem solving tasks; he collectively referred to these hypotheses as groupthink¹. He defined groupthink as “a quick and easy way to refer to a mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members’ striving for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action²” A successful group brings varied ideas, collective knowledge, and focus on the task at hand. The importance of groups is to accomplish tasks that individuals can not do on their own. The Bay of Pigs, Watergate, and the Challenger disaster are all forms of failure within a group. Specifically, you can see the effect of groupthink of Americans before September 11, 2001. The thought of harm to the United States was unfathomable, but only after the attacks did they realize they were not invincible. When a solid, highly cohesive group is only concerned with maintaining agreement, they fail to see their alternatives and any other available options. When a group experiences groupthink, they may feel uninterested about a task, don't feel like they will be successful, and the group members do not challenge ideas. Stress is also a factor in the failure of groupthink. An effective group needs to have clear goals, trust, accountability, support, and training. Some indicators that groupthink may be happening are; making unethical decisions, they think they are never wrong, close-minded about situations, and ignore important information. Many things can be done to prevent groupthink from happening. One way is to make each person in the group a “critical evaluator”. The leader must ...
“Conformity is a form of social influence that involves a change in behavior or belief so that one can fit in with a certain group” (McLeod). Such a change is a response to imagined (which involves the pressure of expectations or social norms) or real (which involves the presence of others) group pressure. Another definition of conformity can be “yielding to group pressures”. Group pressure can take many forms, for example persuasion, teasing, bullying, criticism etc. Conformity is also referred to as group pressure or majority influence. The term conformity is mostly used to show an agreement to the position of the majority, and this is brought about by either by the desire to be liked or to fit in, or just to match a social role. The aim of this paper is to argue that conformity is among people because they always live in groups-work groups, family, political, religious and social groups. At the same instance, they are adjusted to obey authority. A conformist mentality makes it easy for people to be influenced by others.
Based on the information and data collected through research the statement that soda has no nutritional benefits for the human body and causes harm, opposed to stating that soda has no negative effects to the body can be made. Soda is often a big part of a human’s diet. Therefore, the harmful effects of soda are occurring without people knowing soda is to blame and not having the knowledge of the illnesses that are linked to it.
Many people believe they are their own person and are free to make their own choices; however, few explore just how much a group can influence their behavior. This realm of influential group power has been analyzed by several psychologist to see how far people will bend to stay within a group mentality. Psychologists Asch, Zimbardo, McEwan, and Lessing defined a group mind as a mass of people who ignore their own morals and conscious to act as one whole entity because of obedience and pressure. As a result, this creates the potential for the group to become a destructively dangerous force.
On December 3, in full view of a number of witnesses standing within close proximity, Ki-Suck Han, a 58 year-old male entered into an altercation with Naeem Davis, a 30 year-old homeless male at the Times Square subway station. Han was pushed down into the tracks and then struggled and pleaded for help for what was reported to be a full 22 seconds, as witnesses watched, took pictures, and failed to come to his assistance (Petrecca & Eversley, 2012). The man was then hit by the approaching subway train as it dragged into the station. This is a sad example of the Bystander Effect which demonstrates that people are less likely to come to the assistance of another in an emergency situation when other bystanders are present and also perceived to be responsible and able to help (Schneider, Gruman, and Coutts, 2012). Moreover, we are most of the time influenced by Social Loafing. Social loafing is the diffusion of responsibility among a group of people. When a group of people are perceiving an emergency situation, all of them tend to think that others are available to help. Social influence explains that people always look to others to evaluate a situation as a real emergency. We assume that others may know something that we do not know and we measure their reactions before we decide how we will respond. If we noticed that those around us are acting as if it is an emergency, then we will view the situation in the same way and act accordingly. However, if those around us are acting calm, then we may not realize the immediacy of the situation and therefore fail to respond appropriately. Maybe this is the answer to why people did not help the homeless who was attacked by the 58 year- old man. They failed to see the situation as a real emergency, and as a result they did not act
What is groupthink? There is a simple definition for it, but is it truly that simple? The term groupthink refers to the inclination of group members to have the same opinions and beliefs; it frequently leads to mistakes. It often occurs without an individual being aware of it. Conflict is considered to be a harmful element when related to groups, but conflict is good when considering groupthink because it helps to eliminate the existence of a groupthink. The explanation sounds simple enough, but it is more complex than the description given.
Autism is a neurodevelopmental disorder that effects the brains development. It is characterized by affecting communication, cognition and social interaction. The spectrum of the disorders ranges from a mild condition called Asperger’s syndrome to a more severe form, which severely impairer’s development. The Office of Communications and Public Liaison states that the disorder affects one and eighty-eight children, however ASD effects boys more frequently than girls (Office of Communications and Public Liaison, 2013). ASD emerges in all age, ethnic and socioeconomic groups. The significant varied character and severity of the disorder is why ASD is considered a spectrum that poses a broad range of symptoms.
To what extent do those around us affect the way we think; they we perceive a situation; or they way we form our prerogatives? There are many different trains of thought, some of which are adopted, others of which are taken into account based on experience and periods of introspection, but there is one that lies with it, a fundamental difference in comparison to others: the group mind. To which it involves several individuals, a group mind is in essence, a collective following to a set of beliefs and/or practices, usually brought together through forms of social pressure and preconceived notions of moral obligation. Furthermore, these groups are often characterized by the absence of individualism and a sense of obliviousness towards how their unspoken rules influences their view of the world as a whole. Moreover, group minds also involve social pressures, often enticing some to forsake their opinions to fit the given status quo of the group. Indeed, humans are social creatures that want to feel as if their participation in a group has value, but without the awareness of how social pressures affect their ability to make decisions and how one can overcome such pressure, they are nothing more but mental toxins, or in other words, group minds.
Those in collectivist cultures value their group membership, respect group processes and decisions, and expect other in-group members to look after or protect them in case of needs or crisis. For them, keeping good and harmonious relationships inside their in-group is a priority; and avoiding loss of face is important. Their identity is based on the strong and cohesive in-groups to which they belong. In collectivist cultures, cooperation is high within in-groups, but is unlikely when the other person belongs to an out-group. As a comparison, people in individualist cultures are good at forming new in-groups and getting along with those from out-groups.
According to Allport, because humans rely on one another for the information and resources they need to survive, we must be willing to trust and cooperate with one another. However, trust must be present at all times. Therefore, ingroups are formed in which members are compelled to respond to any support given or asked of them. Members expect the ingroup to treat them with kindness and fairness. As groups become larger, signs and symbols are created to differentiate ingroup members from outgroup members so that outgroup members don’t benefit from ingroup members. As power becomes more unconditional in the ingroup, they have low tolerance for outgroups, leading to hostility toward the outgroup (Brewer,
Working together with other people for an assignment can be a challenging task in some cases but luckily, I worked well with my group members. The decisions we made were anonymous although we paced ourselves individually when it came to completing our separate parts of the essay. As a group I believe that we connected well on an interpersonal level as all four of us were able to make alterations to any problem together . Furthermore, we did not give each other a chance to get angry at one another as we knew that this would only cause conflict that would disrupt our flow as a group. There was an equal divide in the amount of work that we all did; our contributions were fair and no one was lacking behind. In addition, my group members were great at keeping each other informed if one of us were not able to attend a group meeting; emails were sent out informing us what we missed and ideas that were formulated. Everyone in my group worked according to deadlines and in synchronization with each other; we did not have to nag anyone to complete work or wait on a member to complete their task.