More handpicked essays just for you.
My personal experience of groupthink
Essay on groupthink
Discuss in a paragraph the phenomenon of groupthink
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Groupthink, a term that is so prevalent in society that few even raise a question onto what the expression actually means. Groupthink has developed in our culture as a buzzword that brings forth ideas of Big Brother and a diminished idea of self-reliance. Groupthink can be heard in conversations on late night television and on the news, but what is groupthink? The common definition of groupthink is “when a group makes faulty decisions because group pressures lead to a deterioration of “mental efficiency, reality testing, and moral judgment” (psysr.org). Although groupthink seems to be a common occurrence in American society, there is no way to truthfully analyze how common it is. Groupthink has no way to be measured and many scientists …show more content…
In order to obtain a strong conclusion in a scientific experiment, the conclusion must be backed up with evidence and must be able to be replicated. The whole concept of groupthink was from one man named Irving Janis. Groupthink wasn’t a collaboration of many different scientists, but just Janis having an idea, and then he tested that idea. When Irving Janis first conducted the experiment on groupthink, he believed that he had strong evidence to back up his new theory and the public instantly hopped on the bandwagon of the mysterious groupthink. Groupthink now allowed the public to not be responsible for their actions and instead they could blame it on their brain in groups. The only problem with Janis’s theory is that to this day no one has been able to replicate his findings in the slightest. There were many problems of Janis’s study first off, the support for groupthink was due mainly to retrospective studies (Aldag 536). Also Janis’s test used a relatively small sample and had no real format. There was no …show more content…
This illuminates a strong contrast between the scholarly sources and this source from a public website. The public just agrees with groupthink because they believe that it is the truth and backed up by science. The scholarly sources are condemning it as false, how can these two sources be on the same topic, and yet have vastly different points of view? This is due primarily to the public’s perception of groupthink. According to a popular website, verywell.com, the benefits of groupthink are the ability’s to “make decisions, complete tasks, and finish projects quickly and efficiently.” But this can apparently lead to “poor decision-making and inefficient problem-solving.” To the general public this may seem like a groupthink phenomenon, but in actuality it could simply be teamwork because humans as a species work well in groups. It isn’t always due to an intricate occurrence instead it could just be because we can work together. Poor decisions can be blamed on an individual; there is no way to tell if the group has anything to due with the bad decision. In any group scenario there will be bad and good outcomes, and there might not even be any correlation to groupthink. The public has decided that any bad group decision is the result of groupthink and any good group decision was the individual’s idea. In societies eye
“Something happens to individuals when they collect in a group. They think and act differently than they would on their own. (17)” States Carol Tavris in her article, “In Groups We Shrink From Loner’s Heroics”. Tavris believes people who are in groups tend to act in a more sluggish manor than those alone. She states many examples of this theory in her article, including the story of Kitty Genovese which is stated in the first paragraph. Kitty was stabbed repeatedly and killed in front of her New York apartment. No one did anything to stop this heinous action from taking place. Within her essay she obtains rhetorical appeals to prove that her statements are plausible to the audience.
Ira Sher is able to capture the true philosophy and psychology of group thinking and conformism in the short story “The Man in the Well” by vividly reminiscing a specific encounter he had during his childhood. The short story depicts the savage and immoral actions of unsupervised children proving that as a collective unit individuals will tend to act in a wilder and uncivilized manner. The notion of group mentality as opposed to personal thought is saturated throughout the story and one of the main themes Sher is striving to express to the reader. Irvin Janis, the author of the book Victims of Groupthink, developed the word groupthink and defined it as a group making faulty decisions due to group pressures that lead to deterioration of their
In-group relationships were built through activities that will promote group identification. Stereotypes were assumed, such as believing that in-group members are brave and friendly (described in favourable terms) and members of the other group – sneaky (unfavourable terms). Hostility developed rapidly, followed by bitter conflict. The experiment focused heavily on the concept of a 'group ' and what a perception of belonging to a group can actually do to the relationships of members within it and their relationships with people outside their group. Sherif remarked that anyone who came in at this point would have concluded that these youngsters were wicked and vicious. However, it was group processes rather than the personality that had produced the conflict. However, in one of Sherif’s studies, which, unfortunately, was never published, they refused to be divided and, together, they resisted attempts by the experimenters to set them against each other.
Groupthink. Defined as "reasoning or decision-making by a group, often characterized by uncritical acceptance or conformity to prevailing points of view," groupthink was the predominant characteristic of Pentagon Middle East policy development. The result of groupthink is the elevation of opinion into a kind of accepted "fact," and uncritical acceptance of extremely narrow and isolated points of view.
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
Groupthink relates to the movie The Ghost of Abu Ghraib because Military Intelligence were a cohesive group, so what one did they all did. Even though most of the Military Police didn’t believe what they were doing to the detainees were humanely correct, they did it anyways because their higher rank told them to do it. If they were telling them to do these violent acts, then they must have been okay in doing. Intelligence wanted the information quickly and this was one of the reason why they interrogated the detainees. The military police were angry and everyone wanted answers. The higher ranked intelligence guys thought abuse was the way to get the answers they needed and quickly. The textbook, ORGB, mentions illusions of invulnerability, which is when group members feel that they are above criticism, leading to risk taking. One of the top intelligence guys, Corporal Graner, was hungry for the power. Abusing the detainees made he feel powerful, so he did it more and
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 ...
There are eight symptoms of groupthink. The first symptom is when all or most of the group view themselves as invincible which causes them to make decisions that may be risky. The group has an enormous amount of confidence and authority in their decisions as well as in themselves. They see themselves collectively better in all ways than any other group and they believe the event will go well not because of what it is, but because they are involved. The second symptom is the belief of the group that they are moral and upstanding, which leads the group to ignore the ethical or moral consequences of the decisions. The group engages in a total overestimation of its morality. There is never any question that the group is not doing the right thing, they just act. The disregarding of information or warnings that may lead to changes in past policy is the third symptom. Even if there is considerable evidence against their standpoint, they see no problems with their plan. Stereotyping of enemy leaders or others as weak or stupid is the fourth symptom. This symptom leads to close-mindedness to other individuals and their opinions. The fifth symptom is the self-censorship of an individual causing him to overlook his doubts. A group member basically keeps his mouth shut so the group can continue in harmony. Symptom number six refers to the illusion of unanimity; going along with the majority, and the assumption that silence signifies consent. Sometimes a group member who questions the rightness of the goals is pressured by others into concurring or agreeing, this is symptom number seven. The last symptom is the members that set themselves up as a buffer to protect the group from adverse information that may destroy their shared contentment regarding the group’s ...
A. Preventing "Groupthink" Psychology Today. 20 Apr. 2011. The. Psychology Today.
Groupthink is the psychological phenomenon in which groups working on a task think along the same lines which could have drastic results. It is the result of group polarization where discussions are enhance or exaggerate the initial leanings of the group. Therefore, if a group leans towards risky situation at the beginning of the discussion on average they will move toward an even riskier position. (Marks, 2015). The idea when everyone think the same no one is really thinking. The drastic outcomes result from people trying to avoid conflict with one another, being highly cohesive, and results is questionable decision making (Oliver, 2013). Houghton Mifflin publication of Victims of Groupthink: A Psychological Study of Foreign-Policy Decisions
Groups also share three characteristics. All groups have: a set of expected behaviors which certain individuals perform, or roles; groups follow norms, or rules of behaviors regarding to beliefs, values and attitudes; and cohesion from positive or negative stimuli which pushes groups closer together. When groups make decisions, there are certain aspects in group interactions that can potentially effect ‘good’ decision making. Group Polarization is the tendency for groups to make decisions that are more extreme than a member’s original individual intent. Members of the group tend to be more inclined toward greater risk if the tendency is to be risky or, members will be more inclined to be more cautious if the tendency is to be cautious.
A rapid appraisal was done at the capital of the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National park at Balloch. Observations were made around the surroundings of the national park along with informal conversations with the public who were randomly picked across the park which consisted of locals and tourists. Then after visiting the national park authority helped to gather further information through networking and snowballing help lead to a Key-informant group interview. 2.1.2: Key-informant group interview With the key informants a formal interview was conducted which led to a group interview with members in the tourism, community development and environment departments whose main focuses on different sectors and aspects on managing the park. The
Groups influence our everyday lives in ways that we don’t even realize. Most of what is learned from groups are societal norms that are being reinforced on a micro level in everyday life. Group influence on individuals is a clear tangible proof of societal norms by institutions. The groups we become a part of therefore can have a greater influence on our individual actions then we are aware of. As an individual we like to believe we have agency over our actions and what we decide but a lot of our own actions is more a part of a group mentality. Also, individual’s go along with a group’s influence so they feel better about themselves because then they won’t be ostracized. This paper will analyze different aspects of individual behavior and
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.
Several experiments and researches have been conducted that have focused on how people behave in groups. The findings have revealed that groups affect peoples’ attitudes, behavior and perceptions. Groups are essential for personal life, as well as in work life.