What is the most important thing you think the attorney needs to know about group dynamics? An attorney needs to be aware of the steps and processing that led to certain decisions that was made in a group or individual plan. Group dynamics is the way team members work together to solve problems and make meaningful decision. Honesty is very important in the jury system. Grimes (2015) stress the importance of evaluating every decision being made in the jury. Members in a group discussion are better at detecting lying by asking in-depth questions to cause others to think carefully and critically (Grimes, 2015). Define and discuss group polarization, groupthink, and social influence? How might these processes affect jury deliberations (e.g., jury decision making)? From my personal knowledge and understanding for …show more content…
Individuals can have negative thoughts but the peer pressure to conform to group norms changes their moral judgement on the decision (Breton, 2015). In regard to the scenario, to eliminate any confusion and in-depth issues in the election, the official agreed to report the politician. The official could have took the offer (bride) and waited to see the outcome, but being a part of a group, many questions would have aroused and the secret would have spilled. Social influence is way any individuals change their behavior based on someone else behavior. Pronin et.al (2007) conclude how people tend to conform for a number of reasons such as to people they look up to or peers they do not personally know (Pronin et. al, 2007). In the scenario, the way the other members acted upon the situation caused the local official to act different about the idea. Think back to your readings on processing persuasive messages. What would you suggest to the attorney in terms of persuading the jury that his client is a trustworthy and honest
Claim: When making a decision, people are often influenced by the pressure society places on them in order to follow the social norm, or what is socially accepted.
This chapter is mainly devoted to the jury selection process and how it is taken care
I think there was a weak group dynamic. This is because I believe the choices made were not made by themselves and they just agreed or disagreed just to get it over with. This is shown in the movie at about the halfway mark where juror 12 said not guilty but when asked by juror 11 why he said so juror 11 had no response. This proves he had a weak group dynamic because he was only listening to what to other people said and didn’t think of an opinion
As one of the seven jury deliberations documented and recorded in the ABC News television series In the Jury Room the discussions of the jurors were able to be seen throughout the United States. A transcript was also created by ABC News for the public as well. The emotions and interactions of the jurors were now capable of being portrayed to anyone interested in the interworkings of jury deliberations. The first task,...
In America, every individual has the right to a fair trial, but how fair is the trial? When an individual is on trial, his or her life is on the line, which is decided by twelve strangers. However, who is to say that these individuals take their role seriously and are going to think critically about the case? Unfortunately, there is no way to monitor the true intentions of these individuals and what they feel or believe. In the movie, Twelve Angry Men, out of the twelve jurors’ only one was willing to make a stance against the others, even though the evidence seemed plausible against the defendant. Nevertheless, the justice system is crucial; however, it is needs be reformed.
Stop for a moment and think how many times have you said “I'll kill you” to a person and actually killed that person? Two times? Three times? We all know that the answer is never unless of course you're actually a killer. This is what might or might not have happened with the boy who was accused of killing his father in the movie 12 Angry Men. Firstly, let's consider on the title of the movie itself which says “12 Angry Men.” Twelve is indicating the number of group members, angry is indicating the state of their temper, and men indicating their gender. So the title of the movie strongly connects to the name of the class “Group Communication Studies” because both involve a group, a goal and communication among the group members in order to achieve a common goal. The 96 minute film is all about a group of jurors sitting in a room on a very hot day to decide the fate of an 18 year old boy. Each judge had to come up with a decision— either the boy is guilty or not guilty of killing his father with a switch blade knife. The entire movie theme revolves around the group and how it completes its task. The group is so much involved in the discussion and there are so many conflicts that the members even forget to introduce themselves, hence the audience has to remember them by numbers of the order of their seating arrangement. This movie is a perfect detailed and visual example of how a group forms and develops over time, and most importantly the personality and approach of Jury number 8 gives an idea about how important it is to participate, speak up, and take a stance even in the early stages of the group formation. Each member's involvement and contribution to the group goal is important as it can reshape and change the dimensions of o...
Famous writer Robert Frost stated, “A jury consists of twelve persons chosen to decide who has the better lawyer.” While selecting a competent lawyer is important, in the court of law, the process of jury selection is easily one of the most important factors. While many elements are considered during the process of jury selection, the most valuable is the use of psychology. Psychology is used by lawyers during the process of jury selection to choose the best possible jurors to decide the fate of their client. Psychology can be used in many different ways such as voir dire, persuasion, and research.
Within the movie, it can be seen that persuasive argument is employed by one single juror to help sway the majority to believe his analysis of the evidence presented. He sets on a course to reach out to each juror and improve their thinking by reasonable and justified persuasion. There were three points raised in the tri...
There are many different things that influence our behavior, from internal influences to social norms. Social norms are explicit rules that govern how we behave in our society. Social norms influence our behavior more than any of us realize, but we all notice when a norm has been broken. Breaking a social norm is not an easy task and often leads us to feel uncomfortable whether we broke the norm ourselves or witnessed someone else breaking it. Sometimes however, you just have to break a norm to see what happens.
Stevenson, D 2012, The function of uncertainty within jury systems, George Mason Law Review, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 513-548, viewed 6 May 2014, .
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 ...
Groups however, do not always make good decisions. Juries sometimes render verdicts that run against the evidence presented. Groups tend to: fail to adequately determine their objectives and alternatives, fail to assess the risks associated with the group’s decision, fail to cycle through discarded alternatives and to reexamine their worth after a majority of the group discards the alternative, fail to seek expert advice, select and use only information that supports their position and conclusions, and does not make contingency plans in case their decision and resulting actions fail. Many times people’s lives are affected and little thought or care is put into it.
Cialdini, Robert B, & Trost, Melanie R. (1998). Social Influence: Social Norms, Conformity, & Compliance. Interpersonal Phenomena. Retrieved from: angel.elmira.edu/section/default.asp?id=w114_PSY3010_01.
The quietness and patience juror 8 displayed caused tension amongst the other jurors creating careful and adequate (Flouri & Fitsakis, 2007, p.453) deliberations. Juror 8 's circle of influence (Covey, 2013) directly influenced the other jurors’ circle of concern (Covey, 2013) when forcing them to question their thought process. Juror 8 chose a collaborative negotiation (Budjac Corvette, 2007, p. 63) method when deliberating with the other jurors immediately handing down guilty verdicts for the defendant. Furthermore, juror 8 used his ACES to help the other jurors cross the creek (Budjac Corvette, 2007, p.
It is critical for success in any job and at any level” (Kinicki & Fugate, 2012, p.5). The jurors had conflict and power struggles throughout the movie. The foreman, Juror #1, tried to keep the peace and avoid conflict in the jury room by taking the leadership role. He advised the other jurors to sit in order by jury number and to go around the table to discuss their points of view on the case. Each juror had their own motives, ideas, and beliefs about the young Latino male that grew up in the slums.