More handpicked essays just for you.
Advantages and disadvantages of Groupthink
Advantages and disadvantages of Groupthink
Behavior change theories and models
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Advantages and disadvantages of Groupthink
Pondering regarding my fellow classmates’ posts and additional article readings, I consider that groupthink, persuasion, and genetics should be additional concepts that I should have in mind when addressing individuals in a health psychology setting. Regarding groupthink, I must have in mind that changes on behaviors can be hindered if the environment does not help. Studies regarding groupthink have found that in real life, a majority of people can make change the decision of an individual even it is not in accordance with the individual’s will, (Aroson, Wilson, & Akert, 2007). For instance, let us say that I am assessing a client that needs to change eating habits. He/she might have the desire, but if most of his/hers immediate family members
Summary – It can be very useful when things do not tend to fall your way by then switching things up on your opponent and using their most positive words in order to make it look negative. Every argument needs facts and if that does not work for you, you should probably redefine the issue being made. The importance and relevance of the argument should be taken into consideration. Remember that manipulating the definition of things in your favor is the way to go.
Human behavior is a vital component in the sustainment of health and the prevention of illness. For some decades now there has been an increasing attention to the contribution of psychological and social components to improving and changing health. Health specialists have used the help of models of behavior change in order to reduce health risks. Through all these years psychosocial models have been a leading influence in predicting and explaining health behaviors. The most accustomed are the social cognition models. A central principle of social cognition is that people’s social behavior is comprehended by examining their perceptions about their own behaviour
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 ...
According to Merriam Webster, the term “ethical” can be defined as “rules of behavior based on ideas about what is morally good and bad.” Being able to differentiate between what is good, and what is bad is key when it comes to many things. One of these things includes persuasion. There are many concepts that can explain why certain principles of persuasion can be more ethical than others, and many that are critical to being an ethical communicator. Said concepts are explained in Rothwell’s text, In the Company of Others, Robert Cialdini and Steve Martins video, Science of Persuasion, and Stephen Carter’s text, Integrity.
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.
Wood, W. (2000). Attitude change: Persuasion and social influence.. Annual Review of Psychology, 51(1), 539.
In the most widely quoted and discussed model of presidential power, Richard Neustadt states that the power of the president lies in the power to persuade. According to Neustadt, the key to presidential success and influence is persuasion. Although some may view the president as a powerful authority figure, the checks and balances established by the founders makes the president’s skills of persuasion crucial.
According to the text , Social Psychology, “social psychology is the scientific study of how people think about, influence, and relate to one another”(pg. 4) this is viewed in a variety of social topics incorporating group behaviors, attitudes, conformity, obedience to authority, stereotypes and peer pressure. Outside factors can have a positive or negative affect our view of ourselves and each other. These outside factors are used to persuade and influence group behavior. Persuasion is defined as “the process by which a message induces change in beliefs, attitudes, or behaviors” (Myers, 2010, pg. 230). The principles of this process of persuasion according to researchers, Robert Cialdini and Thomas Davidson, are attractiveness and likeability, reciprocity, social proof, consistency, authority, and scarcity (Davidson, 2008)(Myers, 2010, pg. 237). These principles of persuasion impact our self-perception, our attitudes and behaviors, and our culture.
Cognitive change and motivation applies to my life in how I interact with friends and family making their own lifestyle choices. Making sure people I know are aware why they’re making changes and of the benefits that come from changes will definitely help them in the long run. Explaining exactly why attitudes about self-efficacy and normative beliefs, such as in the Theory of Planned Behavior model, provide a clear way to illustrate the importance of cognition in lifestyle change.
Every day in our life's we are persuaded to make choices. Persuasion is a very
Finally, the liking principle is one that will often be used in the art of persuasion. This can be used effectively, where a product can be seen as “likable” if for example it has been endorsed by someone perceived to be physically attractive or perhaps someone that demonstratives the behaviors of a friend, such as showing similar traits or someone that can be related to.
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
Health behaviour theorists have long attested to the importance of social influences in health decision making. For example, the prominent Social Cognitive Theory builds in a construct of outcome expectancies, of which social outcome expectancies, or the value of the anticipated reaction of those in one’s environment, play a role. In essence, an individual is going to consider anticipated approving or disapproving responses, by his/her peers, to a particular health decision, and the perceived reaction will affect the decision that is made (Lusczynska and Schwarzer, 2007). The Theory of Planned Behaviour describes the social influence as subjective norms, which are individual’s beliefs that significant others think that they should engage in a behaviour (Conner and Sparks, 2007). For example, an adolescent may decide to begin smoking if he thinks that his friends have favourable attitudes towards smoking behaviour. Other models have focused on more of a learning and observing approach, such as the Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour, which speaks more specifically about social group subcultures and norms and their facilitating effect on health behaviour decisions (Norman and Conner, 2007). Though these theories describe the effects of the social environment on an individual, at the very base level the individual is consciously making the decision of which health behaviour to engage in. Social Network Analysis (SNA) is a technique that can be used to develop a richer description of the social environment. In addition to identifying peer groups, SNA creates a structural map of the relationships in a given community, and these can be examined on several different levels, including the individual or sub-group level.
Health psychology is a relatively new concept rapidly growing and could be defined as the biological and psychological influences affect ones behaviour also bringing in social influences of health and illness (MacDonald, 2013). Biological determinants consider genetic and biological factors of an illness whereas psychological determinants focus on the psychological factors such as why people behave the way they do when dealing with issues such as anxiety and stress. Models such as the Health Belief Model and Locus of Control were developed in attempt to try and explain psychological issues around a chronic illness such as breast cancer (Ogden, 2012). Sociological factors can cause an enormous amount of pressure for one to behave in a certain way for example gender roles in society and religious considerations when dealing with health beliefs. Health Beliefs can be defined as one’s own perception to their own personal health and illness and health behaviours (Ogden, 2012). There are also theories and models used to explain pain and coping with diagnosis such as Moos and Schaefer (1984) Crisis theory and Shontz (1975) cycle of grief people go through when being diagnosed with a serious illness.
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