Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Cuban missile crisis notes
Analyze group dynamics
Cuban missile crisis notes
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Groupthink From the Velasquez excerpt he explains Janis definition of Group think which refers to the susceptibility of groups of people to get increasingly out of touch with reality (Janis 84). Velasquez believes the main cause of groupthink is socials pressures within the group due to the group wanting to get along and keep harmony (Janis 84). When a group really wants to have a good standing relationship with each other they could possibly just agree on something to not upset the others, or to make them not like them for their beliefs and not agreeing resulting in them not evaluating the situation. This negatively affects ones decision making outcome. Groupthink as any other problem has symptoms and we will go over each of these. …show more content…
The Bay of Pigs Fiasco is a great example because it shows how even a group of the smartest people can fall into groupthink. The group of people where very well know, respected, and smart yet they let groupthink affect their end decision and make a terrible choice to invade Cuba. Looking back on the situation it is apparent that some symptoms of groupthink occurred and impacted the situation. The symptoms that this example have are illusion of invulnerability, belief in inherit morality, direct pressure on dissenters, self-censorship. Illusion of invulnerability is apparent here through that everyone that was there was very well known and smart so they thought they could ignore the danger of the idea and wrongs of invasion and be more optimistic about the situation. Believe in inherit morality occurs because they felt they were doing something good for the county in trying to help take down the communist in the country. Direct pressure on dissenters occurred because member felt the pressure to agree so they wouldn’t seem against the rest. Also self-censorship occurred when members held back there opposing views so they wouldn’t be different and stand out from the
Are you a self-reliant individual, or do you generate more ideas while working in a group? Groupthink has always been the dysfunctional idea that results from within a group that seeks harmony and conformity. Groupthink has been seen in Salem, MA, specifically in The Crucible, where townsfolk would go around accusing women, often innocent, of witchcraft. It has also been seen during the Red Scare, where Senator McCarthy would create a list of celebrities and other well-known people that he would accuse of being communists in the United States. At the time, Americans were against the idea of the communists and communism due to the fact that the Soviet Union, which had a communist government, was threatening to bomb the US. Thus, anyone who was
During World War 2, Hitler is able to gain popularity by manipulating the German people's’ minds and using mod mentality so the German people “know what their eyes are telling them, [but] they choose to ignore it, and go along with the group to belong to the group,” (ABC News 23). People choose to ignore what they see and go with the crowd because they believe that the crowd is always right. This is not always the case because when the Germans follow Hitler, it ensues in chaos. When people become part of a group, they worry about the groups needs and not the individuals. They also can tend to all think alike causing them to lose their independent thoughts. In virtue of this, individuals can become violent and rowdy because a single member of the group is, making everyone else feel that it's okay. Similar to both sources, herd behavior can have a negative affect, even if the victims are not involved directly. Comparably in the story “A Very Old Man with Enormous WIngs” written by Gabriel Garcia Marquez, an angel falls
The soldiers at My Lai were in an environment conducive to obeying orders. They have been trained to follow the orders of their commanders; respect for authority is weighed heavily upon. It is hard for them to disobey because they have been integrated into the social structure of the military and when in the middle of a war they would have nowhere to turn if they choose to disobey the orders of their commanders. The consequences of disobedience for them could be sent to death. A classic example of the power of authoritative factors is provided by Stanley Milgram’s
The story of the failed invasion of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs , located on the southern coast of Cuba about 97 miles southeast of Havana, was one of mismanagement, poor judgment , and stupidity ( " Bay Pigs " 378). The blame for the failed invasion falls directly on the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) and a young man by the name of President John F. Kennedy. The whole purpose of the invasion was a communist assault Cuba and Fidel Castro ended . Ironically , thirty nine years after the Bay of Pigs , Fidel Castro remains in power . First, we need to analyze why the invasion happened and then why it did not work .
We live in a society where each individual has their own set of thoughts and beliefs. Occasionally one will modify their beliefs and behavior to coincide with a group. This is an example of social influence. Social influence has three main components; conformity, compliance and obedience. The concept of compliance is similar to conformity, however there is a slight difference. Compliance only requires a person to perform a task. The person does not have to agree or disagree with the assignment, just simply complete it. Conformity requires the person being influenced to change their attitudes and or beliefs. An example of this aspect of social psychology is the holocaust in World War II. Adolph Eichmann was a Nazi officer responsible for filling up death camps in Germany. After the war he went on trial in Jerusalem for crimes against the Jewish people, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. On May 31, 1962, he was sentenced to death for the horrible crimes he committed. His defense was "Why me? Why not the local policemen, thousands of them? They would have been shot if they had refused to round up the Jews for the death camps. Why not hang them for not wanting to be shot? Why me? Everybody killed the Jews". A few months after the start of Eichmann’s trial, Stanley Milgram instituted an experiment testing ones obedience to authority. He wanted to find out if good people could do atrocious things if they were just obeying authority. Was Eichmann and millions of others in Nazi Germany decent people who were just following orders? Some other famous experiments that have taken place to test the waters of social psychology are Philip Zimbardo’s Stanford prison experiment and Solomon Asch’s conformity experiments, all ...
Numerous cases in history show that identification with a particular group can lead to dreadful outcomes. Together, with historical evidence, classic psychological studies tell a very powerful story. Decent people can take on oppressive roles and succumb to oppressive leaders. However, people often resist tyranny, and their resistance tends to be most effective when it is collective.
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...
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 the years of the Vietnam War, we can find a good example of what groupthink can do to a force as powerful as the United States. President Johnson drug the troops to such fate and struggle thinking that the United States would determine the course of events in Vietnam. The U.S. declared war to Vietnam under the excuse of defending their ally, South Vietnam, and to prevent further aggression. The Congress agreed and voted in favor of military action against North Vietnam because “the overall effect was to demonstrate before the world the unity of the American people in resisting Communist aggression” (Bacevich, 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 ...
Individuals often yield to conformity when they are forced to discard their individual freedom in order to benefit the larger group. Despite the fact that it is important to obey the authority, obeying the authority can sometimes be hazardous especially when morals and autonomous thought are suppressed to an extent that the other person is harmed. Obedience usually involves doing what a rule or a person tells you to but negative consequences can result from displaying obedience to authority for example; the people who obeyed the orders of Adolph Hitler ended up killing innocent people during the Holocaust. In the same way, Stanley Milgram noted in his article ‘Perils of Obedience’ of how individuals obeyed authority and neglected their conscience reflecting how this can be destructive in experiences of real life. On the contrary, Diana Baumrind pointed out in her article ‘Review of Stanley Milgram’s Experiments on Obedience’ that the experiments were not valid hence useless.
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.
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.
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.