A group is defined as two or more people who interact and influence one another. Groups meet various human needs such as affiliation, achievement, and social identity. The presence of others can strengthen dominant responses through social facilitation or cause poorer performance if it induces evaluation apprehension. Groups can also intensify pre-existing opinions through group polarization as discussion amplifies the average member tendency. However, groupthink can cause poor decision-making if the group is cohesive, isolated, and has a directive leader as it leads to closed-mindedness and failure to consider alternative viewpoints or warnings.

2. WHAT IS A
GROUP?
A group has two or more people who interact
and influence one another. (Shaw, 1981)

3. WHAT IS A
GROUP?
Perceives “US” rather than ‘THEM.”

4. WHAT IS A
GROUP?
Meets different human needs: affiliate,
achieve, and social identity.

5. 1. How are we
affected by
the presence
of others?

6. SOCIAL
FACILITATIO
N
Strengthening of dominant (prevalent, likely)
responses in the presence of others.

7. But why do we sometimes perform
poorer in the presence of other
people?

8. The social psychologist ROBERT
ZAJONC (Zy-ence) answered this through the
following idea:
“Arousal enhances whatever
response tendency is dominant.”

9. The effect of others’ presence increases with their
number (Jackson & Latané, 1981; Knowles, 1983).

10. Sometimes the arousal and self-conscious attention
created by a large audience interferes even with well-
learned, automatic behaviors, such as speaking.

11. Being in a crowd also intensifies positive or negative
reactions.
Friendly people are liked even more, and unfriendly people are
disliked even more.
(Schiffenbauer & Schiavo, 1976; Storms & Thomas, 1977)

12. 2. Why are we
aroused in the
presence of
others?

13. A. EVALUATION
APPREHENSION
Concern for how others are evaluating us.

14. A. EVALUATION
APPREHENSION
The enhancement of dominant responses is strongest
when people think they are being evaluated.

15. A. EVALUATION
APPREHENSIONThe self-consciousness we feel when being evaluated
can also interfere with behaviors that we perform best
automatically

16. B. DRIVEN BY
DISTRACTIONThis conflict between paying attention to others and paying
attention to the task overloads our cognitive system, causing
arousal.

17. C. MERE PRESENCE
The mere presence of others produces some arousal
hinting an innate social arousal mechanism.

18. 1. Do individuals
exert less
effort in a
group?

19. A. SOCIAL LOAFING
The tendency for people to exert less effort when
they pool their efforts toward a common goal
than when they are individually accountable.

20. B. FREE RIDERS
People who benefit from the group but give little in
return.

21. Six blindfolded
participants with
headphones (that makes
them hear like other
people were also shouting
with them) were
instructed to shout as loud
as they could and clap as
hard as they could.

22. When being observed increases evaluation
concerns, SOCIAL FACILITATION occurs;
but,
when being lost in a crowd decreases evaluation
concerns, SOCIAL LOAFING occurs.

23. Social loafing

24. 1. When do
people lose
their sense of
SELF in a
group?

25. DEINDIVIDUATION
- Loss of self-awareness
and evaluation
apprehension.
- Occurs in group
situations that foster
responsiveness to group
norms, good or bad.

26. A. GROUP SIZE
A group has the power not only to arouse its
members but also to render them unidentifiable.

27. 2. PHYSICAL ANONYMITY
Less physical anonymity = less inhibition.

28. Philip Zimbardo (1970, 2002) experimented with such
anonymity, he dressed New York University women in identical
white coats and hoods.
Asked to deliver electric shocks to a woman, they pressed the
shock button twice as long as did women who were unconcealed
and wearing large name tags.

29. C. AROUSING AND
DISTRACTING ACTIVITIES
Group shouting, chanting, clapping, or dancing
serve both to hype people up and to reduce self-consciousness.

30. There is a self-reinforcing pleasure in acting impulsively
while observing others doing likewise. When we see others
act as we are acting, we think they feel as we do, which
reinforces our own feelings (Orive, 1984).

31. D. DIMINISHED SELF-
AWARENESSGroup experiences that diminish self-consciousness tend to
disconnect behavior from attitudes.

32. Circumstances that decrease self-
awareness, increase deindividuation.
Deindividuation decreases in
circumstances that increase self-
awareness: mirrors and cameras,
bright lights, large name tags, etc.

33. 1. Do groups
intensify our
opinions?

34. Group-produced enhancement of members’ preexisting
tendencies; a strengthening of the members’ average
tendency, not a split within the group.

35. A. THE RISKY SHIFT
PHENOMENONThe tendency for people to choose “risky” behaviors when
they are in a group than when they are alone.

36. Discussion typically strengthens the
average inclination of group members.

37. -Group Polarization in schools
-Group Polarization in communities
-Group Polarization on the Internet
-Group Polarization in Terrorist
Organizations

38. 2. Why do groups
adopt stances
that are more
exaggerated
than that of
their
average
individual
member?

39. A. INFORMATIONAL
INFLUENCEA group discussion elicits a pooling of ideas which could include
ideas that were not previously considered by the individual.

40. A. INFORMATIONAL
INFLUENCEActive participation in discussion produces more attitude
change than does passive listening.

41. B. NORMATIVE
INFLUENCEThis involves comparison with others.

42. Evaluating one’s opinions
and abilities by comparing
oneself with others.
We are most persuaded by
people in our “reference
groups”—groups we
identify with.

43. A false impression of what
most other people are
thinking or feeling, or how
they are responding.

44. The information gleaned from a
discussion mostly favors the
initially preferred alternative,
thus reinforcing support for it.

45. 1. Do groups
hinder or
assist good
decisions?

46. “The mode of thinking
that persons engage in
when concurrence-seeking
becomes so dominant in a
cohesive in-group that it
tends to override realistic
appraisal of alternative
courses of action.”
—Irving Janis (1971)

47. • an amiable, cohesive
group.
• relative isolation of the
group from dissenting
viewpoints.
• a directive leader who
signals what decision he
or she favors.

48. Group members
overestimate
their group’s
might and right.

49. A. AN ILLUSION OF
INVULNERABILITYExcessive optimism that blinded them to warnings of
danger.

50. B. UNQUESTIONED BELIEF IN THE
GROUP’S MORALITY
Excessive optimism that blinded them to warnings of
danger.

51. Group members
become closed-
minded.

52. C. RATIONALIZATION
Excessive optimism that blinded them to warnings of
danger.

53. D. STEREOTYPED VIEW OF
OPPONENTExcessive optimism that blinded them to warnings of
danger.

54. Group members
become closed-
minded.

55. E. CONFORMITY
PRESSUREExcessive optimism that blinded them to warnings of
danger.

56. F. SELF-CENSORSHIP
Excessive optimism that blinded them to warnings of
danger.

57. G. ILLUSION OF
UNANIMITYExcessive optimism that blinded them to warnings of
danger.

58. G. MINDGUARDS
Excessive optimism that blinded them to warnings of
danger.

60. Be impartial—do
not endorse any
position.

61. Assign a “devil’s
advocate.”
Better yet,
welcome the
input of a
genuine
dissenter.

62. Occasionally
subdivide the
group, then
reunite to air
differences.

63. Welcome
critiques from
outside experts
and associates.

64. Before
implementing,
call a “second-
chance” meeting
to air any
lingering doubts.

65. 2. How do
individuals
influence the
group?

66. A. CONSISTENCY
Excessive optimism that blinded them to warnings of
danger.

67. B. SELF-CONFIDENCE
Excessive optimism that blinded them to warnings of
danger.

68. C. DEFECTIONS FROM THE
MAJORITYExcessive optimism that blinded them to warnings of
danger.

69. Before
implementing,
call a “second-
chance” meeting
to air any
lingering doubts.