Term
|
Definition
| The copying of another person or social norm. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. COPYING DIRECTLY from another person
2. Copying the SOCIAL NORMS |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
“The rules that implicitly or explicitly govern members of a group.”
- Implicit: don’t have to be stated
- Explicit: directly told do or not to do (such as traffic behaviour) |
|
|
Term
| What are Perceived norms? |
|
Definition
People’s perception of the social norm – which may or may not be accurate but is important in influencing their behaviour
- Actual norms and perceived norms are different, but people are influenced to follow the perceived norm more than actual |
|
|
Term
| Babies Imitation Study Results |
|
Definition
- Around 2/3 where able to copy
- Babies are definitely able to copy tongue poking
- Adults imitate baby gestures at least once every minute |
|
|
Term
| RESULTS Study Albert Bandura Bobo Doll |
|
Definition
- Children tended to replicate what they saw.
- If the child saw the person being aggressive, they would be aggressive.
- If they had not seen a person being aggressive, they would not even consider being aggressive towards the doll
- Also turns out that the child would think if new ways to be aggressive
- This suggests children were imitating the goal of the model person rather than the specific body movements |
|
|
Term
| What is the Chameleon Effect? |
|
Definition
| When a person changes their behaviour to fit into their surroundings |
|
|
Term
| The role of mirror neurons |
|
Definition
A neuron or group of neurons is doing something for every movement, every thought and every gesture that a person does.
- As you watch a person tapping their foot in front of you, (their motor neuros are generating that tapping), your motor neurons begin firing also and create a taping movement
- Mirror neurons respond to seeing the behavior, and doing the behavior
- Overlapping processes means that our brains are pried in to copying because some of the parts required for the behavior are already alert
- Not just a straight imitation in terms of the motor actions, but imitation of the goals
- Also suggested that mirror neurons play a big part in emotion |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Two carparks, one was completely clean and the other was full of rubbish.
Results showed:
- If a car park was covered with litter, then 30% of people littered
- If the carpark was clean, 14% of people littered
- If the carpark was dirty and they saw someone in front of them litter, 54% of them littered |
|
|
Term
| Cluster Pattern of Behaviors |
|
Definition
- People who quit smoking tend to quit in geographical clusters i.e. one friend gives up, so you give up, and your husband gives up etc.
- This is a positive removal of something
- We are observing each other and the traces of which we model/copy |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
“The behaviour that a member in a given position in a group is expected to perform”
- Note everyone in a group is expected to do the same thing |
|
|
Term
| What is a Status Hierarchy? |
|
Definition
The “roles that reflect that distribution of power in a group.”
Many settings have a status hierarchy |
|
|
Term
| METHOD Zimbardo’s prison study |
|
Definition
- Recruited college students to act as prisoners and guards
- Found that they tended to assume the attitudes and behaviours associated with these roles
- i.e. Status hierarchy, the guard had a higher status than the prisoner and took the role on very fully |
|
|
Term
| RESULTS Zimbardo’s prison study |
|
Definition
- In the first couple of days no one was taking their role very seriously, and then one guard suggested for them to actually act as real guards which is when everything took off
- Concluded that there were two key processes going on: Deindividuation and Dehumanisation |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
A process by which behaviors become acceptable in a group context that would not be outside that context (p. 485)
- You lose your personal identity
- e.g. become a guard and do bad things to other people, and forget what your true identity is |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
When “victims” are not seen as a real person.
- Often based on factors such as ethnicity |
|
|
Term
| Does deindividuation and Dehumanisation occur today? |
|
Definition
The case of Abu Gharib (US prisoner of war camp)
- When the war was going in Iraq
- Photos taken showed the way that US soldiers were showing how they were treating the Iraq prisoners
- US soldiers are carrying out behavior that are not acceptable in another scenarios
- Losing their humanity |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
The pressure to be whoever society says that you should be in that moment. “a change in beliefs or behaviors to follow a group’s norms”
This includes two key processes (Both social influences):
1. Informational Social Influence
2. Normative Social Influence |
|
|
Term
| What is Informational social influence? |
|
Definition
Applies when we use others as a guide to what is right (p. 488)
- When we use the group to get explicit information to know what is right
- Copying other people
- A rational response to the world |
|
|
Term
| What is Normative Social Influence? |
|
Definition
Applies when we want to fit in for the sake of fitting in (p. 489)
- Doing this all the time
- Clothes is a huge example of this
- People are always acting similar to people around them in order to fit in
- Sometimes people really explicitly are not themselves in order to fit in, and sometimes it is more subtle |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Participants came in and sat on the table where they were shown a pattern of cards.
[image]
- Were told to answer a question which line out of the right corresponds with the line on the left. The correct answer is obviously 2. All tasks were really obvious.
- Only one person of the group was a real participant, the rest were actors. The first eight were always the actors, and the last one was the real person.
- Were asked to call out what the right answer was.
- Then the first eight were told to state the wrong answer |
|
|
Term
| RESULTS Asch (1956) Study |
|
Definition
- People generally conformed
- Only ONE QUARTER of participants continued to always call out the correct answer when everyone else was calling out the same wrong answer
- Later asked why they chose the answer that was obviously incorrect, of which they said that they were so embarrassed to state a different answer that they chose the one that everyone else picked
- Did not conform to the same extent when they had an ally in non-conformity (one person said the right or a different wrong answer). Not necessarily because what the other person said was correct, but because they had broken the CONFORMITY, and provided the opportunity for the person to say what they really thought. |
|
|
Term
| REPLICATION RESULTS of Asch (1956) Study |
|
Definition
- Bond & Smith (1996) meta-analysis of 133 studies over 40 years found the average participant conformed 29% of the time, even if it not correct
- Studies have been done in 17 cultures. Conformity occurs in all cultures, but is highest in collectivist cultures
- More conformity occurred in studies that took place at an earlier date, has decreased over time which is expected due to the increasing individualist culture. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
- Imitation is a key feature of human learning, so we are predisposed towards it
- Mirror neurons to look at other people and do what they are doing
- Others do provide information on what is right (informational social influence).
- Non-conformity threatens the individual’s desire for social approval and belonging. E.g. if you vote national, and you were surrounded by people who voted green, you would be more cautious in stating your real vote, because of the fear of being excluded
SO: it is very hard to do the right thing when everyone else is doing the wrong thing |
|
|
Term
| Performance in groups: Decision making |
|
Definition
- Groups will make different decisions to individuals, and not just due to information
- In theory, groups should make better decisions due to more points of views and greater range of information
- It is important to understand group decision making as group decisions affect our lives |
|
|
Term
| What is Group Polarisation? |
|
Definition
“The tendency of group members’ opinions to become more extreme (in the same direction as their initial opinions) after group discussion.” p. 493
- Happens due to these confirmative pressures, and a distinctiveness pressure
- Once you have discussed a topic, you are more likely to be sure |
|
|
Term
| Reasons for Group Polarisation |
|
Definition
1. Informational –influence
2. Effect of Group discussions
3. Social Comparison
4. Groupthink |
|
|
Term
| What is Informal - Influence? |
|
Definition
Exposure to similar views
- From your initial position, you are receiving information that enhances your opinion |
|
|
Term
| What are the Effects of Group Discussions? |
|
Definition
| Encourages us to state and restate our views which strengthens the view |
|
|
Term
| What is Social Comparison? |
|
Definition
Members strive to express a group ideal
- Conformity is not just only going along with the group, but is about ‘being the group’
- Desire to CONFORM and be DISTINCTIVE
- Distinctiveness pulls group even further to an extreme
- People suggest that terrorist sets can occur in this way |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
“A mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members’ striving for unanimity overrides their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action.”
- When you are part of the group, you become more focused with the health of the group than the issue on hand |
|
|
Term
| Processes in Groupthink for the Space Shuttle Challenger (Moorhead et al. (1991) study) |
|
Definition
Factor 1: A highly cohesive group:
Factor 2: Leader preference for a certain decision
Factor 3: Insulation of the group from outside opinions
Factor 4: Invulnerability
Factor 5: Rationalisation
Factor 6: Pressure on dissent
Factor 7: Self-censorship
Factor 8: Illusion of unanimity
Factor 9: Consideration of few alternatives
Factor 10: Time pressure |
|
|
Term
| Factor 1: A highly cohesive group: (Space Shuttle Challenger) |
|
Definition
- Strong sense of group identity.
- Group of people who have met together often so have a strong sense of group identity
- The flight readiness review (happens the night before the launch)
- Group readiness review team where members of NASA and embers of the engineering, had known each other for a long time |
|
|
Term
| Factor 2: Leader preference for a certain decision (Space Shuttle Challenger) |
|
Definition
| - At the beginning of the review, two top level managers from NASA promoted their pro launch opinion |
|
|
Term
| Factor 3: Insulation of the group from outside opinions (Space Shuttle Challenger) |
|
Definition
- Insulated from the mechanics who actually built the rocket in terms to the input of the decision
- In the presidential commission, the engineers were interviewed
- The engineers said they were invited to the readiness review, were asked their opinion to which they said that they did not think it should launch, but where not invited back
- So their views were lost in the final decision
- There was never one comment in favour of launching by any engineer |
|
|
Term
| Factor 4: What is Invulnerability? And how did it take part in the Challenger situation? |
|
Definition
- Illusion of invulnerability and willingness to take extraordinary risks. This may cause them to ignore clear danger warnings.
- Feel like nothing bad will happen because it has not happened in the past
- Ignore clear warnings
- NASA had not lost a person since 1967 and had 55 successful missions |
|
|
Term
| Factor 5: What us Rationalisation? And how did it take part in the Challenger situation? |
|
Definition
Participants in groupthink collectively construct rationalisations that discount warnings and other negative feedback
- Rationalise and come up with reasons of what you want to do rather than use those reasons to choose what you should do
- Back casting
- Engineers knew that it was not safe to launch |
|
|
Term
| Invulnerability – the BP oil spill |
|
Definition
- Tony Hayward (CEO, BP) has on his desk a plaque that reads “If you knew you could not fail, what would you try?” (p. 3)
- A BP spokesman, Steve Rinehart said: “I don’t think anybody foresaw the circumstances that we’re faced with now”. Apparently it “seemed inconceivable” that the blowout preventer would ever fail so why prepare?’ (p. 3)
STRONG MESSAGES OF INVUNREABILITY
- $39bn for exploration of new sources, $20m for research and development into safety
- In BP’s exploration plan for the Deepwater Horizon well, the phrase “little risk” appears five times |
|
|
Term
| Rationalisations - the BP oil spill |
|
Definition
- ‘Best of all, should a major spill occur, there is, apparently “little risk of contact or impact to the coastline” because of the company’s projected speedy response (!) and “due to the distance [of the rig to the shore]” – about 48 miles (77 kms).’ p. 4
- Wanted the well, so made up reasons of why the well should be built |
|
|
Term
| Factor 6: What is Pressure on dissent? And how did this apply to the Challenger situation? |
|
Definition
- Group members often apply direct pressure on anyone who questions the validity of arguments supporting a decision.
E.g. Managers of NASA put pressure on the engineers to stop pressing that problem.
This leads of on to Self-Censorship. |
|
|
Term
| Factor 7: What is Self Censorship? And how did this apply to the Challenger situation? |
|
Definition
- Group members tend to censor themselves when they have opinions or ideas that deviate from the group consensus
This leads to illusion of unanimity. |
|
|
Term
| Factor 8: What is Illusion of Unanimity? And how did this apply to the Challenger situation? |
|
Definition
- Group members share an illusion that the majority view is unanimous. Decent has not been allowed into the picture.
- E.g During the night, the conference was taken over a phone which disregards body signs that might influence decisions. |
|
|
Term
| Factor 9: What is meant by Consideration of Few Alternatives? And how did this apply to the Challenger situation? |
|
Definition
Group considers few alternatives, often only two.
- When you reduce the situation to just a few alternatives, people feel like they are in this either or.
- E.g. decision was either we launch tomorrow, or do not launch ever. Not thinking about a delay launch as it would probably get colder. Forced choice took away the nuance features that are important for decision making. |
|
|
Term
| Factor 10: What is meant by time Pressure? And how did this apply to the Challenger situation? |
|
Definition
A decision must be made in a short period of time.
- Had to decide whether the launch should occur overnight, so had no time to make a deep thought decision. |
|
|
