Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Group influence (GROUPS (Advantages (protection; predators, others, child…

- - - - Subdivide & reunite to discuss a decision
      - Seek outside input
      - Encourage "devils advocate" positions
      - Schedule a "second chance meeting" before making a final decision
      - Value impartiality
    - - Janis: Well-known bad decisions (Bay of pigs, US soldiers in Vietnam, Challenger disaster)
    - - Cohesive
      - Isolation from dissenting viewpoints
      - Directive leader who signals what decisions he or she favours
    - - Symptoms: feelings of invulnerability, discredit information, pressure on dissenters, stereotyping of out-group members
        
        Poor decision making procedures: low chance of success
- - - - Kitty Genovese
        
        1964 raped & assaulted over 30 min period & finally killed
        
        Residents heard but few reacted
      - Intervention VS no-intervention
        
        Interpret situation as emergency?
        
        Take personal responsibility
        
        Notice event
      - Improving chances of getting help
        
        Make your needs clear
        
        Select a specific person
    - - Characteristics
        
        Unusual
        
        Vary in nature
        
        Potential for danger
        
        Unexpected
        
        Rapid response
      - Woman falling off a chair % who helped
        
        Alone: 70%
        
        Pairs of strangers: 40%
        
        Passive confederate: 7%
        
        Limitation: Friends: 70%
        
        Make attributions & excuses, no insight into own behaviour
        
        Looking to other people's faces to define the situation
      - Smoke-filled room: % who reported
        
        Alone: 75%
        
        3 Naive: 38% (pluralistic ignorance)
        
        2 passive confederates: 10%
      - Seizure % helped before end of fit
        
        2 people: 85%
        
        3 people: 62%
        
        6 people: 31%
      - Typical bystander
        
        Women help less: Men knight in shining armour
        
        Compelled to make complex decision under pressure of stress and fear
        
        Reactions are shaped by action/inaction of others (pluralistic ignorance)
        
        Genuine doubt
    - - Prior commitment: "watch my things"
        
        Asked for a match: 20% chased
        
        Asked to watch: 95% chased
      - Time pressure inhibited helping behaviour:
        Good Samaritan
        
        Students going to give a talk about the study
        
        Man slumped in a corridor
        
        Hurry: 10%
        
        Not in a hurry: 60%+
      - Bleeding (self-concern)
      - Rural VS Urban enviroments
        
        More helpful acts in rural > urban settings
        
        Explanation: stimulus overload: less noticing
  - - - IV (blindfolded): pulling alone OR pulling with others
      - DV: pressure on rope
      - One real subject, five condeferates
      - By themselves: pulled 18% harder
      - Believed there were others: pulled less
    - - IV: S believed were alone OR in a group
      - DV: S asked to clap and yell as loudly as they could
      - Earphones of yelling & clapping; S blindfolded
      - Social Impact theory
        
        Social pressure directed toward a group is divided among it's members
        
        As group size increases; each individual feels less pressure to contribute his or her max effort (stops at 6-10)
        
        Swimming relay: loafing stopped by telling swimmers individual times
      - 1/3 louder alone
- - - - Enhance easy behaviour
      - Impair difficult behaviour
    - - Simple maze: Slower when alone then in pairs
      - Complex: Faster when alone than in pairs
      - No self-esteem; mere presence
      - Task-dependency
      - Control for competition
        
        Transparent wall: audience box
  - - - Zajonc
      - More motivated & alter when other around (especially strangers)
    - - Looking bad in eyes of others (social)
      - Male joggers jog faster past an attractive onlooker VS back turned
      - Size & status of audience affects anxiety of students performing a learning task
      - NO for cockroaches
    - - Markus (1978)
        
        Familiar task: own shoes
        
        Repair man: mere presence (Faster)
        
        Attentive person; mere presence + evaluation (Fastest)
        
        Alone (Slower)
        
        Unfamiliar task: lab coat, socks & shoes
        
        Repair man (slower)
        
        Attentive person (slowest)
        
        Alone (faster)
- - - - Physical anonymity
        
        Zimbardo: Women in hooded gowns vs identified: more likely to give electric shocks
        
        Nurse uniform: prosocial: cues of uniform that define the behaviour
        
        Ellison: Convertible- top up: beep horn for longer
        
        Watson: Deindividuated Warriors More aggressive if changed appearance 80% (torture, kill to death)
      - Group Size
        
        Suicide Baiting (Mann): conditions likely to increase anonymity increases suicide baiting (300+, after dark, further away)
        
        Diener: Took more lollies in group then alone, look less if identified
  - - - Mirrors, cameras, name tag, being identified
      - Cheating: 75% keep going on tests, only 10% in front of a mirror
    - - Holiday from self: taxing ---> binge drinking, highly on self consciousness more likely to relapse