Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Lecture 11: Groups and task performance - Coggle Diagram

- - - - 2 or more individuals who:
        
        are interacting with one another (interactions structured by roles and norms)
        
        are interdependent in achieving goals
        
        recognized by members to be distinct and coherent unit/entity - this is called entitattivity (Hamilton et al., 2998)
  - - - through socialization, members are bound to the power of the group, which operates via norms
        
        Different types of norms:
        
        explicit norms vs implicit norms
        
        explicit norms
        
        implicit norms
        
        Descriptive norms vs Prescriptive norms vs Proscriptive norms
        
        Prescriptive norms
        
        Proscriptive norms
        
        Descriptive norms
        
        What are the functions of norms?
        
        Define group membership (what is important in order to be part of a group)
        
        Differentiate between groups
        
        Specify range of acceptable behaviour to reduce uncertainty (see Lecture 13 on Sherif’s
        autokinetic study – informational influence)
    - - How are group structures broken down into?
        
        Roles
        
        Define expectations of members; often represent a division of labour
        
        Status relations
        
        consensual evaluation
        of prestige of role in group
        
        Communication networks
        
        Rules determining possibility or ease of communication among different roles in group (e.g. wheel, chain, circle)
        
        Different type of communication networks
        
        Wheel communication network
        
        Chain / line communication network
        
        Circle communication network
        
        All-channel / open communication network
  - - - Tuckman (1965) has a stage model of small group development
        
        Forming (familiarisation)
        
        Storming (conflict and difference resolution)
        
        Norming (norms and consensus formation)
        
        Performing (action towards goals)
        
        Adjourning (group dissolution – often after purpose is achieved)
- - - - Social facilitation
        
        the presence of others enhanced individual performance, even if they are not interacting and are not members of the same group
        
        what leads to social facilitation
        
        Zajonc’s (1965) drive theory - presence of others
        increases ‘drive’ or arousal
        
        presence of other people → increases physiological adrousal (bodies become more energized) → enhances dominant response
        
        on well-learned tasks, better performance
        
        on new or difficult tasks, worse performance
      - Social inhibition
        
        the presence of an audience sometimes still can produce a decline in performance
    - - social loafing
        
        What it is: Reduction in individual effort when working on a collective task compared with working alone
        
        Reasons
        
        Diffusion of responsibility (recap lecture 4)
        
        if they feel that their own contribution cannot be identified --> The larger the group, the less responsible each person feels for overall output - each member feels less evaluated as the group gets larger
        
        Output equity: Believe others loaf so they themselves loaf to maintain equity
        
        Social loafing and culture
        
         Tendency to engage in social loafing is more pronounced in individualistic than in collectivistic cultures
        
         In collectivistic cultures, individuals tend to work towards the benefit of the group.
      - free rider
        
        Related to social loafing - Free rider’s aims to exploit the group while contributing nothing to the group
      - social labouring
        
        sometimes people end up working harder in a group
        
        reasons?
        
        Social compensation effect
        
        Tasks are important to group members
        
        Group is important to members
  - - - THEORY: Steiner's task analysis
        
        Quantity/Quality
        
        Is quantity produced or quality of performance more important?
        
        Quantity (maximizing) - Job required people to do as much as possible
        
        Quality (optimizing) -A correct or optimal solution is correct needed
        
        Interdependance
        
        Additive
        
        Product is the sum of all member's contribution
        
        social loafing might affect group performance
        
        Conjunctive
        
        performance limited/determined by slowest member: performance inversely proportional to group size
        
        Disjunctive
        
        Best individual performance is chosen: if a good group decision is made to pick the individual to represent
        
        Compensatory
        
        Average of individual's inputs
        
        Discretionary
        
        group decides to their own discretion how individual outputs relate to group product
        
        Unitary/Divisible
        
        If division of labour is appropriate
        
        No: Unitary task — no sub-components
        
        Yes: Divisible task
  - - - Individuals enter group discussions with "social decision schemas" that operate implicitly or explicitly as norms for groups' decision making (Davis, 1973)
        
        either Majority wins rule
        
        Exerts pressure to come to majority-based agreement
        
        But, decisions produced by groups are not always predictable on the basis of social decision schemas So, what else is going on??
        
        Likely used when there is no clear right answer
        
        or truth wins rule
        
        Prompts discussion until position that seems obviously correct is established
        
        Likely to apply where assumed correct answer exists
    - - What it is
        
        What it is: Tendency for groups to make decisions that are than the average of members' initial decisions, more extreme in direction already favoured by the average
        
        Early research suggested that group decisions were more risky than individual decisions - risky shift (Stoner, 1961). Subsequent studies found that some group decisions were more conservative (on either sides)
      - explanations for group polarization
        
        Polarisation through persuasive arguments (informational influence)
        
        nature of arguments is important
        
        persuasive arguments strengthen people's views such new that the group's view becomes exaggerated
        
        a group that tends towards a particular opinion will rehearse arguments in favour of it, strengthening adherence and exaggerating the group's view overall
        
        Polarisation through social comparison/cultural values (normative influence)
        
        group members seek social approval for their decisions and wish to avoid criticism
        
        thus they shift their individual decisions in the direction that is socially valued (i.e., to align with the group)
        
        Polarisation through self-categorisation (referent influence)
        
        members see themselves and other members of the group as an in-group (recap lecture 6 - social identity), resulting in a conformity process
        
        members adhere more closely to the perceived normative position of the group, which may become more extreme in order to contrast with the perceived views of an out-group (other group)
    - - what it is
        
        What it is: A group decision making process that produces poor decisions (Janis, 1972)
        
        Mode of thinking where the desire to reach an unanimous agreement overrides the motivation to adopt rational decision making procedures
      - antecedents and syptoms of groupthink
        
        read SG
      - alternative views to groupthink
        
        read SG
      - What types of groups does groupthink affect:
        
        Groups with significant power, which allows it to act without a high degree of external surveillance groups
        
        Groups with highly developed and socialisation rituals norms (e.g. Moreland and Levine, 1982)