|Haslam I 193
Groupthink/Group dynamics/Baron: Robert S. Baron: Baron (2005)(1) argued that groupthink-like dynamics, including conformity, suppression of dissent, polarization, self-censorship, illusions of consensus and intergroup bias are actually commonplace – meaning that they are ubiquitous to pretty much any meaningful group. Baron (2005)(1) further argued that failures to find strong or consistent evidence for the antecedent conditions of groupthink may actually reflect the fact that it is so common. In other words, there is little variation to detect because most groups exhibit groupthink-like symptoms and defective decision-making processes.
Group think model/Baron: Baron (2005) proposed a ubiquity model of groupthink, arguing that many of the symptoms identified by Janis (1972(2), 1982(3)) are common in groups and arise from three interactive (again, not additive) antecedent factors.
1) At least a minimal degree of social identification (defined in social identity/self-categorization-like terms) is required. Identification with the group matters, in part, because it tends to increase both normative social influence (i.e., compliance), as well as informational social influence (i.e., internalization).
2) For social influence to occur and for identification to produce groupthink-like symptoms, the group must have a clear norm or set of norms for individuals to follow.
3) Social influence is more likely to the degree that individual group members possess low self-efficacy or confidence regarding their abilities to understand or uniquely contribute to decision-making.
1. Baron, R.S. (2005) ‘So right it’s wrong: Groupthink and the ubiquitous nature of polarized group decision-making’, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 37: 219–253.
2. Janis, I.L. (1972) Victims of Groupthink. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
3. Janis, I.L. (1982) Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Dominic J. Packer and Nick D. Ungson, „Group Decision-Making. Revisiting Janis’ groupthink studies“, in: Joanne R. Smith and S. Alexander Haslam (eds.) 2017. Social Psychology. Revisiting the Classic studies. London: Sage Publications_____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. The note [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition.
|Baron, Robert S.
S. Alexander Haslam
Joanne R. Smith
Social Psychology. Revisiting the Classic Studies London 2017