|Haslam I 190
Group think /social identity/Pratkanis/Turner: Marlene Turner and Anthony Pratkanis proposed a social identity maintenance model [for group think]. Their model retained consensus-seeking at the heart of groupthink, but emphasized consensus of a particular type – namely, consensus around ‘a shared positive view of the functioning of the group’ (1998a(1): 212). They posited that the desire to achieve this type of consensus arises from two interactive (not additive) factors: (
collective threat, which in combination induce behaviours that do a better job of protecting the group’s self-image than ensuring sound decisions.
Haslam I 191
Cohesion/Pratkanis/Turner: Turner and Pratkanis (1998a)(1) drew on social identity and self-categorization theories (Abrams and Hogg, 1988(2); Hornsey, 2008(3); Tajfel and Turner, 1979)(4) to offer a particular definition of cohesion. Specifically, they suggest that cohesion arises when members identify with their group, such that membership in the group represents an important part of their self-concept. Thus identified, individuals seek to maintain a positive image of their group and are more reactive to potential threats to that image. >Goals/Pratkanis/Turner.
1. Turner, M.E. and Pratkanis, A.R. (1998a) ‘A social identity maintenance model of groupthink’, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 73: 210–35.
2. Abrams, D. and Hogg, M.A. (1988) Social Identifications: A Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations and Group Processes. London: Routledge.
3. Hornsey, M.J. (2008) ‘Social identity theory and self-categorization theory: A historical review’, Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2: 204–22.
4. Tajfel, H. and Turner, J. (1979) ‘An integrative theory of intergroup conflict’, in W.G. Austin and S. Worchel (eds), The Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole. pp. 33–47.
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.
S. Alexander Haslam
Joanne R. Smith
Social Psychology. Revisiting the Classic Studies London 2017