Social Psychology 463should be done by secret ballots rather than by a show of hands, and it should be made
clear that group members will be held responsible for decisions made by the group.
THINKING CRITICALLYCan you think of a time when you conformed with the actions of a group of friends, even though you
disagreed with their actions? Based on Asch’s studies and studies on groupthink, what might have
kept you from objecting?
The response entered here will be saved to your notes and may be
collected by your instructor if he/she requires it.SubmitGROUP POLARIZATION Once called the “risky shift” phenomenon, group polarization is
the tendency for members involved in a group discussion to take somewhat more extreme
positions and suggest riskier actions when compared to individuals who have not partic-
ipated in a group discussion (Bossert & Schworm, 2008; Moscovici & Zavalloni, 1969). A
good example of group polarization can occur when a jury tries to decide on punitive dam-
ages during a civil trial: Studies have found that if members of a jury individually favored
a relatively low amount of punitive damages before deliberation, after deliberation the
amount usually lessened further. Similarly, if the individual jurors favored stiffer penal-
ties, the deliberation process resulted in even higher penalties (MacCoun & Kerr, 1988).
If information is provided in an online forum such as a social networking group, group
polarization can become even more pronounced because group members are exposed to
only the information fitting their worldview (Hansen et al., 2013). Group polarization is
thought to be due to both normative social influence and informational social influence.
SOCIAL FACILITATION AND SOCIAL LOAFING Social influence can affect the success or fail-
ure of an individual’s task performance within a group. The perceived difficulty of the task
seems to determine the particular effect of the presence of others as well: If a task is perceived
as easy, the presence of other people seems to improve performance. If the task is perceived
as difficult, the presence of others actually has a negative effect on performance. The positive
influence of others on performance is called social facilitation, whereas the negative influ-
ence is called social impairment (Aiello & Douthitt, 2001; Michaels et al., 1982; Zajonc, 1965).
In both social facilitation and social impairment, the presence of other people acts to
increase arousal (Rosenbloom et al., 2007; Zajonc, 1965, 1968; Zajonc et al., 1970). Social facili-
tation occurs because the presence of others creates just enough increased arousal to improve
group polarization
the tendency for members involved in
a group discussion to take somewhat
more extreme positions and suggest
riskier actions when compared to
individuals who have not participated
in a grouR discussion.social facilitation
the tendency for the presence of other
people to have a positive impact on
the Rerformance of an easy tasM.social impairment
the tendency for the presence of other
people to have a negative impact on
the Rerformance of a difficult tasM.Table 12. 1 Characteristics of Groupthink
Characteristic Description
Invulnerability Members feel they cannot fail.
Rationalization Members explain away warning signs and help each other rationalize
their decision.
Lack of introspection Members do not examine the ethical implications of their decision
because they believe that they cannot make immoral choices.
Stereotyping Members stereotype their enemies as weak, stupid, or unreasonable.
Pressure Members pressure each other not to question the prevailing opinion.
Lack of disagreement Members do not express opinions that differ from the group consensus.
Self-deception Members share in the illusion that they all agree with the decision.
Insularity Members prevent the group from hearing disruptive but potentially
useful information from people who are outside the group.
SOURCE: Janis (1972, 1982).Interactive