Group polarization, Mind grouping, Minority influence...

Group Polarization

Students who have studied management were asked to imagine that they should decide whether to continue to invest money to save failed projects, for example, whether to give a risky loan to save their previous investments. 72% agreed to a re-investment, which they would hardly have gone if they saw it as a new independent project. Taking the same decision in the group, 94% of students agreed to re-investment.

Group decisions are more risky. Shift to risk is not always observed. It turned out that during the discussion there is a clear tendency to emphasize and strengthen the initial views of the members of the group. Instead of dividing the opinions within the group, people in the discussion usually increase the average tendency of the members of the group. This phenomenon is called group polarization.

Thinking grouping

The grouping of thinking is a mode of thinking that arises in people when the search for consensus becomes so dominant for a cohesive group that it tends to reject realistic assessments of an alternative mode of action.

The ground on which the growth of thinking arises is the friendly cohesion of the group, the comparative isolation of the group from conflicting opinions and the decision-making leader who makes it clear what decision he likes.

Because of the syndrome of the ouster of thinking, there can be no search and discussion of conflicting information and alternative possibilities. The selected information is often considered biased, negligence is allowed when reassessing possible alternatives, a contingency plan is not being developed. When a leader puts forward an idea, and a group isolates itself from conflicting views, the ouster of thinking can lead to imperfect decisions.

When people want to be accepted and approved by a group, they can simply suppress their own unwanted thoughts in the group. But in conditions of security and in a very cohesive group (for example, in a married couple) there can be no omission of thinking. To prevent the omission of thinking, the following procedures can be proposed:

1. Tell the members of the group about the sharing of thinking, its causes and consequences.

2. Be yourself impartial, do not take prejudice.

3. In the discussion, ask everyone to approach the problem critically; Encourage objections and doubts.

4. Give one or more participants the role of the "devil's advocate".

5. From time to time, divide the group into parts. Let each subgroup meet separately, and then gather all together to identify differences.

6. If the problem concerns a rival group, take the time to consider all possible adversary moves.

7. Having worked out a preliminary decision, gather the "second level meeting", asking everyone to express the doubts that remain in him.

8. Invite external experts to join the meeting; ask them to challenge the group's views.

9. Encourage group members to share their views with trusted persons.

10. Let independent groups work on the same problem at the same time.

Such decision-making procedures may take longer, but ultimately they prove their effectiveness.

Minority influence

At the root of the progress, there was almost always a minority that influenced the majority, and often became the majority itself. The whole story is a chronicle of the power of a minority, including a minority consisting of one person. Let us recall Copernicus and Galileo, the revolutionaries. Historical discoveries in the field of technology are also created by an ingenious minority.

What makes a minority persuasive?

1. Sequence. A minority that stands firm in its positions is more influential than a minority that vacillates. A consistent minority is influential, albeit not popular, often due to the fact that soon it becomes the center of the dispute. General attention allows a person to express a disproportionate number of arguments. A position in favor of which more arguments are expressed, usually wins. At the same time, those who speak loudly and eloquently tend to be more influential.

2. Self-confidence. Consistency and persistence testify to self-confidence. Any confident action by a minority, for example, an attempt to take the place at the head of the table, gives rise to a doubt in the majority. The feeling of a strong and unshakable conviction of the minority encourages the majority to reconsider their position.

3. Apostates on the part of the majority. When a minority constantly doubts the wisdom of the majority, some members of the majority no longer hesitate to express their doubts and may even move on to the position of the minority. The apostates on the part of the majority are even more convincing than the unshakable representatives of the minority. As soon as defectors appear, they are immediately followed by all the others, causing the effect of a snow avalanche.

Also We Can Offer!

Other services that we offer

If you don’t see the necessary subject, paper type, or topic in our list of available services and examples, don’t worry! We have a number of other academic disciplines to suit the needs of anyone who visits this website looking for help.

How to ...

We made your life easier with putting together a big number of articles and guidelines on how to plan and write different types of assignments (Essay, Research Paper, Dissertation etc)