Groupthink and Risky ShiftGroup Polarization By Mr Daniel

Groupthink and Risky Shift/Group Polarization By Mr Daniel Hansson

Observation Observe the group on the following behaviour: Leadership in group? To what extent do group members agree in their decisions? Any group polarization or conformity? How could the group have improved the decision process?

Risky Shift/Group polarization Risky shift: The tendency for the group decision to involve greater risk than the average of the decisions made by individuals

Empirical support: Risky Shift Bray and Noble (1978), a highly authoritarian person sentencing a guilty defendant to a prison sentence who individually recommends 56 years (on average) recommends 68 years (on average) following deliberation in a group of highly authoritarian peers and the low authoritarian decreases the sentence from 38 years predeliberation to 29 years after deliberation with a group of like-minded peers. Stoner (1961) found that in considering moral dilemmas, a group's decision will be significantly more risky than the mean decision of the members of the group prior to the group interaction. Stoner found that the individuals' decisions after leaving the group tended towards greater risk than earlier decisions

Evaluation: Risky Shift Subsequent research has lead to the conclusion that, rather than the group making riskier decisions all the time, the initial leanings of the individuals is accentuated by group discussion. For instance, if the only way out of a difficult situation is to do something risky, the effect of the group is to advocate greater risk. If, however, the current situation is satisfactory and action would be risky, the effect of the group is to advocate caution.

Group think (Janis 1982( Group feels invulnerable and optimistic The group comes to a decision without allowing members to express doubts about it The group deny outside information that may undermine the decision The group believes the decision is unanimous

Explanations of Groupthink Occurs in cohesive groups with authoritarian leaders Group members do not disagree out of fear of lowering group morale or fear of being rejected

Strengths of Groupthink model Valuable insights of historical incidents (Challenger fiasco, invasion of Pig bay Some empirical support (Janis and Tetlock historical case studies( Research high in validity (Content analysis of records of real political decisions(

Weakness of groupthink theory Limitations of research (generalisability problem, content analysis – may be subjective(