SlideShare ist ein Scribd-Unternehmen logo
1 von 10
by
Col Mukteshwar Prasad(Retd),
MTech,CE(I),FIE(I),FIETE,FISLE,FInstOD,AMCS
I
Contact -9007224278,
e-mail -muktesh_prasad@yahoo.co.in
for book ”Decoding Services Selection Board”
and
SSB guidance and training at Shivnandani
Group Polarization
(Social Psychology-16)
Group Polarization
 Grew out of research on the effect of group processes on decision-
making,
 Group polarization theories explore the tendency of people in groups to
shift their opinions toward the extreme pole of popular opinion.
 This research was pioneered by James A. F. Stoner (1961), who first found
the tendency in groups who were considering risk-taking behaviors; the
phenomenon was thus initially labeled "risky shift."
 Theorists believe that group polarization is caused by either
 social comparisons,
 persuasive arguments, or
 a combination of the two.
 Group polarization has been applied to understand behavior cases ranging
from political and financial decision-making to gambling.
 Keywords Consensus; Conformity; Group Polarization; Groupthink;
Incestuous Amplification; Minority Influence; Persuasive Argumentation;
Risky Shift; Social Comparison Theory
Social Interaction in Groups
 Overview
 Basically sociology ‘s quest is to discover the effect of groups on
individual action.
 One area that has attracted much research in both sociology and psychology
is the question of how groups can influence the decision-making of
individuals.
 Risky Shift
 Group polarization is the phenomenon that occurs when the consensus
opinion of a group is more extreme than opinions previously held by
the individuals in it.
 James A. F. Stoner (1961) was the first to identify and write about what he
initially called risky shift.
 Stoner conducted a study in which participants were asked to advise
fictional characters.
 Participants had to make decisions while they were alone, then five
people were put into a group with the task of reaching consensus.
 Stoner found that each participant's opinion became more extreme as
Social Interaction in Groups
 Risky Shift….. had before group discussion.
 Stoner's study launched many other empirical studies that further specified
and clarified this phenomenon.
 Wallach, Kogan, and Bem (1964) discovered that individuals may seek
greater risks if there is a belief that the risk associated with a decision is
shared by all members of the group.
 Given the shared responsibility, the level of anxiety associated with making
the decision lessens.
 Collins and Guetzkow (1964) found that individuals who thrive on taking
risks tend to be extremely confident and have the ability to convince other
members of the group to take risks.
 Bateson (1966) found that individuals will continuously evaluate the level of
risk associated with a decision.
 As a result, they can become comfortable with the risk associated with a
decision and underestimate it.
 Risky shift eventually became known as group polarization or group-
induced attitude polarization (Isenberg, 1986).
Social Interaction in Groups
 Risky Shift….. attitude polarization (Isenberg, 1986).
 The change in name arose from discoveries about the dynamics of this
tendency.
 People in groups would shift their opinions away from the average and
toward the extreme version of the opinion favored by the group.
 Thus, if individuals in the group favored risk on average, then after
discussion, they would each favor even riskier behavior.
 The same would be true if the average tendency was toward caution; after
discussion, members would shift their opinions toward a more cautious
level.
 Polarization refers to the shift of opinion toward an extreme, and is
analyzed as a group phenomenon; it is the average of the groups'
opinions that reliably shifts toward the extreme (Myers & Lamm, 1976).
Social Interaction in Groups
 Conformity(read Presentation on Conformityon slide share by me)
 Group members tend to be alike and hold the same values, and members
are encouraged to conform to the rules and norms of the group.
 The discovery of group polarization contradicted previous findings about
group behavior.
 Earlier studies suggested that group opinions tended to fall into a middle
ground and that groups reached decisions that were the average of the
opinions of the individuals in the group, revealing a trend toward
conformity (Allport, 1924; Farnsworth & Behner, 1931; Sherif, 1935).
 Conformity occurs when members of the group give in to perceived
pressures from the other group members.
 In one famous study, Asch (1952) found that the majority of subjects
would conform to other group members' opinions, even when these
directly contradicted the evidence of their own senses.
 Group conformity is common and follows regular patterns.
 For example, as a group gets larger, more people tend to conform.
Social Interaction in Groups
 Conformity….. more people tend to conform.
 However, once the group reaches a certain size, the members' need to
conform will plateau.
 Also, people tend to conform if the other members in the group agree
unanimously; dissent from just one member is enough to splinter
previous consensus (Henslin, 2002).
 There are many reasons why people may feel the need to conform to
the standards of a group.
 Some of the reasons include
 A need to feel liked and accepted by the group,
 A desire to be a part of the "in" group,
 A fear of rejection by the group,
 A perceived access to information, or
 A desire to obtain a reward from the group.
 Group polarization would thus seem to contradict or at least problematize the
findings of earlier studies, a fact that led researchers on a quest to specify
under what circumstances this tendency toward greater extremes appeared.
Social Interaction in Groups
 Conformity….. toward greater extremes appeared.
 Some have theorized that the earlier studies showing a preference for
conformity toward an average may have been overstated.
 Because earlier experiments that revealed a tendency toward conformity
did not consider the impact of the subject matter that participants
discussed, the tendency toward conformity might have revealed a lack of
commitment to the subject at hand.
 For example the Asch experiment asked subjects to pick which lines
matched other lines; this was not a subject over which many would
have invested emotions or felt a deep commitment.
 Moscovici and Zavalloni (1969) found that if the subject of an experiment
is anything that will cause participants to become personally involved —
that is, if it is something that evokes meaning among group members
— then group polarization is likely to result.
Social Interaction in Groups
 Applications
 How Does Group Polarization Work?
 There are two competing theories of the mechanism behind group
polarization:
 social comparison processes (Isenberg, 1986; Sanders & Baron, 1977)
and
 persuasive argumentation (Burnstein & Vinokur, 1977; Isenberg 1986).
 Social Comparison
 Social comparison theorists have developed two explanations for group
polarization, both of which emphasize that individuals constantly compare
themselves to the group to judge how they appear to others and to
develop a sense of how they are doing socially.
 One line of social comparison theory believes that observed polarization
arises because individuals are ignorant of the beliefs of others.
 Thus, when they initially state their opinions to the group they may soften
their opinions in an attempt to strike a balance between their own
views and their (wrongly estimated) assumptions about others'
Social Interaction in Groups
 Applications…. assumptions about others' opinions.
 When they discover that the groups' opinions are different than assumed,
they then adjust their own stated views to be closer to their actual beliefs,
and therefore more extreme.
 Other social comparison theorists believe that polarization arises from
one-upmanship. They think that individuals want to be unique and to stand
apart from others.

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Andere mochten auch

Group Process
Group ProcessGroup Process
Group Process
tjcarter
 
Group decision making
Group decision makingGroup decision making
Group decision making
Krishna Jith
 
Presentation on Polarization
Presentation on PolarizationPresentation on Polarization
Presentation on Polarization
12inch
 
Transactional & Transformational Leadership
Transactional & Transformational LeadershipTransactional & Transformational Leadership
Transactional & Transformational Leadership
Vijay A Raj
 
PSYC1101 - Chapter 12, 4th Edition PowerPoint
PSYC1101 - Chapter 12, 4th Edition PowerPointPSYC1101 - Chapter 12, 4th Edition PowerPoint
PSYC1101 - Chapter 12, 4th Edition PowerPoint
hunzikerCCC
 
Group processes lecture social psychology
Group processes lecture social psychologyGroup processes lecture social psychology
Group processes lecture social psychology
Matthew Giobbi
 
Transactional and transformational leadership(1)
Transactional and transformational leadership(1)Transactional and transformational leadership(1)
Transactional and transformational leadership(1)
jjadhav1972
 
Group Decision Making
Group Decision MakingGroup Decision Making
Group Decision Making
Avinash Kumar
 
4. Individual Differences
4. Individual Differences4. Individual Differences
4. Individual Differences
rossbiology
 
Social Psychology PowerPoint
Social Psychology PowerPointSocial Psychology PowerPoint
Social Psychology PowerPoint
KRyder
 
Groupthink and its impact on decision making
Groupthink and its impact on decision makingGroupthink and its impact on decision making
Groupthink and its impact on decision making
Iman Ibrahim
 

Andere mochten auch (20)

Group decision making
Group decision makingGroup decision making
Group decision making
 
Group Process
Group ProcessGroup Process
Group Process
 
Group decision making
Group decision makingGroup decision making
Group decision making
 
Presentation on Polarization
Presentation on PolarizationPresentation on Polarization
Presentation on Polarization
 
Transactional & Transformational Leadership
Transactional & Transformational LeadershipTransactional & Transformational Leadership
Transactional & Transformational Leadership
 
PSYC1101 - Chapter 12, 4th Edition PowerPoint
PSYC1101 - Chapter 12, 4th Edition PowerPointPSYC1101 - Chapter 12, 4th Edition PowerPoint
PSYC1101 - Chapter 12, 4th Edition PowerPoint
 
Transactional leadership theory
Transactional leadership theoryTransactional leadership theory
Transactional leadership theory
 
Group Decision Making
Group Decision MakingGroup Decision Making
Group Decision Making
 
Group processes lecture social psychology
Group processes lecture social psychologyGroup processes lecture social psychology
Group processes lecture social psychology
 
Transactional and transformational leadership(1)
Transactional and transformational leadership(1)Transactional and transformational leadership(1)
Transactional and transformational leadership(1)
 
Group Decision Making
Group Decision MakingGroup Decision Making
Group Decision Making
 
Reinforcement
ReinforcementReinforcement
Reinforcement
 
Contingency theory of management
Contingency theory of managementContingency theory of management
Contingency theory of management
 
Individual differences
Individual differencesIndividual differences
Individual differences
 
4. Individual Differences
4. Individual Differences4. Individual Differences
4. Individual Differences
 
Social Psychology PowerPoint
Social Psychology PowerPointSocial Psychology PowerPoint
Social Psychology PowerPoint
 
Social Psychology
Social PsychologySocial Psychology
Social Psychology
 
Social psychology
Social psychologySocial psychology
Social psychology
 
Group Think
Group ThinkGroup Think
Group Think
 
Groupthink and its impact on decision making
Groupthink and its impact on decision makingGroupthink and its impact on decision making
Groupthink and its impact on decision making
 

Mehr von Col Mukteshwar Prasad

Mehr von Col Mukteshwar Prasad (20)

The Psychology Behind Unethical Behavior 2.0.pptx
The Psychology Behind Unethical Behavior 2.0.pptxThe Psychology Behind Unethical Behavior 2.0.pptx
The Psychology Behind Unethical Behavior 2.0.pptx
 
BAD BOSS.pptx
BAD BOSS.pptxBAD BOSS.pptx
BAD BOSS.pptx
 
Mindset 2.0.pptx
Mindset 2.0.pptxMindset 2.0.pptx
Mindset 2.0.pptx
 
Why Psychology Theory 2.0.pptx
Why Psychology Theory 2.0.pptxWhy Psychology Theory 2.0.pptx
Why Psychology Theory 2.0.pptx
 
Personology Murray.pptx
Personology Murray.pptxPersonology Murray.pptx
Personology Murray.pptx
 
Emotions and Types of Emotional Responses.pptx
Emotions and Types of Emotional Responses.pptxEmotions and Types of Emotional Responses.pptx
Emotions and Types of Emotional Responses.pptx
 
Understanding Anger.pptx
Understanding Anger.pptxUnderstanding Anger.pptx
Understanding Anger.pptx
 
Cognitive Distortions New.pptx
Cognitive Distortions New.pptxCognitive Distortions New.pptx
Cognitive Distortions New.pptx
 
Trauma Bonding.pptx
Trauma Bonding.pptxTrauma Bonding.pptx
Trauma Bonding.pptx
 
Emotional Abuse.pptx
Emotional Abuse.pptxEmotional Abuse.pptx
Emotional Abuse.pptx
 
Attachement Styles in Adulthood 2.0.pptx
Attachement Styles in Adulthood 2.0.pptxAttachement Styles in Adulthood 2.0.pptx
Attachement Styles in Adulthood 2.0.pptx
 
Conduct Disorder.pptx
Conduct Disorder.pptxConduct Disorder.pptx
Conduct Disorder.pptx
 
Oppostion Defiant Disorder(ODD).pptx
Oppostion Defiant Disorder(ODD).pptxOppostion Defiant Disorder(ODD).pptx
Oppostion Defiant Disorder(ODD).pptx
 
Types of Intelligence.PPT
Types of Intelligence.PPTTypes of Intelligence.PPT
Types of Intelligence.PPT
 
Attachment Theory.pptx
Attachment Theory.pptxAttachment Theory.pptx
Attachment Theory.pptx
 
7.Defense mechanisms-Major Image-Distorting Defense Level.pptx
7.Defense mechanisms-Major Image-Distorting Defense Level.pptx7.Defense mechanisms-Major Image-Distorting Defense Level.pptx
7.Defense mechanisms-Major Image-Distorting Defense Level.pptx
 
e Rupee.docx
e Rupee.docxe Rupee.docx
e Rupee.docx
 
Moonlighting in India.docx
Moonlighting in India.docxMoonlighting in India.docx
Moonlighting in India.docx
 
6.Defense mechanisms-Disavowal Defense Level.pptx
6.Defense mechanisms-Disavowal Defense Level.pptx6.Defense mechanisms-Disavowal Defense Level.pptx
6.Defense mechanisms-Disavowal Defense Level.pptx
 
5.Defense mechanisms-Minor Image-Distorting Defense Level.pptx
5.Defense mechanisms-Minor Image-Distorting Defense Level.pptx5.Defense mechanisms-Minor Image-Distorting Defense Level.pptx
5.Defense mechanisms-Minor Image-Distorting Defense Level.pptx
 

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Salient Features of India constitution especially power and functions
Salient Features of India constitution especially power and functionsSalient Features of India constitution especially power and functions
Salient Features of India constitution especially power and functions
KarakKing
 
Jual Obat Aborsi Hongkong ( Asli No.1 ) 085657271886 Obat Penggugur Kandungan...
Jual Obat Aborsi Hongkong ( Asli No.1 ) 085657271886 Obat Penggugur Kandungan...Jual Obat Aborsi Hongkong ( Asli No.1 ) 085657271886 Obat Penggugur Kandungan...
Jual Obat Aborsi Hongkong ( Asli No.1 ) 085657271886 Obat Penggugur Kandungan...
ZurliaSoop
 
Spellings Wk 3 English CAPS CARES Please Practise
Spellings Wk 3 English CAPS CARES Please PractiseSpellings Wk 3 English CAPS CARES Please Practise
Spellings Wk 3 English CAPS CARES Please Practise
AnaAcapella
 
The basics of sentences session 3pptx.pptx
The basics of sentences session 3pptx.pptxThe basics of sentences session 3pptx.pptx
The basics of sentences session 3pptx.pptx
heathfieldcps1
 

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Kodo Millet PPT made by Ghanshyam bairwa college of Agriculture kumher bhara...
Kodo Millet  PPT made by Ghanshyam bairwa college of Agriculture kumher bhara...Kodo Millet  PPT made by Ghanshyam bairwa college of Agriculture kumher bhara...
Kodo Millet PPT made by Ghanshyam bairwa college of Agriculture kumher bhara...
 
How to Manage Global Discount in Odoo 17 POS
How to Manage Global Discount in Odoo 17 POSHow to Manage Global Discount in Odoo 17 POS
How to Manage Global Discount in Odoo 17 POS
 
Interdisciplinary_Insights_Data_Collection_Methods.pptx
Interdisciplinary_Insights_Data_Collection_Methods.pptxInterdisciplinary_Insights_Data_Collection_Methods.pptx
Interdisciplinary_Insights_Data_Collection_Methods.pptx
 
Basic Civil Engineering first year Notes- Chapter 4 Building.pptx
Basic Civil Engineering first year Notes- Chapter 4 Building.pptxBasic Civil Engineering first year Notes- Chapter 4 Building.pptx
Basic Civil Engineering first year Notes- Chapter 4 Building.pptx
 
HMCS Max Bernays Pre-Deployment Brief (May 2024).pptx
HMCS Max Bernays Pre-Deployment Brief (May 2024).pptxHMCS Max Bernays Pre-Deployment Brief (May 2024).pptx
HMCS Max Bernays Pre-Deployment Brief (May 2024).pptx
 
Holdier Curriculum Vitae (April 2024).pdf
Holdier Curriculum Vitae (April 2024).pdfHoldier Curriculum Vitae (April 2024).pdf
Holdier Curriculum Vitae (April 2024).pdf
 
Single or Multiple melodic lines structure
Single or Multiple melodic lines structureSingle or Multiple melodic lines structure
Single or Multiple melodic lines structure
 
Key note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdf
Key note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdfKey note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdf
Key note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdf
 
Salient Features of India constitution especially power and functions
Salient Features of India constitution especially power and functionsSalient Features of India constitution especially power and functions
Salient Features of India constitution especially power and functions
 
Application orientated numerical on hev.ppt
Application orientated numerical on hev.pptApplication orientated numerical on hev.ppt
Application orientated numerical on hev.ppt
 
TỔNG ÔN TẬP THI VÀO LỚP 10 MÔN TIẾNG ANH NĂM HỌC 2023 - 2024 CÓ ĐÁP ÁN (NGỮ Â...
TỔNG ÔN TẬP THI VÀO LỚP 10 MÔN TIẾNG ANH NĂM HỌC 2023 - 2024 CÓ ĐÁP ÁN (NGỮ Â...TỔNG ÔN TẬP THI VÀO LỚP 10 MÔN TIẾNG ANH NĂM HỌC 2023 - 2024 CÓ ĐÁP ÁN (NGỮ Â...
TỔNG ÔN TẬP THI VÀO LỚP 10 MÔN TIẾNG ANH NĂM HỌC 2023 - 2024 CÓ ĐÁP ÁN (NGỮ Â...
 
Mehran University Newsletter Vol-X, Issue-I, 2024
Mehran University Newsletter Vol-X, Issue-I, 2024Mehran University Newsletter Vol-X, Issue-I, 2024
Mehran University Newsletter Vol-X, Issue-I, 2024
 
Beyond_Borders_Understanding_Anime_and_Manga_Fandom_A_Comprehensive_Audience_...
Beyond_Borders_Understanding_Anime_and_Manga_Fandom_A_Comprehensive_Audience_...Beyond_Borders_Understanding_Anime_and_Manga_Fandom_A_Comprehensive_Audience_...
Beyond_Borders_Understanding_Anime_and_Manga_Fandom_A_Comprehensive_Audience_...
 
Jual Obat Aborsi Hongkong ( Asli No.1 ) 085657271886 Obat Penggugur Kandungan...
Jual Obat Aborsi Hongkong ( Asli No.1 ) 085657271886 Obat Penggugur Kandungan...Jual Obat Aborsi Hongkong ( Asli No.1 ) 085657271886 Obat Penggugur Kandungan...
Jual Obat Aborsi Hongkong ( Asli No.1 ) 085657271886 Obat Penggugur Kandungan...
 
UGC NET Paper 1 Mathematical Reasoning & Aptitude.pdf
UGC NET Paper 1 Mathematical Reasoning & Aptitude.pdfUGC NET Paper 1 Mathematical Reasoning & Aptitude.pdf
UGC NET Paper 1 Mathematical Reasoning & Aptitude.pdf
 
Spellings Wk 3 English CAPS CARES Please Practise
Spellings Wk 3 English CAPS CARES Please PractiseSpellings Wk 3 English CAPS CARES Please Practise
Spellings Wk 3 English CAPS CARES Please Practise
 
Wellbeing inclusion and digital dystopias.pptx
Wellbeing inclusion and digital dystopias.pptxWellbeing inclusion and digital dystopias.pptx
Wellbeing inclusion and digital dystopias.pptx
 
The basics of sentences session 3pptx.pptx
The basics of sentences session 3pptx.pptxThe basics of sentences session 3pptx.pptx
The basics of sentences session 3pptx.pptx
 
How to Give a Domain for a Field in Odoo 17
How to Give a Domain for a Field in Odoo 17How to Give a Domain for a Field in Odoo 17
How to Give a Domain for a Field in Odoo 17
 
How to setup Pycharm environment for Odoo 17.pptx
How to setup Pycharm environment for Odoo 17.pptxHow to setup Pycharm environment for Odoo 17.pptx
How to setup Pycharm environment for Odoo 17.pptx
 

Group Polarization

  • 1. by Col Mukteshwar Prasad(Retd), MTech,CE(I),FIE(I),FIETE,FISLE,FInstOD,AMCS I Contact -9007224278, e-mail -muktesh_prasad@yahoo.co.in for book ”Decoding Services Selection Board” and SSB guidance and training at Shivnandani Group Polarization (Social Psychology-16)
  • 2. Group Polarization  Grew out of research on the effect of group processes on decision- making,  Group polarization theories explore the tendency of people in groups to shift their opinions toward the extreme pole of popular opinion.  This research was pioneered by James A. F. Stoner (1961), who first found the tendency in groups who were considering risk-taking behaviors; the phenomenon was thus initially labeled "risky shift."  Theorists believe that group polarization is caused by either  social comparisons,  persuasive arguments, or  a combination of the two.  Group polarization has been applied to understand behavior cases ranging from political and financial decision-making to gambling.  Keywords Consensus; Conformity; Group Polarization; Groupthink; Incestuous Amplification; Minority Influence; Persuasive Argumentation; Risky Shift; Social Comparison Theory
  • 3. Social Interaction in Groups  Overview  Basically sociology ‘s quest is to discover the effect of groups on individual action.  One area that has attracted much research in both sociology and psychology is the question of how groups can influence the decision-making of individuals.  Risky Shift  Group polarization is the phenomenon that occurs when the consensus opinion of a group is more extreme than opinions previously held by the individuals in it.  James A. F. Stoner (1961) was the first to identify and write about what he initially called risky shift.  Stoner conducted a study in which participants were asked to advise fictional characters.  Participants had to make decisions while they were alone, then five people were put into a group with the task of reaching consensus.  Stoner found that each participant's opinion became more extreme as
  • 4. Social Interaction in Groups  Risky Shift….. had before group discussion.  Stoner's study launched many other empirical studies that further specified and clarified this phenomenon.  Wallach, Kogan, and Bem (1964) discovered that individuals may seek greater risks if there is a belief that the risk associated with a decision is shared by all members of the group.  Given the shared responsibility, the level of anxiety associated with making the decision lessens.  Collins and Guetzkow (1964) found that individuals who thrive on taking risks tend to be extremely confident and have the ability to convince other members of the group to take risks.  Bateson (1966) found that individuals will continuously evaluate the level of risk associated with a decision.  As a result, they can become comfortable with the risk associated with a decision and underestimate it.  Risky shift eventually became known as group polarization or group- induced attitude polarization (Isenberg, 1986).
  • 5. Social Interaction in Groups  Risky Shift….. attitude polarization (Isenberg, 1986).  The change in name arose from discoveries about the dynamics of this tendency.  People in groups would shift their opinions away from the average and toward the extreme version of the opinion favored by the group.  Thus, if individuals in the group favored risk on average, then after discussion, they would each favor even riskier behavior.  The same would be true if the average tendency was toward caution; after discussion, members would shift their opinions toward a more cautious level.  Polarization refers to the shift of opinion toward an extreme, and is analyzed as a group phenomenon; it is the average of the groups' opinions that reliably shifts toward the extreme (Myers & Lamm, 1976).
  • 6. Social Interaction in Groups  Conformity(read Presentation on Conformityon slide share by me)  Group members tend to be alike and hold the same values, and members are encouraged to conform to the rules and norms of the group.  The discovery of group polarization contradicted previous findings about group behavior.  Earlier studies suggested that group opinions tended to fall into a middle ground and that groups reached decisions that were the average of the opinions of the individuals in the group, revealing a trend toward conformity (Allport, 1924; Farnsworth & Behner, 1931; Sherif, 1935).  Conformity occurs when members of the group give in to perceived pressures from the other group members.  In one famous study, Asch (1952) found that the majority of subjects would conform to other group members' opinions, even when these directly contradicted the evidence of their own senses.  Group conformity is common and follows regular patterns.  For example, as a group gets larger, more people tend to conform.
  • 7. Social Interaction in Groups  Conformity….. more people tend to conform.  However, once the group reaches a certain size, the members' need to conform will plateau.  Also, people tend to conform if the other members in the group agree unanimously; dissent from just one member is enough to splinter previous consensus (Henslin, 2002).  There are many reasons why people may feel the need to conform to the standards of a group.  Some of the reasons include  A need to feel liked and accepted by the group,  A desire to be a part of the "in" group,  A fear of rejection by the group,  A perceived access to information, or  A desire to obtain a reward from the group.  Group polarization would thus seem to contradict or at least problematize the findings of earlier studies, a fact that led researchers on a quest to specify under what circumstances this tendency toward greater extremes appeared.
  • 8. Social Interaction in Groups  Conformity….. toward greater extremes appeared.  Some have theorized that the earlier studies showing a preference for conformity toward an average may have been overstated.  Because earlier experiments that revealed a tendency toward conformity did not consider the impact of the subject matter that participants discussed, the tendency toward conformity might have revealed a lack of commitment to the subject at hand.  For example the Asch experiment asked subjects to pick which lines matched other lines; this was not a subject over which many would have invested emotions or felt a deep commitment.  Moscovici and Zavalloni (1969) found that if the subject of an experiment is anything that will cause participants to become personally involved — that is, if it is something that evokes meaning among group members — then group polarization is likely to result.
  • 9. Social Interaction in Groups  Applications  How Does Group Polarization Work?  There are two competing theories of the mechanism behind group polarization:  social comparison processes (Isenberg, 1986; Sanders & Baron, 1977) and  persuasive argumentation (Burnstein & Vinokur, 1977; Isenberg 1986).  Social Comparison  Social comparison theorists have developed two explanations for group polarization, both of which emphasize that individuals constantly compare themselves to the group to judge how they appear to others and to develop a sense of how they are doing socially.  One line of social comparison theory believes that observed polarization arises because individuals are ignorant of the beliefs of others.  Thus, when they initially state their opinions to the group they may soften their opinions in an attempt to strike a balance between their own views and their (wrongly estimated) assumptions about others'
  • 10. Social Interaction in Groups  Applications…. assumptions about others' opinions.  When they discover that the groups' opinions are different than assumed, they then adjust their own stated views to be closer to their actual beliefs, and therefore more extreme.  Other social comparison theorists believe that polarization arises from one-upmanship. They think that individuals want to be unique and to stand apart from others.