New User Special Price Expires in

Let's log you in.

Sign in with Facebook


Don't have a StudySoup account? Create one here!


Create a StudySoup account

Be part of our community, it's free to join!

Sign up with Facebook


Create your account
By creating an account you agree to StudySoup's terms and conditions and privacy policy

Already have a StudySoup account? Login here

P 304

by: Kole Corwin

P 304 PSY

Kole Corwin
GPA 3.52

Scott Thompson

Almost Ready


These notes were just uploaded, and will be ready to view shortly.

Purchase these notes here, or revisit this page.

Either way, we'll remind you when they're ready :)

Preview These Notes for FREE

Get a free preview of these Notes, just enter your email below.

Unlock Preview
Unlock Preview

Preview these materials now for free

Why put in your email? Get access to more of this material and other relevant free materials for your school

View Preview

About this Document

Scott Thompson
Class Notes
25 ?




Popular in Course

Popular in Psychlogy

This 0 page Class Notes was uploaded by Kole Corwin on Sunday November 1, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to PSY at Indiana University taught by Scott Thompson in Fall. Since its upload, it has received 16 views. For similar materials see /class/233463/psy-indiana-university in Psychlogy at Indiana University.


Reviews for P 304


Report this Material


What is Karma?


Karma is the currency of StudySoup.

You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!

Date Created: 11/01/15
103009 Group Processes Norman Triplett 1898 Father of social psychology Published first empirical article within the domain of social psychology 0 Constructed experiment with bicycle performance alone or in groupwhen do they ride faster People rode faster when racing against other people rather than a clock Social Facilitation increase in performance as the result of being in the presence of other people Social lnhibition decrease in performance as the result of being in the presence of other people Mere Presence Explanation ZaioncI 19651 0 3 central tenants 0 Predisposed to physiological arousal Animals and humans are genetically predisposed to be aroused in the presence of Hans specifics o Arousal enhances dominant response Dominant response very well learned Social facilitation will be experienced if your good at something 0 Arousal inhibits nondominant response Dominant vs non is dependent on behavior Michaels experiment Observed regularly playing pool players In college billiard room Grad students stood next to pool table 0 For the dominant playerspeople who were good at pool 71 of the shots were made 0 Nondominant players people who weren t good 36 shots made 2 Then grad students actually stood next to the pool table and watched them play the game 0 Dominant players made 80 of shots performance increasedsocial facilitation 0 Non dominant players made 25performance decreasedsocial inhibition 39quot us with Zaionc s ar uments Evaluation Apprehension Cottrell 1968 o The concern for how others are evaluating us is what causes arousal and effects performance Round peg in round hole test 3 conditions 1 Performed alone 2 Others presentgt faster and better performance 3 Others present but blind foldedgt same as condition 1 for Cottrell For Zajonc condition 2 amp3 are the same No arousal no change in performance Also demonstrated in animals Ex cockroaches Distraction conflict theory Baron 1986 0 When working on task do I pay attention to task or specifics Distraction causes arousal which effects performance What to attend to 0 Conflict of attention 0 Conflict increases arousal Also applies to non social stimuli Ex talking about life All 3 arguments argue arousal effects performance and they all disagree on what causes arousal ALL MODELS ARE CORRECT Social inhibitionfacilitation occurs when person knows their individual performance can be evaluated Social Loafing Tendency for people to exert less effort when working in a group vs working alone Ringlmann 1933 employed dynamometer measures exerted force 0 Individuals pull alone then in a group People exerted less effort in a group People think only the group s performance can be evaluated M o Diffusion of responsibility sense that an individual in a group we are not responsible for the outcome 0 Freerider effect people in the group think their group will be successfulTheir individual contribution isn t needed o Sucker effect if you identify a freerider in group there is a tendency for another person in the group to perform like the freeriderWhy should I contribute to someone ese s work 0 Leads to social loafing again Less liker to occur if 0 Highly cohesive group lots of communication trust interactions closer bonds 0 Strong competition between groups you want the quotAquot Believing others in the group are exerting maximum effort or working their hardest Group is small smaller group less enmity People recognize contributions in small groups Expectation of punishment Task is important meaningful Ex How to get people to work efficiently on assembly line with other people Make them think their individual performance can be evaluated Ex get old video cameras that don t even have to work This will make them think they are being watched and evaluated at all times Deindividuation Loss of individuality self awareness and a lessening of restraints with regards to deviant behavior There are degrees of Deindividuation severe end riotslynching Doing things you wouldn t normally do Halloween smashing pumpkins egging houses stealing candy trespassing 0 elements V physiological arousal If there is risk involved V diminished responsibility V anonymity darkness masks being geographically away 0 Why does Deindividuation occur V Loss of personal identity takes away your sense of self your behavior becomes less and less guided by your own valuesbelieves It is instead guided by the group V Loss of individuality Adoption of a new identity I Basement of Stanford into a mock prison people were screened for instability drug use etc Tried to get the most stable people he could 0 He assigned the role of PrisonerGuard o If Prisoner you are picked up from police department taken to police department blind folded then told you are going to be transferred to a different facility basement When you arrive you are stripped and given a new jail outfit lf Guard Spiffy uniform night stick and sunglasses Only one set of instructions conduct a count 3 times a day Janitors closet becomes hole of sanitary confinement Scheduled to last 3 weeks By the 5 h day things were getting out of control Guards were more abusive prisoners were to write their given namesevery single one of them wrote their prisoner number 0 They were losing their identity 0 social amp situational factors 0 Lack of selfawareness We don t think of ourselves as separate entities We don t attend to our own values or beliefs Ed Daner University of Washington Halloween candy study 0000 Arriving alone Arriving in group More likely to take more candy Asked who you are you re name etc Eliminates your extra candy taking Bowl of candy and mirror behind bowl Eliminates extra candy taking 1961 President Robert Kennedy and Eisenhower Proposed invasion of Cuba Kennedy s cabinet smartest collection of people in politics met to decide whether or not to execute Eisenhower s plan they decided to proceed 1400 Cuban exiles trained them and gave them guns April 17 h 1961 1400 exiles invaded Cuba 0 Within hours all 1400 were captured or killed Kennedy says quothow could we have been so stupid 1986 Nasa launches spaceship Challenger o In the morning do we launch the space shuttle in sub freezing weather Engineers warned them not to Nasa made a group decision to go ahead and launch 73 seconds after the launch everybody was killed Groupthink A faulty decision making process as the result of the group s emphasis on concurrent seeking The group thinks it s more important that everyone agree than it is to be correct 0 Antecedents I N 04 Group Cohesiveness The more cohesive the group the greater the tendency to try and agree Upsetting the cohesiveness of the group is worse than making a correct decision Structural and proceduralfaults How the group works as a unit I Structural faults as homogeneity I Procedural faults as isolation from outside sources Group isolates itself from information without the group Don t examine alternatives I Strong or directive leader Threatening Situation Group believes it has to make an immediate decision Valuing speed over accuracy 0 Symptoms How can you tell if a group of people are experiencing group think 1 2 3 Overestimations of one s ingroup I Illusion of invulnerability The group believes it can do no wrong I Intrinsic morality of group The group believes it is morally superior CloseMindedness I Collective rationalization Justifying past decisions I Shared common stereotypes Increased Conformity Pressure If there is disagreement in the group direct pressure to agree will occur I Direct pressure on dissenters Selfcensorship privately you do not agree publically you go along with it Illusion of unanimity Because of direct pressure and self censorship it appears everyone is unanimous I Mindguards Keep conflicting outside information away from the group 0 Prevention How do you keep a group from making faulty decisions 1 91550 Nonopinionated leader Outside consultants Reassessment Stop trying to justify previous decisions Reasses your current decision Devil s advocate Someone to argue the groupchalenge them Subdivide This would give a few different ideas instead of one collective idea More likely to express disagreement in small group Village Pantry Robbing o If you confess you will get a moderate sentence your friend will get the maximum penalty o If your friend confesses and you don t vice versa o If both of you confess some penalty between the two You and your friend should say absolutely nothing You should confess Social dilemmas Individual behavior within a group that pits individual self interest against the collective benefit 0 Self interested choice hurts everyone in the group 0 Pursuit of individual self interest Titanic s life boats not being filled Prisoner s dilemma The relationships between choosing to cooperate or to compete o Cooperate If we both cooperate we will walk out Both could have mutually benefited o Compete Do compete to avoid the maximum penalty Overwhelming majority will choose to confess even though it is not the best choice Both lose Resource Dilemmas o llTragedy of the commons Cows Solving social dilemmas o psychological factors Personal characteristics How they interact with other people I Cooperative orientation If you have a cooperative orientation you are a person who is interested in maximizing the benefits of everyone you want to see the entire group do well Least likely experience a social dilemma Individualistic orientation Interested in maximizing their own benefits with no benefit to other people I Competitive orientation Maximizing their own benefits relative to other people in the group It is okay if others benefit as long as benefit more Trust Do you trust your friend to be quiet Prison Dilemma If you did trust you friend you would always both mutually benefit If you can build trust less likely to experience a social dilemma Situational factors Do you perceive yourself as an individual or do you perceive yourself as a group Do you interact with that group V Information about others If you know that other people are doing their best to conserve a resource then you are more likely to conserve the resource If you know other people are gouging that resource you are more likely to do the same V Most social dilemmas occur at large scale populations Structural factors How the group is structured V Authority to control resources Establish an authority to control the resource We have a number of such agencies in the United States What happens if they fail 9 lose money and protection V Make smaller groups If I have a common that supports 100 cowsDivide the commons into lots V Communication If you have a group of people there is potential they will view themselves as separate entities If you get them to communicate they will perceive themselves as part of the group


Buy Material

Are you sure you want to buy this material for

25 Karma

Buy Material

BOOM! Enjoy Your Free Notes!

We've added these Notes to your profile, click here to view them now.


You're already Subscribed!

Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'

Why people love StudySoup

Steve Martinelli UC Los Angeles

"There's no way I would have passed my Organic Chemistry class this semester without the notes and study guides I got from StudySoup."

Anthony Lee UC Santa Barbara

"I bought an awesome study guide, which helped me get an A in my Math 34B class this quarter!"

Bentley McCaw University of Florida

"I was shooting for a perfect 4.0 GPA this semester. Having StudySoup as a study aid was critical to helping me achieve my goal...and I nailed it!"

Parker Thompson 500 Startups

"It's a great way for students to improve their educational experience and it seemed like a product that everybody wants, so all the people participating are winning."

Become an Elite Notetaker and start selling your notes online!

Refund Policy


All subscriptions to StudySoup are paid in full at the time of subscribing. To change your credit card information or to cancel your subscription, go to "Edit Settings". All credit card information will be available there. If you should decide to cancel your subscription, it will continue to be valid until the next payment period, as all payments for the current period were made in advance. For special circumstances, please email


StudySoup has more than 1 million course-specific study resources to help students study smarter. If you’re having trouble finding what you’re looking for, our customer support team can help you find what you need! Feel free to contact them here:

Recurring Subscriptions: If you have canceled your recurring subscription on the day of renewal and have not downloaded any documents, you may request a refund by submitting an email to

Satisfaction Guarantee: If you’re not satisfied with your subscription, you can contact us for further help. Contact must be made within 3 business days of your subscription purchase and your refund request will be subject for review.

Please Note: Refunds can never be provided more than 30 days after the initial purchase date regardless of your activity on the site.