Upload
nikhil-sawant
View
232
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
7/24/2019 Loafing 2011
1/14
Do people try less hard when working in groups?
If so, why do they do so?
Ringleman Efect--- (e.g., with rope pulling task)
The average performance (input) of individuals decreasesasgroup size increases
Why?
a) Less effort
b) Coordination issues
Social Loang
7/24/2019 Loafing 2011
2/14
Ringelmann Findings
Individuals IndividualEfforts(Sum)
GroupEffort
Group/Individual Ratio
1-7 764 480 .63
8-14 516 432 .84
15-21 533.7 435.4 .82
22-28 575.5 471.2 .82
15-28 1109.2 858.9 .78
7/24/2019 Loafing 2011
3/14
Subject 1 Subject 2 Sum Dyaderformance
60.0 114.0 174.0 180.0
85.2 79.2 164.4 120.0
97.2 78.0 175.2 174.0
72.0 81.6 153.6 156.0
84.0 78.0 162.0 132.0
54.0 72.0 126.0 140.4
78.0 88.8 168.8 144.0
78.0 102.0 180.0 152.4
78.0 86.4 164.0 122.4
72.0 69.6 141.6 110.4
Ringelmann Findings (cont)
7/24/2019 Loafing 2011
4/14
Yelling (& clapping) studies by Latane, Williams,& Harins
Alone
In actual groups
In pseudo-groups
Less indi!idual efort"#en in groups, e!enin $groups% "#en no
one "as present (butpeople t#oug#t t#ey"ere)
7/24/2019 Loafing 2011
5/14
10
8
6
4
2
Soundpressure
perperson
1 2 6
Group sie
Reduced effort
(Social loafing)
Coordination lo
!otential "roducti#it$
!eudo-grou"
%ctual grou"
7/24/2019 Loafing 2011
6/14
W#y less efort (loang)W#y less efort (loang)
' Epectation t#at ot#ers are trying (or "ill try)less #ard (euity)
' *ptimi+ing goal setting, rat#er t#an maimi+ing
' Less social pressure on eac# indi!idual groupmember
' Less contingency bet"een indi!idual inputs andoutputs (indi!iduals in groups cannot be
identiedanonymous)
7/24/2019 Loafing 2011
7/14
Social Pressure
7/24/2019 Loafing 2011
8/14
7/24/2019 Loafing 2011
9/14
7/24/2019 Loafing 2011
10/14
30
27
24
21
18
15
Performance Alone
Group
16.5
24.5
United States srael !"ina
23.3
20.8
23.8
18.5
!ountr#
Social Loafing Across Cultures
7/24/2019 Loafing 2011
11/14
Isolated, cohesive,homogeneous
decision-makinggroup
Lack of impartial
leadership
High stress
Closed-mindedness
Rationalization
Suelching dissent
!"indguards#
$eelings ofrighteousness
and invulnera%ilit&
Self-censorship
Incompletee'amination of
alternatives
$ailure to
e'amine risksand conseuences
Incomplete searchfor information
The Stages of GroupthinkThe Stages of GroupthinkWhat are the causes and consequences of
groupthink?
Poor
decisions
ConseuencesS#stems ofS#stems ofGroupt"in$Groupt"in$
AntecedentAntecedent
!onditions!onditions
Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYpbStMyz_Ihttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYpbStMyz_Ihttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYpbStMyz_I7/24/2019 Loafing 2011
12/14
7/24/2019 Loafing 2011
13/14
(ther )roup *ecision-"aking Phenomena
Collective +ntrapment!!! The more effort used to ma"e a decision# thegreater li"elihood of stic"ing to that decision (even if it$s been sho%n to beincorrect)
Common noledge +ffect!!! &nformation held by most groupmembers e'erts a stronger impact on final decisions
7/24/2019 Loafing 2011
14/14
Leadership st&le(impartial# use of outside input)
.rainstorming/
0ominal )roup 1echniue efine the problem
&ndividuals anonymously generate solutions
*olutions presented to the group (no evaluation allo%ed)
+roup rates solutions
,est solution is chosen (vote# consensus)
Ways to Improve Group Decision-Making