Psychology for Dummies (49 page)

“There’s no I in TEAM!” A lot of coaches use this line in their pep talks, trying to convey the idea that the better a team plays together, the better their results will be. Social psychologists have found that this idea is true to a certain extent. When we’re in the presence of others, we’re more aroused and energized, and dominant behaviors are strengthened. This phenomenon is called
social facilitation.

Robert Zajoncin found that when we do something relatively simple and routine, being in the presence of others improves our performance. But when a task is complex, having others around can hinder our performance. So, it may be a good idea to conduct that calculus contest somewhere other than Madison Square Garden. Although, tug of war is probably okay.

When I was in junior high school, teachers often asked me to participate in group projects. It usually went something like this: Four less-motivated students would pair up with the smart kid and let the smart kid do all of the work. These motivationally challenged pupils would then ascribe their names to the project in order to get the credit. This is an example of
social loafing
— the tendency for people to put out less energy and effort when engaged in a group task that ignores individual accountability.

Psychologists Latane, Kipling, Williams, and Harkins found, for example, that when people were put in groups of six and instructed to clap as loud as they possibly could, the amount of noise produced was less than that of one person clapping alone. People “loaf” when engaged in activities as groups. These loafers are
free riders
who rest on the efforts of other people in the group, kind of like those people who just mouth the words in the school choir. Hey, if I’m not being watched, then why should I exert myself? I won’t get credit for my individual effort anyway.

Ever wonder why groups of people who do really awful things often wear uniforms? Take the Ku Klux Klan for example. What’s with the pointy hats? Researchers have found that diminishing individual identity and diffusing individual responsibility reduces people’s inhibitions. This reduction of inhibitions can result in people doing things that they may not do if they were alone or more easily identifiable. When this happens, they become
deindividuated.

A certain amount of freedom seems to accompany blending into a crowd or being anonymous. Maybe, we’re less afraid of getting caught. Children have been found to steal more when they are deindividuated. It seems that anonymity and a lack of unique identification facilitate antisocial behavior — something to think about when you consider how anonymous American society really is. Some of us don’t even know our next-door neighbors.

Groups can have both positive and negative effects on individual behavior. We may perform some tasks better when working within a group and be lazier while performing others. In 1971 Janis introduced another potentially adverse effect of group participation, a phenomenon known as
groupthink.
When groups work to suppress disagreement and dissent in order to maintain group harmony, they are engaged in groupthink.

Dissent can sometimes threaten the cohesiveness of a group. When people start expressing ideas contrary to the group’s views, the group sometimes reacts negatively. Galileo was one of the most famous victims of groupthink in history. He discovered evidence regarding the solar system that challenged the prevailing thought of the day. Did he receive high praise and honors? Not quite! He was locked away in prison for being a heretic, a dissenter.

Groups work hard, both consciously and unconsciously, to prevent dissent. Janis identified eight symptoms of groupthink that can be present in a group:

Groupthink can cause a lot of problems. Alternatives to the status quo may go unexamined, thus preventing a complete survey of any problem at hand. Risks may be ignored. Overall, the decisions that a group makes can be compromised.

Some ways to avoid groupthink are to