Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
The power of conformity
The power of conformity
Comittee and group decision making
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The power of conformity
The power of conformity
Comittee and group decision making
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In the realistic fiction book, “The Outsiders” by S.E. HINTON, a war between the Socs and the Greasers is getting more intense by the day as the rich, snobby Socs gang up on the struggling, hardened Greasers leaving them with no choice but to surprise the Socs with a bloody surprise. Unfortunately, this gory accident forces some Greasers to run and go into hiding relying on their fellow Greasers to help them out but things don’t always go their way as they would quickly learn. All the evidence is leaning towards the answer that it is more beneficial to be a part of a group than to be an individual. It is more beneficial to be a part of a group because when you’re in a group they can protect you and stand up for you. Group members protecting and standing up for each other is evidenced in the book when Johnny kills Bob because he and his gang of Socs started drowning Ponyboy.
Due to groupthink a person that accepts the goals and means of the society will most likely disregard the means after being subject to the ideals of a group of deviants for a long period of time. Due to these many reasons, of which there are many more, it should be understood and mentally maintained that while there may always be choices, there may not be any good choices
In “The Genocidal Killer in the Mirror”, Crispin Sartwell argues that the average citizen can be convinced to commit atrocious crimes under the right circumstances from the premise that the traits to become a genocidal killer are not that uncommon, using examples from recent history such as the Holocaust in Nazi Germany and the Rwandan Genocide. Sartwell clarifies that although most people delude themselves into thinking that they wouldn’t partake in genocide if they were placed in a similar situation as many have before, it would take a “moral hero” (Sartwell 118) to refuse the opportunity given the circumstances. On the other hand, in “Just Do What the Pilot Tells You”, author Theodore Dalrymple claims that people's response to authority in respect to their obedience is what leads the average man to kill countless others. While both authors address the fact that it doesn’t take a malicious person to engage in genocide, Sartwell focuses more on the qualities that people who commit genocide commonly share, Dalrymple seems more concerned on how people react to authority in
Ian Parker, author of “Obedience”, provides accurate depictions of the immediate and long-term effects of Dr. Stanley Milgram’s Experiment. In addition, he includes that under complex situations, individuals are easily induced to react through a destructive manner (Parker103). Americans commonly underestimate the influences of a situation; however, Parker thoroughly delineates the consequences behind blind obedience (Parker 104). Herbert C. Kelman and V. Lee Hamilton, authors of “The My Lai Massacre: A Military Crime of Obedience” construe the atrocity of blind obedience committed by the United States Military. In March of 1968, crimes of obedience occurred due to an elusive order commanded by a higher ranked officer (Kelman&Hamilton 131).
This is how groupthink is displayed because as said in the text, it was impossible to not join in. The way people were supposed to act was already somehow planned into their brains. They weren’t
Mob mentality is a term used to describe how certain negative characteristics surface when people are combined in large groups (Smith). Mobs usually portray an aggressive image, since people feed off of other’s negative emotions toward the victim of the mob. People were influenced by mob mentality for many reasons. Being apart of a mob alters people’s thinking, since they feel invincible whilst in the middle of a mob (Edmonds). People think that if they are in a group of people they will not be held responsible for the crime being committed (Edmonds).
When people are in a group, they feel more anonymous, and less likely to be caught doing something wrong. A concept that Arthur Miller shows clearly in The Crucible. According to the article this causes people to feel superior and untouchable. As the “grouping” article states “They may also feel a diminished sense of personal responsibility for collective actions.” Because of a person’s fear of being responsible for wrong doing, indulging in such groups makes them feel as though they will not be caught or they feel seemingly invincible from penalty.
In recent years, we have had a series of events that have sparked outrage across our world. This outrage sometimes leads to an issue I have in contemporary culture: mob mentality. “Herd mentality”, or more commonly known as “mob mentality” refers to how people lose their self-awareness and moral code when they are with a group of people. Mob mentality usually drives people to do things they wouldn’t normally do, such as jumping someone, Whether it be a large amount of people online harassing an artist or a movement that has been tainted by the aggressive nature of some, herd/mob mentality has become a more prevalent and pressing issue in the 21st century.
Conformity and group mentality are major aspects of social influence that have governed some of the most notorious events and experiments in history. The Holocaust is a shocking example of group mentality, or groupthink, which states that all members of the group must support the group’s decisions strongly, and all evidence leading to the contrary must be ignored. Social norms are an example of conformity on a smaller scale, such as tipping your waiter or waitress, saying please and thank you, and getting a job and becoming a productive member of society. Our society hinges on an individual’s inherent need to belong and focuses on manipulating that need in order to create compliant members of society by using the ‘majority rules’ concept. This
Therefore, Source E explains that people who want to find new ways of thinking and acting are prone to mob mentality because taking part in the ideologies of new groups as “anonymous members” can act as a starting point, or “middle ground”. This is common among people that don’t want to totally abandon their old behavior and lifestyle. The other common cause of mob mentality, diffusion of responsibility, is the perception that being in a group somehow takes away the individual responsibility of a person. Source D tells the reader that “people believe they won’t be held responsible for their actions if they think they are anonymous.” While anonymity never overrides responsibility, this phenomenon is present in everyone’s unconscious mind.
Milgram himself concluded how easily ordinary people ‘can become agents in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority". (Milgram 1974) As this report has highlighted the research is not without controversy with many questioning to what extent Milgram’s experiment is true to real life and has been criticized for not highlighting further situational variables in determining obedience to authority. Regardless of this, there is no doubt Milgram highlighted a rather troubling phenomenon.
It is a natural human instinct to want to be acknowledge by your peers, yet it is also important to be a critical thinker. Irving Janis in 1972 created the term groupthink. He believed groupthink occurs inside a group of similar people that want to keep from being different, resulting in incoherent decision-making. The 1957 film "12 Angry Men," uses groupthink, which influenced the verdict vote in the case of a teenager accused of murdering his father. The purpose of this essay is to examine groupthink and to represent Dr. Irving Janis’ symptoms of groupthink in the film.
“Collective fear stimulates herd instinct, and tends to produce ferocity toward those who are not regarded as members of the herd” (Bertrand Russell). Humans are very social beings, so we feel the need to be a part of a group in which we are accepted for our personalities or beliefs. Since the beginning of time we have formed specific groups, and once we concede to the herd mentality, we can be directed and controlled by only a few people. The bystander effect and authority figure obedience are worldwide known social psychological phenomena that have shaped the history of the human race. These factors were present specifically during World War Two, and it majorly affected the outcome of it.
Group think According to Janis, who coined the term; groupthink “occurs when a group makes faulty decisions because group pressures lead to a deterioration of mental efficiency, reality testing, and moral judgment” (1972, p. 9) further group think often leads to a decrease in the mental efficacy perception of reality and moral judgement, as personages find themselves in a group system that seeks high cohesion and unanimity which delimits the motivation of the individual to realistically appraise alternate courses of action (Janis, 1972). A common trait of a collective experiencing this phenomenon, is an inclination to take irrational decision making in addition to members of the group being similar in background and further being insulated from external insight. Comparably the singularity of groupthink is present in the film 12 Angry Men, and appears anecdotally, early on the film, present in the expected unanimous vote of ‘guilty,’ that will send the defendant to the electric chair. Invulnerability Literature surrounding the concept of group think is greatly rooted in the writings of Janis.
Psychologist Irving Janis explained some alarmingly bad decisions made by governments and businesses coined the term "groupthink”, which he called "fiascoes.” He was particularly drawn to situations where group pressure seemed to result in a fundamental failure to think. Therefore, Janis further analyzed that it is a quick and easy way to refer to a mode of thinking people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members ' striving for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action. According to Janis, groupthink is referred as the psychological drive for consensus at any cost that suppresses disagreement and prevents the appraisal of alternatives in cohesive decision-making groups.