In the movie of 12 Angry Men they used a lot of persuasion techniques. Like reframing, using cognitive dissonance theory, and inoculation theory as well. But the one that stuck out to me the most was the reframing the case by the main character in the story. In the first few minutes of the movie when the 12 jury men went to the room to discuss the case they all agreed that the boy was guilty with in minutes except one man.
Throughout the story he was trying to reframe the story to fit the case to show the boy could be insight and how the stories from the witness didn’t add up at all. By the main character doing this t changed the other men minds and helped provide the boy not guilty. But I think groupthink had a big impact in the whole process.
…show more content…
In easy words it means that a group of people can work together to come to good or even bad decision. By doing this it can minimize conflict and can reach a decision with out a lot of fighting. Groupthink made a huge impact in the story. The group of men came together to reach a decision and at first, they all had their own opinion on the case and didn’t really agree with each other till the end of the story. But prejudice and stereotyping has probably started them off with disagreeing at the start.
The definition of prejudice and stereotyping are similar in a way of they both mean judging someone or something because of how they look or what race or even their gender. I think the men judged the boy to quick because of how he looked, they must have thought he did it just because he looked like a criminal. Another one is when they were talking about the old lady giving her witness statement saying she saw the whole think. The men said she can’t be lying she a sweet old lady why would she lie about anything. Both of these examples show how prejudice and stereotypes can affect a court