Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In groupthink theory, a mindguard is a member of a group who serves as an informational filter, providing limited information to the group and, consciously or subconsciously, utilizing a variety of strategies to control dissent and to direct the decision-making process toward a specific, limited range of possibilities. [1]
Groupthink occurs when the group members are familiar with each other and seek each other's approval, especially in stressful situations. The diffusion of responsibility contributes to groupthink as when the diffusion of responsibility is occurring within a group, each group member feels less of a responsibility to express his or her own ...
Groupthink is sometimes stated to occur (more broadly) within natural groups within the community, for example to explain the lifelong different mindsets of those with differing political views (such as "conservatism" and "liberalism" in the U.S. political context [7] or the purported benefits of team work vs. work conducted in solitude). [8]
Organizational dissent begins with a triggering event. This triggering event is what propels individuals to speak out and share their opinions about organizational practices or politics. An individual will consider the issue of dissent and whom it concerns before deciding what dissent strategy to use.
The idea of a "group mind" or "mob behavior" was first put forward by 19th-century social psychologists Gabriel Tarde and Gustave Le Bon.Herd behavior in human societies has also been studied by Sigmund Freud and Wilfred Trotter, whose book Instincts of the Herd in Peace and War is a classic in the field of social psychology.
Irving Lester Janis (May 26, 1918 – November 15, 1990) was an American research psychologist at Yale University and a professor emeritus at the University of California, Berkeley most famous for his theory of "groupthink", which described the systematic errors made by groups when making collective decisions.
The success of groupthink also hinges on the long-term homogeneity of the group, which seeks to keep that same cohesiveness and therefore to avoid all potential conflict. [13] However, while groupthink, to some extent, depends on the ability of individuals to perceive attitudes and desires of others, the Abilene paradox hinges on the in ability ...
Sally Fuller and Ramon Aldag argue that group decision-making models have been operating under too narrow of a focus due to the overemphasis of the groupthink phenomenon. [2] [3] [4] In addition, according to them, group decision-making has often been framed in relative isolation, ignoring context and real-world circumstances, which is a likely consequence of testing group decision-making in ...