Results of negative or harmful behaviors
Being apart of a group or crowd can change behavior because individuals form attitudes based on the collective nature of the group. According to Branscombe (2016), deindividuation indicates a psychological state characterized by reduced self-awareness, brought on by external conditions such as being an anonymous member of a large crowd. Many people just want to fit into the crowd, which makes them act in a way to be accepted by the crowd. In most cases, no one wants to feel like the odd ball in crowd. Deindividuation leads to greater normative behavior, for instance, when we are part of a large crowd we are more likely to obey the norms of this group (Branscombe, 2016). Deindividuation can lead to positive outcomes if the group is non destructive. If a person attaches themselves to a productive group with positive influence, it could be a good thing for the members involved. Experiencing deindividuation does not necessarily lead to negative or harmful behaviors, It simply increases the likelihood that crowd members will follow the norms of the group, which might be of “showing respect” (Branscombe, 2016). A way to encourage members of a crowd to behave in line with their normal values, is by reminding them that their true responses could indeed influence another in the group to gain a more positive perspective. After viewing an individual’s performance over different questions, some people are more likely to be affected by social influence than others (Granovskiy, 2015). To ensure they are not affected in a less than positive way, being themselves will assist them in not be influenced heavily.
7-2 KK (200 words with 1 reference)
Deindividuation is a term utilized to express a psychological state described by decreased self-awareness created on by foreign conditions such as being a unidentified representative of a vast group (Branscombe & Baron, 2016). Originally, deindividuation represented that being in a vast crowd causes individuals unidentified and causes them appear less guilty for their efforts which can support standoffish conduct; however, more recent analysis indicates that deindividuation actually contributes to higher normative action (Branscombe & Baron, 2016). When we are a part of a vast group, we are very inclined to adhere to the rules of that group, nevertheless what those rules might be. Being a part of a vast group and having individuation appears not necessarily mean that negative results will derive from it and the text gives examples of being in vast crowds that are looking at times of silence for someone or groups of individuals demonstrating appreciation and quietly weeping (ie: mass murder sites like school shootings) (Branscombe & Baron, 2016). Alternative examples the text gives as a case is serious events and working with one another to achieve a goal-rescuing individuals trapped in a construction (Branscombe & Baron, 2016). We can inspire members of a crowd to act in line with their typical values when we keep each individual liable for their acts and make it known that they will be.
7-1 KK (200 words with 1 reference)
Groupthink takes place when a group of well-intentioned individuals create unreasonable or non-optimal choices that are driven by the impulse to comply or the discouragement of resistance. This ambiguous or incomplete consent may be incited by a plan or solely because group members value peace and integrity above logical understanding. In a groupthink case, group members avoid expressing fears and judgments or disagreeing with the harmony. In the interest of establishing a judgment that promotes their group purpose, members may avoid any proper or moralistic consequences. The variables across individual conflicts among people have the qualities that individuals have toward hostility (Cherry, 2018).
Several elements can affect this psychological experience. It tends to take place more in cases where group members are particularly similar to one another and it is very feasible to take place when a forceful and appealing leader directions the group. Cases where the group is put under severe stress or where moral problems occur further raise the manifestation of groupthink (Cherry, 2018).
Invite individuals from diverse divisions, specifically those who will be influenced by results being carried out. Even if they can’t show up to the session, contact others within the company to learn their criticism – they won’t be affected by the group’s views and may be extremely inclined to give independent points of view and suggestions.
Plan for it, any risk strategy should consist of a means to observe and cut developing groupthink. It doesn’t mean you expect the group will break down – but that it’s desirable to deal with the issue right away rather than avoid it.
