Group polarization

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Group polarization (Engl. Group polarization ) is a term used in social psychology and refers to the observation that the views of individuals after discussion are often more extreme than before. If a majority of the group already had a common tendency before the discussion, this is reinforced by the discussion.

An investigation of US jury rulings showed that in 215 out of 225 cases the first vote before the deliberation already tended to be “guilty” or “not guilty” and that the (unanimous) verdict was exactly the same in 209 of these 215 cases . The result of a group discussion, for example the opinion on the amount of a fine or the tax increase, turns out to be more extreme under certain conditions than the average positions / tendencies of the individual group members before the discussion. If the group polarization results in a decision that was riskier than expected, one also speaks of a risk boost . However, group polarization can also lead to a more cautious, conservative decision.

Explanation of group polarization

One explanation of the phenomenon is the convincing argument model : before the discussion, each individual knows some arguments, on the basis of which his view tends in a certain direction. However, these arguments are often different. If they are mentioned in the conversation, each individual hears further reasons that speak for his or her tendency.

The social comparison theory explains the phenomenon with the desire of individuals to be liked by the group. Whoever takes a certain tendency from the statements of the others presents himself as a particularly exemplary group member by representing it to a greater extent.

Both explanations were supported by subsequent research.

See also

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ S. Moscovici, M. Zavalloni: The group as a polarizer of attitudes. In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Volume 12, No. 2, 1969, pp. 125-135.
  2. ^ H. Kalven, H. Zeisel: The American jury. University of Chicago Press, London 1966.
  3. ^ E. Aronson , TD Wilson, RM Akert: Social Psychology. 6th edition. Pearson Studium, 2008, ISBN 978-3-8273-7359-5 , p. 293.
  4. ^ Sentis Burnstein: Attitude polarization in groups. In: R. Petty, TM Ostrom, TC Brock (Eds.): Cognitive responses in persuasion. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ 1981, pp. 197-216.
  5. ↑ Vinokur Burnstein: Persuasive argumentation and social comparison as determinants of attitude polarization. In: Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. Volume 13, 1977, pp. 315-332.
  6. ↑ J. Blascovich, GP Ginsburg, TL Veach: A pluralistic explanation of choice shifts on the risk dimension. In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Volume 31, 1975, pp. 422-429.
  7. ^ DJ Isenberg: Group polarization: A critical review and meta-analysis. In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Volume 50, 1986, pp. 1141-1151.
  8. ↑ YES Zuber u. a: Choice shift and group polarization: An analysis of the status of arguments and social decision schemes. In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol. 62, 1992, pp. 50-61.

literature

  • Ch. Stangor: Social Groups in Action and Interaction. Pachology Press, New York / Hove 2004, pp. 202-209.
  • W. Stroebe, K. Jonas, M. Hewstone: Social Psychology. An introduction. Springer 2002.
  • H. Lamm, DG Myers: Group-induced polarization of attitudes and behavior. In: L. Berkowitz (Ed.): Advances in experimental social psychology. (Academic Press, NY). Vol. 11, 1978, pp. 145-195.
  • DM Mackie: Social identification effects in group polarization. In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Volume 50, 1986, pp. 720-728.
  • DM Mackie, J. Cooper: Group polarization: The effects of group membership. In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Volume 46, 1984, pp. 575-585.