GROUPTHINK
During psychologist Henri Tajfel’s experiments
in the 1970s, he discovered a phenomenon
called “social identity theory.”
He found that people will not just show allegiance to groups based on what many might regard as meaningful criteria, they will show allegiance to groups based on meaningless, arbitrary and unimportant criteria like shared hair color or being randomly assigned to a group by an experimenter.
Groups are created and led by individuals. And leaders often emerge from within the groups.In the 1990s, psychologist Michael Hogg found that group members often fail to choose the best and the brightest as their leaders. Instead, they will choose individuals that the group members can identify with. This can sometimes be the most average person in the group.
By defining their group in exclusive terms (“White Nationalists” or “Black Panthers”), leaders can reinforce the group’s social identity and build power.
This is why racism and nationalism are often effective political strategies. They are used to reinforce group identities.
Experts used to think that groups make more rational and conservative decisions than individuals. The idea was that group decisions would reflect the consensus of the group (the average position of all the group’s members), thereby diluting extremist views.In 1961, James Stoner released a groundbreaking study that has since been replicated hundreds of times with different groups. These studies show that groups actually make more polarized decisions than individuals do.
Group decisions often accentuate the
extreme biases held by group members.
In the early 1970s, Yale University psychologist Irving Janis found that certain conditions can lead to a particularly extreme form of polarization called “groupthink” during which an illusion of consensus takes over.Factors that lead to groupthink include members being close-knit and like-minded, a group leader who makes his or her position known and the group being shut off from other influences and opinions.
If you pay attention, you will see this happening all around you.Universities that have predominantly conservative or liberal faculty members, which discourage or limit speakers with alternative views on campus, create a fertile environment for groupthink. Political parties that promote certain views and are less receptive to alternative perspectives promote groupthink. Companies whose ownership or leadership openly supports certain beliefs, and not others, also promote groupthink.
Groupthink is dangerous because it can lead to bad decisions and even the widespread adoption and normalization of extremist views.
