Psychology of Group Influence

Second Edition

Paul B. Paulus

• Publisher: Psychology Press
• Year: 2015
• ISBN:
  9781317504313
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Psychology
• Subtopic: History & Theory in Psychology
• Index: Psychology

Originally published in 1989, this title showcased new developments, providing a systematic and in-depth overview of some of the basic issues in the field of group psychology. Subject areas range from basic group processes to complex interactive phenomena. There are international contributions, with chapters covering the latest developments in the field at the time. The volume provided students and professionals with a comprehensive, coherent, and interrelated picture of the broad scope of group influence processes. The volume was motivated by the belief that group psychology is a central and important activity for social psychology.

1 An Overview and Evaluation of Group Influence

Paul B. Paulus
University of Texas at Arlington

Some Background and Perspectives

What is the psychology of group influence? Frankly, we have been rather arbitrary in our choice of issues to reflect this topic. Any topic that examines social influence processes in groups can be seen as fitting within this category, and in this volume we have by no means exhausted the range of issues that could fit under this umbrella. However, we have tried to focus on some of the major topics and some of the exciting new developments that have not been adequately covered in prior publications.

The study of the psychology of group influence is an interesting and fundamental area of study. It deals with a whole range of intriguing questions about how individuals are influenced by the groups to which they belong or with whom they are involved, and how these groups are in turn influenced by their members. How do groups influence our performance of various tasks? How do we react to the spatial distances among group members? What happens when we become emotionally involved in groups? How do certain environmental conditions affect group behavior? How do newcomers become fullfledged members of a group? How do groups react to those who disagree with the majority view? What determines how members see themselves as part of a group? How do groups make decisions or come to a consensus about an issue? How do the different ways in which decisions are reached influence group member satisfaction? How can groups work together to remember events they have experienced? What are some of the ways in which we incorporate part of the group experience into our own identity? These are just some of the issues that are addressed in Psychology of Group Influence.

The study of psychology of group influence has a long and distinguished record in social psychology. The very first experimental study in social psychology was concerned with the influence of other presence (Triplett, 1898). Some of the classic studies in social psychology fall within the confines of group influence. Sherif's work on norms (Sherif, 1936) and intergroup conflict (Sherif & Sherif, 1953), the research by Lewin and his colleagues (e.g., Lewin, Lippet, & White, 1939), Asch's (1956) work on conformity, Schachter's (1951) studies of reactions to deviates are just a few examples. In the late 60s and early 70s the social facilitation (Chapter 2), the bystander intervention (Latane & Darley, 1970), and group polarization (Chapter 8) phenomena generated a lot of excitement and research activity. Although, there appeared to be decline in overall activity in the area of groups during the 1960s and 1970s (Steiner, 1974), there were a significant number of exciting new developments in the area of group influence in the late 1970s. Many of these were highlighted in the first edition of Psychology of Group Influence (Paulus, 1980).

Steiner (1974, 1983, 1986) has written a number of interesting analyses of factors related to activity level in the area of groups. He has suggested that the time-consuming nature of the research and the lack of interesting theoretical issues may have accounted for some of the reduction in interest in the past 30 years. He also suggested that interest level in groups research may reflect the extent to which societal events lead social scientists to focus on the importance of group dynamics in human affairs. Frankly, it is difficult to evaluate the health of research in the area of groups. It would seem to be true that the proportionate level of activity on groups has declined since the early days. However, this would seem inevitable since there were only a small number of research social psychologists and many of them happened to be investigating topics on groups. As the number of social psychologists increased, the diversity of topics addressed naturally increased. This same trend continues today, with social psychologists addressing an ever wider range of basic and applied issues. So on a relative as well as absolute basis, one would expect any standard topic to experience some attrition of research interest.

There appears to be little disagreement that research on groups in social psychology reached a low point during the heyday of dissonance, attribution, and social cognition. However, at present, the level of activity on intergroup behavior and intragroup processes is strong in both the U.S. and Western Europe. Furthermore, this activity seems to be driven by a variety of interesting ideas and theories. If one considers the activities of group scholars in the fields of management and organizational behavior, clinical psychology, health, criminal justice, environmental psychology, and families as part of the set of group research, the activity level today is quite impressive. Even in the more restrictive domain of experimental social psychology, there appears to be a high level of interest in groups (cf. Hendrick, 1987a, 1987b).

Research activity in social psychology is driven by theoretical ideas and empirical phenomena. Sometimes a provocative empirical finding generates a large amount of research designed to understand its underlying features and limitations (e.g., bystander intervention). At other times, a theory tends to generate a broad range of ideas and research (e.g., dissonance theory). In most cases, it is some combination of interesting findings and provocative ideas that lead to the stimulation of a high degree of research activity. In this light, it is interesting to note one difference between much of the old research on groups and the new look in groups. The old research focused primarily on empirically documenting the various features of a group phenomenon. Although the basic phenomena were often quite provocative, the research generated was often not motivated by interesting theoretical ideas. Certainly, there was a testing of hypotheses about the role of various factors in the phenomena, but the research was phenomena driven rather than theory driven. In contrast, research in the 50s through 70s in some of the more active areas of social psychology can be seen as primarily theory driven (e.g., dissonance, attribution). It seems that ideas play a stronger role in sustaining a broad range of research activity in social psychology than empirical phenomena. In this light it is of interest that much of the recent excitement in group psychology as reflected in this volume centers around ideas as well as phenomena.

I would venture, however, that the study of groups will never become the dominant activity of academic social psychologists. There are a number of factors inherent in research on groups that will limit the number of scholars who will become engrossed in this topic. Research on groups often is expensive in terms of time and subjects. In an environment where number of publications in respectable journals is taken as a primary indicant of success, the incentive value of groups research is rather low. This makes group research an unlikely choice for graduate students and young scholars unless they have a strong intrinsic interest in the subject matter. Another problem with group research is the relative paucity of provocative theoretical issues. Although there have always been some interesting theoretical issues, other topic areas seemed to generate a larger number of interesting or counterintuitive hypotheses (e.g., interpersonal attraction, attitudes, social cognition). One reason for this may be that it is easier to come up with hypotheses about processes at the level of one individual since our subjective experiences and personal introspections provide a wealth of data. Our personal intuitions and introspections may be less useful for conceptualizing processes at the group level.

Even though the level of activity may be moderate, it is likely that groups research will always be a solid part of the overall enterprise in social psychology. This may in part reflect the influence of societal forces as suggested by Steiner. However, there are many who are convinced that groups represent one of the most fundamentally unique concerns of social psychology. As noted by Berger in Steiner (1986), many subareas of social psychology (e.g., social learning and social cognition) derive much of their sustenance from other disciplines in psychology, and as these areas develop, they may become indistinguishable from their core disciplines. The study of groups, however, is an activity of social psychology not inevitably reducible to the concerns of other topic areas. In addition, most social processes occur in group contexts and a full understanding of their role in social behavior requires an examination of the issues at the level of groups. Moreover, research on groups typically involves some degree of realistic social activity-either as part of the procedures or of the measures employed. It is thus less subject to artificiality problems that beset the topic areas that use only symbolic stimuli and paper and pencil responses (cf. Markus & Zajonc, 1985). Finally, some of the most compelling concerns of our society are related to group phenomena. Intergroup and international conflict, productivity, leadership, societal unrest or social movements, the drug crisis, urban gangs, and the functioning of families are just a few examples. It would seem likely that social psychologists who are desirous of making a significant contribution to society as well as their discipline will continue to investigate group processes. In sum, although groups research does not dominate social psychology, it certainly is alive and well as one of its core areas and will likely outlast many of its competitors in staying power.

An Overview of Psychology of Group Influence

The chapters in Psychology of Group Influence cover a broad range of topics that provide a fairly coherent picture of the field. We have included some of the basic topics in this area as well as some that have only recently developed. We have attempted to showcase the latest empirical and theoretical developments in each of these areas.

The chapters are based solidly on a number of foundations. Many cite the seminal work and ideas of early thinkers in the area such as LeBon, Lewin, and Festinger. Some of the chapters have a strong empirical base as the research on these particular topics has been ongoing for a number of years. Others deal with issues that only recently have seen increased research attention. Most of the chapters have a strong theoretical basis. Some provide theoretical integration and analyses of the wide variety of results in particular area. Others suggest new perspectives to guide future research in developing areas. The chapters focus on a broad range of psychological processes such as drive, attention, self-awareness, self-regulation, approach-avoidance, memory, information processing, and appropriation. However, the major focus of each of the chapters is to highlight group influences on these basic processes.

Basic Group Influence

The first four chapters focus on the basic dimensions and processes involved in groups-the presence of others, involvement in groups, spatial distancing among group members, influence of number of group members, and spatial arrangement. One common theme in these chapters is the approach/ avoidance dilemma. We can't very well do without groups and derive many benefits from group membership, but at the same time we seem to have some fears about group involvement. Geen's chapter on social facilitation highlights the fear and avoidance element involved in observer or audience situations. Knowles analyzes in detail the approach and avoidance processes involved in spatial distancing in groups. Prentice-Dunn and Rogers' chapter on deindividuation examines the issue of seeking and avoiding loss of self-awareness in groups. Paulus and Nagar examine those factors that influence positive and negative reactions to interactions in group settings.

One of the most basic topics in group influence is that of the presence of others. This issue was the concern of the first social psychology experiment (Triplett, 1898) and has been the focus of consistent examination since that time. Geen provides a detailed review and analysis of this research with humans. He analyzes the ability of three major theoretical approaches to account for the evidence obtained-drive based theories, self theories, and attentionallinformation processing theories. He examines a broad range of empirical effects-arousal, task performance, attention, and inhibition of behavior. He suggests that various types of theories may be differentially applicable to two somewhat different audience contexts-ones that elicit anxiety or embarrassment and ones that do not. It is clear from Geen's review that the issue of other presence is much more complex than most of us probably anticipated. His analysis brings conceptual coherence to this area of study, however, and provides a solid basis for future research.

While other presence is certainly the most basic feature of group situations, social distance might be considered the most basic dimension of social interaction. This interesting topic has been examined mostly under the rubric of personal space. Early studies assumed that humans required and maintained certain minimal distance zones in various types of interactions. If these were violated, individuals would become uncomfortable and attempt to compensate in some particular manner. Knowles deals with the research on this topic and presents an affiliative conflict theory of spatial behavior. This theory has its basis in part in Lewin's field theory (Lewin, 1938) and builds on the ideas of Argyle and Dean (1965). He provides an elegant and detailed analysis of spatial behavior in groups and is able to integrate much of the literature's complexities in terms of this model. The affiliative conflict theory allows for an understanding of those conditions under which people will compensate or reciprocate in response to spatial intrusions. Knowles also develops the implications of this model for understanding spatial behavior in various group, audience, and crowd situations.

One aspect of groups that has been of interest for a long time has been the tendency of individuals to submerge their identities within the group. This type of process has been pointed to in explaining mob behavior and other extreme acts committed in group contexts. Prentice-Dunn and Rogers examine in detail the contribution deindividuation theory has made to the understanding of these and other phenomena. Deindividuation is generally viewed as a state of lowered selfawareness that can result from involvement in group activities. This state can be associated with disinhibited or antinormative behavior as well as increased levels of aggressive behavior. Prentice-Dunn and Rogers examine the history of the concept and recent theoretical and empirical developments. They combine concepts from self-awareness theory and control theory of self-regulation into a comprehensive understanding of the role of deindividuation in social behavior. Prentice-Dunn and Rogers propose that such disinhibition may derive from two different types of antecedents, which in turn affect either degree of public or private self-awareness. They evaluate various alternative viewpoints and apply deindividuation to such domains as aggression, prosocial behavior, sports, and religious experiences. In doing so, they provide a very compelling analysis of the means by which groups may have a powerful influence on the actions of their members.

Group behavior can occur in a wide range of environments. Certain features of these environments may influence the behavior of group members. Two environmental factors that have been extensively related to group processes are density and spatial factors. Paulus and Nagar outline some of the major issues that have been examined in studies of these two environmental variables. They summarize the basic findings and suggest several perspectives for integrating this literature. Interestingly, while crowding and spatial proximity may sometimes produce strongly negative reactions, at other times reactions may be quite positive. An environment-social interaction model is presented to facilitate the understanding and prediction of positive and negative group outcomes that occur under various group/environmental conditions. The implications of this model for the study of group processes in laboratory and naturalistic situations are developed.

Influence Processes in Groups

The second section of this volume focuses on various ways in which groups influence its members. Groups may have goals, norms, or traditions that require some degree of uniformity among its members. Newcomers to groups may thus be subject to a variety of techniques by the group to socialize them. Those who persist in being different may elicit strong reactions but may also influence the other group members. We may be members of a wide variety of groups and our identification with groups may have a strong impact on our self-concept and behavior.

Before one can become subject to many of the major group processes, one has to join and become accepted by the group. Moreland and Levine examine this process in some detail and provide the first comprehensive theoretical and empirical analysis of the processes by which newcomers are socialized in groups. Building on their earlier work on group socialization, they present a broad theoretical framework and organize the extensive literature within it. The major focus of the chapter is on the dual processes of assimilation and accommodation by which newcomers become full members of the group. They examine a wide variety of factors that influence these processes and the different strategies that can be employed by the newcomer and the group to facilitate them. By integrating the research on newcom...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title
• Copyright
• Original Title
• Original Copyright
• Contents
• Preface
• Dedication
• 1. An Overview and Evaluation of Group Influence
• PART I: BASIC GROUP INFLUENCE
• PART II: SOCIAL INFLUENCE PROCESSES IN GROUPS
• PART III: SOCIAL AND COGNITIVE PROCESSES IN INTERACTIVE GROUPS
• Author Index
• Subject Index