Groupthink Wikipedia. Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an irrational or dysfunctional decision making outcome. Group members try to minimize conflict and reach a consensus decision without critical evaluation of alternative viewpoints by actively suppressing dissenting viewpoints, and by isolating themselves from outside influences. Groupthink requires individuals to avoid raising controversial issues or alternative solutions, and there is loss of individual creativity, uniqueness and independent thinking. The dysfunctional group dynamics of the ingroup produces an illusion of invulnerability an inflated certainty that the right decision has been made. Thus the ingroup significantly overrates its own abilities in decision making and significantly underrates the abilities of its opponents the outgroup. Furthermore, groupthink can produce dehumanizing actions against the outgroup. Antecedent factors such as group cohesiveness, faulty group structure, and situational context e. Groupthink is a construct of social psychology but has an extensive reach and influences literature in the fields of communication studies, political science, management, and organizational theory,1 as well as important aspects of deviant religious cult behaviour. 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 conservatives and liberals in the U. How To Avoid Stage Fear Pdf ReaderS. However, this conformity of viewpoints within a group does not mainly involve deliberate group decision making, and might be better explained by the collective confirmation bias of the individual members of the group. Most of the initial research on groupthink was conducted by Irving Janis, a research psychologist from Yale University. Janis published an influential book in 1. Janis used the Bay of Pigs disaster the failed invasion of Castros Cuba in 1. Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1. Later studies have evaluated and reformulated his groupthink model. HistoryeditWilliam H. Cruise ships are considered to be notorious hotbeds for illness, especially the firing out both ends kind. If youd rather spend your trip soaking up sun and. Diabetes Food To Avoid Pdf Diabetes Management Nih The 3 Step Trick that Reverses Diabetes Permanently in As Little as 11 Days. DIABETES FOOD TO AVOID PDF. Diabetes Food To Avoid Pdf The 3 Step Trick that Reverses Diabetes Permanently in As Little as 11 Days. DIABETES FOOD TO AVOID PDF The REAL cause. Whyte, Jr. derived the term from George Orwells 1. Fortune magazine Groupthink being a coinage and, admittedly, a loaded one a working definition is in order. We are not talking about mere instinctive conformity it is, after all, a perennial failing of mankind. What we are talking about is a rationalized conformity an open, articulate philosophy which holds that group values are not only expedient but right and good as well. Irving Janis pioneered the initial research on the groupthink theory. He does not cite Whyte, but coined the term by analogy with doublethink and similar terms that were part of the newspeak vocabulary in the novel Nineteen Eighty Four by George Orwell. He initially defined groupthink as follows I use the term groupthink as a quick and easy way to refer to the mode of thinking that persons engage in when concurrence seeking becomes so dominant in a cohesive ingroup that it tends to override realistic appraisal of alternative courses of action. Groupthink is a term of the same order as the words in the newspeak vocabulary George Orwell used in his dismaying world of 1. In that context, groupthink takes on an invidious connotation. Exactly such a connotation is intended, since the term refers to a deterioration in mental efficiency, reality testing and moral judgments as a result of group pressures. He went on to write The main principle of groupthink, which I offer in the spirit of Parkinsons Law, is this The more amiability and esprit de corps there is among the members of a policy making ingroup, the greater the danger that independent critical thinking will be replaced by groupthink, which is likely to result in irrational and dehumanizing actions directed against outgroups. Janis set the foundation for the study of groupthink starting with his research in the American Soldier Project where he studied the effect of extreme stress on group cohesiveness. After this study he remained interested in the ways in which people make decisions under external threats. MIDDLE STAGE This document is one in a fivepart series on the stages of Alzheimers disease and is written. The stomach flu or gastroenteritis is a condition that typically causes inflammation of the stomach and small intestines. This sickness. The Needle Phobia Page is a starting point for overcoming the fear of needles and needle procedures. This often complex condition ranges from a fear of needles to a. Andra Sciberras, DO, FACOI, AAHIVS. Private Practice. Plantation, Florida. October 2011. 2011 ACOI Annual Convention. This interest led Janis to study a number of disasters in American foreign policy, such as failure to anticipate the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor 1. Bay of Pigs Invasion fiasco 1. Vietnam War 1. 96. President Lyndon Johnson. He concluded that in each of these cases, the decisions occurred largely because of groupthink, which prevented contradictory views from being expressed and subsequently evaluated. After the publication of Janis book Victims of Groupthink in 1. Groupthink Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes in 1. These events included Nazi Germanys decision to invade the Soviet Union in 1. Watergate scandal and others. Despite the popularity of the concept of groupthink, fewer than two dozen studies addressed the phenomenon itself following the publication of Victims of Groupthink, between the years 1. This is surprising considering how many fields of interests it spans, which include political science, communications, organizational studies, social psychology, management, strategy, counseling, and marketing. One can most likely explain this lack of follow up in that group research is difficult to conduct, groupthink has many independent and dependent variables, and it is unclear how to translate groupthinks theoretical concepts into observable and quantitative constructs. Nevertheless, outside research psychology and sociology, wider culture has come to detect groupthink somewhat fuzzily defined in observable situations, for example. Twitter point to the predominance of the hive mind in such social media, the kind of groupthink that submerges independent thinking in favor of conformity to the group, the collective1. The predilection of many cult leaders for abstract, ambiguous, and therefore unchallengeable ideas can further reduce the likelihood of reality testing, while the intense milieu control exerted by cults over their members means that most of the reality available for testing is supplied by the group environment. This is seen in the phenomenon of groupthink, alleged to have occurred, notoriously, during the Bay of Pigs fiasco. Groupthink by Compulsion. Groupthink at least implies voluntarism. When this fails, the organization is not above outright intimidation. In a nationwide telecommunications company, refusal by the new hires to cheer on command incurred consequences not unlike the indoctrination and brainwashing techniques associated with a Soviet era gulag. 10 Day Weather Forecast Orlando Florida In March there. SymptomseditTo make groupthink testable, Irving Janis devised eight symptoms indicative of groupthink. Type I Overestimations of the group its power and morality. Illusions of invulnerability creating excessive optimism and encouraging risk taking. Unquestioned belief in the morality of the group, causing members to ignore the consequences of their actions. Type II Closed mindedness. Rationalizing warnings that might challenge the groups assumptions. Stereotyping those who are opposed to the group as weak, evil, biased, spiteful, impotent, or stupid. Type III Pressures toward uniformity. Self censorship of ideas that deviate from the apparent group consensus.