Module-II

Group Process
 Group Conformity

In what ways people conform?

Group norms are the spoken or unspoken rules that guide how team
members interact, collaborate effectively, and work efficiently
Jeer Pressure Social Influence
✓ Group norms are implicitly agreed upon rules and standards of behavior
✓ It is also known as majority influence in form of prescriptive and
Compliance Obedience proscriptive norms
Proscriptive norms; refers to the do’s and don’ts
Intense Prescriptive norms; are often harsher and have dire consequences when not
Indoctrination
followed

Group conformity can be defined as adjusting one’s behavior to align with

the norms of the group. As a member of a group, people desire for
acceptance by the group and are susceptible to conforming the group norms
 In what ways people conform:
➢ Jeer Pressure: The fear of rejection leads to increased conformity. When an individual see
the other group member being ridiculed, he/she may fear similar rejection and thus conform
to the group
➢ Social Influence: It is the process by which an individual’s attitude, beliefs or behavior are
modified by the presence or action of others
➢ Compliance: Compliance is a type of social influence where an individual does what
someone else wants them to do, following his or her request or suggestion. It is similar to
obedience, but there is no order – only a request
➢ Obedience: Obedience is the act of following orders without question because they come
from legitimate authority

3
➢ Intense indoctrination: A process through which individuals become members of extreme groups and
come to accept the beliefs and norms of a group in a totally unquestioning and highly committed way
Intense indoctrination is a rigid dogma, doctrine , or theory which tend to suppress good sense
and good judgement. The members’ understanding becomes clouded, confused, and obstructed. The
understanding becomes dormant(meaning temporarily inactive).
Highly indoctrinated people become like automatons(a moving mechanical device made in
imitation of a human being). They spout and parrot doctrine, dogma ( belief or set of beliefs that
people are expected to accept as true without questioning) , instead of speaking with common sense or
understanding and the thinking becomes stymied or suppressed
Causes of Intense Indoctrination
There are a number of psycho-social processes involved that explain the causes that lie behind intense
indoctrination:
• Decreased attentional capacity: The cognitive capacity of the individual seems reduced because the
extreme groups use various tactics to mould them so that they can not think carefully and
systematically. Reduced attention capacity increases the tendency of new recruits to think
stereotypically
• By keeping new recruits fatigued: The new members are subjected to deprivation of food,
family, sleep, and so on which make them emotionally aroused and isolated. When people
are confused, uncertain about how to act, and are experiencing reduced confidence, their
tendency to conform is often enhanced

• Inducing the recruits to make public statements: Recruits are subjected to make public
statements, using intense peer pressure supporting groups views. These are applied to
potential members and are compelled continually over time until recruits reach a position
where they accept the group’s views in a totally unquestioning manner
➢ The process of intense indoctrination involves:
i) Softening up- The new members/ or the recruits are isolated from friends and families
and efforts are made to keep them confused , disoriented, and emotionally aroused
ii) Compliance- During this stage, members/ or the recruits are asked to actively involve
themselves in the belief and demands of the role as the member
iii) Internalization- The recruits begin to agree the views of the group as accurate and in
reality accept as true
iv) Consolidation- This is the merging stage where recruit adds strength to make their
membership by engaging in costly acts that make it difficult to go back to the original life.
They offer all their private assets to the group and discontinue all ties with past friends
and family. The result is that the new members now accept the beliefs and philosophy of
the group in an unquestioning manner and hold negative views about outsiders
 Solomon Asch- Conformity Experiment(1951)
Solomon Asch conducted an experiment to investigate the extent to which social pressure from a majority group
could affect a person to conform
Asch (1951) designed what is now regarded as a classic experiment in social psychology, whereby there was an
obvious answer to a line judgment task
Asch was studying visual perception/vision test and that the participants’ task was to decide which of the bars on the
right (CARD 2) was the same length as the one on the left(CARD 1). As you can see, the task is simple, and the correct
answer is obvious
CARD1 CARD 2

X-Target Line A B C
 In each experiment, a naive student participant was placed in a room with several other confederates who
were in on the experiment. The subjects were informed that they were taking part in a "vision test." Around 5-
8 groups were formed with a total of 50 students were part of Asch’s experimental condition
The confederates were all told what their responses would be when the line task was presented. The naive
participant, however, had no inkling that the other students were not real participants. After the line task was
presented, each student verbally announced which line (either 1, 2, or 3) matched the target line
➢ Critical Trials
There were 18 different trials in the experimental condition, and the confederates gave incorrect responses in
12 of them, which Asch referred to as the "critical trials." The purpose of these critical trials was to see if the
participants (that is, the naïve participant in every group) would change their answer in order to conform to
how the others in the group responded
During the first part of the procedure, the confederates answered the questions correctly. However, they
eventually began providing incorrect answers based on how they had been instructed by the experimenters
Each person in the room had to state aloud which comparison line (A, B or C) was most like the target line. The
answer was always obvious. The real participant sat at the end of the row and gave his or her answer last

8
➢ Control Condition
• The study also included 37 participants in a controlled condition. In order to ensure that the average person could
accurately gauge the length of the lines, the control group was asked to individually write down the correct match.
According to these results, participants were very accurate in their line judgments, choosing the correct answer 99% of
the time
➢ Results of the Asch Conformity Experiments
• Nearly 75% of the participants in the conformity experiments went along with the rest of the group at least one time
• After combining the trials, the results indicated that participants conformed to the incorrect group answer
approximately one-third of the time
• The experiments also looked at the effect that the number of people present in the group had on conformity. When
just one confederate was present, there was virtually no impact on participants' answers. The presence of two
confederates had only a tiny effect. The level of conformity seen with three or more confederates was far more
significant
• Asch also found that having one of the confederates give the correct answer while the rest of the confederates gave the
incorrect answer dramatically lowered conformity. In this situation, just 5% to 10% of the participants conformed to the
rest of the group (depending on how often the ally answered correctly). Later studies have also supported this finding,
suggesting that having social support is an important tool in combating conformity.

9
 Conclusion
Why did the participants conform so readily? When they were interviewed after the
experiment, most of them said that they did not really believe their conforming answers,
but had gone along with the group for fear of being ridiculed or thought "peculiar”

A few of them said that they really did believe the group's answers were correct

Based on the Asch’s experiment, people conform for two main reasons: because they want
to fit in with the group (normative influence) and because they believe the group is better
informed than they are (informational influence)
Normative influence is where a person conforms to fit in with the group because they do
not want to appear foolish or be left out. Normative social influence is usually associated
with compliance, where a person changes their public behavior but not their personal
beliefs
For example, a person may feel pressurised to smoke because the rest of their friends
are. Normative influence tends to lead to compliance because the person smokes just for
show but deep down they wish not to smoke. This means any change of behavior
is temporary

Informational influence refers to new information or arguments provided in a group

discussion that change a group member’s attitudes, beliefs, or behavior. Informational
influence is likely to be stronger when a person is uncertain about the correct
interpretation of reality and/or the correct behavior in a given context and therefore looks
to other group members for guidance
 Factors Affecting Conformity

✓ Group Size: The bigger the majority group (no of confederates), the more people conformed, but only
up to a certain point
✓ Lack of Group Unanimity / Presence of an Ally: The absence of group unanimity lowers overall
conformity as participants feel less need for social approval of the group
✓ Difficulty of Task: When the (comparison) lines (e.g., A, B, C) were made more similar in length it was
harder to judge the correct answer and conformity increased
When we are uncertain, it seems we look to others for conformation. The more difficult the task,
the greater the conformity
✓ Answer in Private: When participants were allowed to answer in private (so the rest of the group does
not know their response) conformity decreases. This is because there are fewer group pressures and
normative influence is not as powerful, as there is no fear of rejection from the group
 Group Deviance
It is thought of as a behavior that violates the shared norms of the group

➢Deviance is perceived when members are not convinced with the group norms. When the
norm is not effective for the group goals ;there is a conflict between the individual and the
group goals

➢Deviance also occurs when the members lack clear knowledge and inadvertently violate
group norms and become aware only by perceiving the group’s feedback

➢The tendency of deviance can be reduced while socializing well within the group and then
conforming to the group norms
• Deviance leads to “anomie”, which can be defined as, “being normlessness” or individual’s
departure from group values. This term was coined by Emile Durkheim
• Anomie arises from a mismatch between personal/ group standards and wider social
standards, or from the lack of a social ethic, which leads to moral deregulation. In short, it
describes the breakdown or derangement of social norms/values. To curb the tendency of
anomie, sharing of values should be encouraged to curb the egoistic drives and maintain
group stability
• Deviance also leads to “alienation”. It is a feeling of distance between a member and
the group. It is described as lacking a sense of belongingness or not being part of a group.
The members loose sense of emotional security and feels cut-off with the group
• One of the earliest propounder of this term is Karl Marx and emphasized that alienation
leads to decline in initiative and freedom. It is the individual estrangement from traditional
community or a group. And leads to difficulty in adapting to each other’s uniqueness
 Workplace Deviant Behaviors(WDB)

Workplace Deviant Behaviors (WDBs) are the antisocial actions by organizational members who
intentionally violate established norms and that results in negative consequences for the organization
and its members. In other words, when deviant behaviors surface, employee participation, motivation,
cooperation, and commitment is likely to suffer and this in turn leads to reduced employee productivity,
job satisfaction, and increased turnover
Types of Deviant Behaviors in Organizations
1. Constructive Organizational Deviance(COD): Such kind of deviance is defined as, “voluntary behavior
that violates significant organizational norms and in doing so contributes to the well-being of an
organization, its members, or both.”For example; whistle blowing
2. Destructive Organizational Deviance: Such kind of deviance is defined as, “voluntary behaviors that
violate significant organizational norms and in so doing threaten the well-being of an organization and
its members or both”
 Some examples of destructive deviance are as:
• Cyberloafing: Employees' intentional use of internet technology during work hours for personal
purposes. This can include surfing non-work related internet sites, sending personal emails, online
gaming, or social networking
• Workplace Aggression: Workplace aggression include a wide range of behaviors, ranging from verbal
acts (e.g., insulting someone or spreading rumors) to physical attacks (e.g., punching or slapping)
• Workplace Bullying: It is a persistent pattern of mistreatment from others in the workplace that
causes either physical or emotional harm. It can include such tactics as verbal, nonverbal,
psychological, and physical abuse, as well as humiliation. (Examples as: constant critic- action of
expressing disapproval of something or someone; gatekeeper- isolating the employee or deliberately
cut the target out of the communication loop and then expecting to have all the missing
information; screaming mimi- to yell, scream, abuse, intimidate by slamming things and throwing
objects)
• Employee theft: Using the company’s property for personal use

16
 Group Cohesiveness
The strength of an individual’s desire to remain as part of the group is known as group cohesiveness. Group
cohesiveness measures the level of participation, conformity, and participation

Attraction

External Factors Causing

Causes of Group
Group Group
threats &
Cohesiveness
Cohesiveness
dangers Success

Group
Size
 Schachter’s Classic Study of Cohesiveness
The Pitchfork Productivity Curves
HiCo;+Induction
P
R LoCo ;+Induction
O
LoCo; -Induction
D
U HiCo; -Induction
C CONTROL
T
I
V
I
T
Y

I N D U C T I O N(Influence/ Leadership)
 Consequences of Group Cohesiveness
1. High Performance
2.Member satisfaction
3.Emotional adjustment
4.Intragroup competition: Group size increases and there are chances of formation of cliques
5.Conformity Pressures: Groupthink “The tendency of members of highly cohesive groups to strongly conform to
group decisions that they fail to think critically or reject the potential
influences of outsiders or some negative elements within the group itself.”
There is absence of reality testing and moral judgment
6. Social Loafing and Social Facilitation: Both are based on the influence of others' presence in our performance,
and both are a part of group behavior. Social loafing is the tendency of
group members to exert less individual effort on an additive task as the size of the
group increases
Social facilitation is the tendency for presence of others sometimes to enhance an
individual’s performance and at other times to impair it. It is a state of heightened
emotional arousal (tension and excitement) people experience in the presence of others
 Symptoms of Groupthink

• Illusion of invulnerability: Creates excessive optimism that encourages members to take extreme risks and
decisions
• Belief in inherent morality: Members have strong belief in the rightness of their decisions and sometimes
ignore the moral and ethical consequences of their decisions
• Self-censorship: Members are under constant pressure not to express arguments, doubts, and deviations
against the group’s decision or views
• Self-appointed “mindguards”: Members protect the group and the leader from information that is problematic
or contradictory to the group cohesiveness
• Stereotyped views of out-group: Negative views make effective responses to conflict which seems unnecessary
 Remedies for Groupthink

✓ Devils’s Advocate Technique: The devil's advocacy is a decision-making technique where an

individual in the group is allowed to become the critic in the proposed decision. This decision
technique helps prevent groupthink and increases the chance of a high-quality decision. It
also helps prevent companies from making expensive, risky decisions, promote open inquiry
, and admit the shortcomings

✓ Authentic Dissent Technique: This is a technique for improving the quality of group decision
in which one outside expert actively disagree with the group’s initial preference. This
technique encourages original thinking, and alternative views and attitude changes