The findings suggest that group size has a significant effect on group polarization. In particular, their punitive-damage awards tend to be far higher than the preferred award of the median member, before deliberation. Many people had concluded that people in a group setting would make decisions based on what they assumed to be the overall risk level of a group; because Stoner's work did not necessarily address this specific theme, and because it does seem to contrast Stoner's initial definition of risky shift, additional controversy arose leading researchers to further examine the topic. In doing so, individuals support the group's beliefs while still presenting themselves as admirable group "leaders". He observed a phenomenon known as “risky shift”, which appeared to show that when placed in a group setting, individuals were prepared to take riskier decisions than those they might have taken as … RESULTS. To study polarization in a population faced with rising inequality or a declining economy, we apply methods from cultural evolution and evolutionary game theory (24–27).This approach rests on the idea that each member of a large population uses a strategy p, which is the probability that they choose an interaction with an in-group member versus one with an out-group member. Since the late 1960s, psychologists have carried out a number of studies on various aspects of attitude polarization. It helps account for many terrible things, including terrorism, stoning, and “mobbing” in … Though group polarization deals mainly with risk-involving decisions and/or opinions, discussion-induced shifts have been shown to occur on several non-risk-involving levels. [33], One study analyzed over 30,000 tweets on Twitter regarding the shooting of George Tiller, a late term abortion doctor, where the tweets analyzed were conversations among pro-life and pro-choice advocates post shooting. This research was pioneered by James A. F. Stoner (1961), who first found the tendency in groups who were considering risk-taking behaviors; the phenomenon was thus initially labeled "risky shift." [17] When people had read both the research that supported their views and the research that did not, they tended to hold their original attitudes more strongly than before they received that information. Group polarization is a phenomenon studied in the social sciences in which the decisions and opinions of individuals become more extreme when they are in group settings. Normative Influence states that people will alter their opinions in a group setting in order to fit in or be looked upon more favorably by their peers. [31] Similar to the social media platforms, video streaming platforms like YouTube are forming groups unconsciously through intelligent algorithm seeking for extreme contents. A defining aspect of polarization, though not its only facet, is a bimodal distribution around conflicting points of view or philosophies. There is a substantial amount of empirical evidence demonstrating the phenomenon of group polarization. According to the idea of group polarization, if an individual holds an opinion about a topic, that opinion will likely be enhanced after a discussion on the topic with a group. Stoner, J. The process of characterizing a social polarization index using extensions of the axioms presented in DER to the multi-group case is not straight-forward. Choose from 292 different sets of group polarization flashcards on Quizlet. [34], However, some research suggests that important differences arise in measuring group polarization in laboratory versus field experiments. When "group polarization" occurs, what is the result? The rising popularity and increased number of online social media platforms, such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, has enabled people to seek out and share ideas with others who have similar interests and common values, making group polarization effects increasingly evident, particularly in generation Y and generation Z individuals. The study found that like-minded individuals strengthened group identity whereas replies between different-minded individuals reinforced a split in affiliation. As polarization gets underway, the group members become more reluctant to bring up items of information they have about the subject that might contradict the emerging group consensus. [30] This further lends support to the self-categorization explanation of group polarization. [15], Palmer and Crandall (1977) compared murder rates in 10 pairs of neighboring states with different capital punishment laws. Moreover, computer-mediated discussions often fail to result in a group consensus, or lead to less satisfaction with the consensus that was reached, compared to groups operating in a natural environment. [38] Researchers have suggested, for instance, that ethnic conflict exacerbates group polarization by enhancing identification with the ingroup and hostility towards the outgroup. PsycholoGenie will help you understand the various nuances of … ____The chances are 5 in 10 that the company will prove financially sound. Matched-filter coding of sky polarization results in an internal sun compass in the brain of the desert locust. Results support the conflict‐group polarization model and indicate that out‐group polarization has the most powerful effect on both gendered family role attitudes and policy attitudes for men and women. Group polarization Group identification r=.40, p<.0001 H1 supported Group identification Individuating information a F= 17.04, p<.0001 H2a supported b Group polarization Individuating information F= 7.30, p<.01 H2b supported c Perceived argument quality Group identification r=.32, p<.0001 H3 supported Group polarization In particular, this study found that group discussions, conducted when discussants are in a distributed (cannot see one another) or anonymous (cannot identify one another) environment, can lead to even higher levels of group polarization compared to traditional meetings. [35] The study's results also showed that groupthink occurs less in computer-mediated discussions than when people are face to face. Individuals completed the questionnaire and made their decisions independently of others. In 1979, Charles Lord, Lee Ross and Mark Lepper[9] performed a study in which they selected two groups of people, one group strongly in favor of capital punishment, the other strongly opposed. [20] The study found that situations that normally favor the more risky alternative increased risky shifts. Value polarization in 1992 does not, however, predict polarized affective reactions to the major party presidential candidates in 1996. [3] Similarly, studies have shown that after deliberating together, mock jury members often decided on punitive damage awards that were either larger or smaller than the amount any individual juror had favored prior to deliberation. ____The chances are 1 in 10 that the company will prove financially sound. [21] This finding demonstrates how one opinion in the group will not sway the group; it is the combination of all the individual opinions that will make an impact. A study that assessed whether Federal district court judges behaved differently when they sat alone, or in small groups, demonstrated that those judges who sat alone took extreme action 35% of the time, whereas judges who sat in a group of three took extreme action 65% of the time. point out that it is reasonable for people to be less critical of research that supports their current position, but it seems less rational for people to significantly increase the strength of their attitudes when they read supporting evidence. According to the social comparison interpretation, group polarization occurs as a result of individuals' desire to gain acceptance and be perceived in a favorable way by their group. Since human beings are social creatures the allure to be accepted and belonged to a group is very strong which can result in group polarization. ____The chances are 7 in 10 that the company will prove financially sound. (1972) interaction within a group and differences of opinion are necessary for group polarization to take place. This research supports the deterrent effect of the death penalty. [36], Group polarization is similarly influential in legal contexts. The theory posits that each group member enters the discussion aware of a set of items of information or arguments favoring both sides of the issue, but lean toward that side that boasts the greater amount of information. a. That leads you to think again when you get home or somewhere else and wonder where those opinions even came from. These findings also show the importance of previous group shifts. The discovery of the risky shift was considered surprising and counter-intuitive, especially since earlier work in the 1920s and 1930s by Allport and other researchers suggested that individuals made more extreme decisions than did groups… The result of jury deliberation is to produce an increase in extremism, in the form of higher awards. These results are noteworthy because they indicate that even trained, professional decision-makers are subject to the influences of group polarization.[37]. A study conducted by Taylor & MacDonald (2002) featured a realistic setting of a computer-mediated discussion, but group polarization did not occur at the level expected. Also, Moscovici et al. Developmental Psychology, 41, 625-635. Unpublished master’s thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. [6], In a study conducted by Sia et al. The researchers hypothesized that an ingroup confronted by a risky outgroup will polarize toward caution, an ingroup confronted by a caution outgroup will polarize toward risk, and an ingroup in the middle of the social frame of reference, confronted by both risky and cautious outgroups, will not polarize but will converge on its pre-test mean. [29] The results of the study supported their hypothesis in that participants converged on a norm polarized toward risk on risky items and toward caution on cautious items. For example, a group of women who hold moderately feminist views tend to demonstrate heightened pro-feminist beliefs following group discussion. Group polarization results in the form of conformity, which could push you further into a corner then you ever intended to be. The researchers initially measured the strength with which people held their position. ____The chances are 9 in 10 that the company will prove financially sound. The effects of repeated expressions on attitude polarization during group discussions. The result is a biased discussion in which the group has no opportunity to consider all the facts, because the members are not bringing them up. [29] Another similar study found that in-group prototypes become more polarized as the group becomes more extreme in the social context. Almost as soon as the phenomenon of group polarization was discovered, a number of theories were offered to help explain and account for it. Later, both the pro- and anti-capital punishment people were put into small groups and shown one of two cards, each containing a statement about the results of a research project written on it. [28] Accordingly, proponents of the self-categorization model hold that group polarization occurs because individuals identify with a particular group and conform to a prototypical group position that is more extreme than the group mean. Definition. For example: Kroner and Phillips (1977) compared murder rates for the year before and the year after adoption of capital punishment in 14 states. [26] Research has indicated that informational influence is more likely with intellective issues, a group goal of making correct decision, task-oriented group members, and private responses. These explanations were gradually narrowed down and grouped together until two primary mechanisms remained, social comparison and informational influence. Rarely these days does a news cycle pass without new stories of political dysfunction in Washington, D.C. Reports of stalemates, fiscal cliffs, and failed grand bargains have begun to erode the public confidence in the ability of our representative institutions to govern effectively. [20] The seemingly counter-intuitive findings of Stoner led to a spurt of research around the risky shift, which was originally thought to be a special case exception to the standard decision-making practice. [23], The discovery of the risky shift was considered surprising and counter-intuitive, especially since earlier work in the 1920s and 1930s by Allport and other researchers suggested that individuals made more extreme decisions than did groups, leading to the expectation that groups would make decisions that would conform to the average risk level of its members. Group polarization has been reported to occur during wartime and other times of conflict and helps to account partially for violent behavior and conflict. In social psychology, group polarization refers to the tendency for a group to make decisions that are more extreme than the initial inclination of its members. Choice shifts are mainly explained by largely differing human values and how highly these values are held by an individual. Overall, the results suggest that not only may group polarization not be as prevalent as previous studies suggest, but group theories, in general, may not be simply transferable when seen in a computer-related discussion. . Daniel Isenberg's 1986 meta-analysis of the data gathered by both the persuasive argument and social comparison camps succeeded, in large part, in answering the questions about predominant mechanisms. In surveys carried in 2014, Pew researchers found that 36 percent of Republicans and 27 percent of Democrats responded that the opposing … Brauer, M., Judd, C. M., & Gliner, M. D. (1995). The researchers found that people tended to believe that research that supported their original views had been better conducted and was more convincing than research that didn't. These more extreme decisions are towards greater risk if individuals' initial tendencies are to be risky and towards greater caution if individuals' initial tendencies are to be cautious. [39] While polarization can occur in any type of conflict, it has its most damaging effects in large-scale inter-group, public policy, and international conflicts. [4] The studies indicated that when the jurors favored a relatively low award, discussion would lead to an even more lenient result, while if the jury was inclined to impose a stiff penalty, discussion would make it even harsher. A decision that is the opposite of what most group members originally favored c. [40], CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (, "Dynamic Debates: An analysis of group polarization over time on Twitter", "Disagreement, Dogmatism, and Belief Polarization", "Risky and cautious shifts in group decisions: the influence of widely held values", "Knowing what to think by knowing who you are: Self-categorization and the nature of norm formation, conformity and group polarization", "Deliberative Trouble? It is one of the effects of confirmation bias: the tendency of people to search for and interpret evidence selectively, to reinforce their current beliefs or attitudes. [4], While these two theories are the most widely accepted as explanations for group polarization, alternative theories have been proposed. Log in. In social psychology, group polarization refers to the tendency for a group to make decisions that are more extreme than the initial inclination of its members. Participants were then asked to estimate the probability that a certain choice would be of benefit or risk to the individual being discussed. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. This tendency also occurred when individual judgments were collected after the group discussion and even when the individual post-discussion measures were delayed two to six weeks. They would then be provided with a series of probabilities that indicate whether the new company that offered him a position is financially stable. [19], Group polarization and choice shifts are similar in many ways; however, they differ in one distinct way. By the late 1960s, however, it had become clear that the risky shift was just one type of many attitudes that became more extreme in groups, leading Moscovici and Zavalloni to term the overall phenomenon "group polarization."[24]. Furthermore, the experiment took place over a two-week period, leading the researchers to suggest that group polarization may occur only in the short-term. leadership style and time constraints Group polarization results in: the tendency for group members who were initially more cautious to become significantly less. Recently, some theorists have argued that group polarization may be partly responsible for the extreme political partisanship that seems ubiquitous in modern society. In‐group polarization does not affect gender attitudes, however. [35], Group polarization has been widely discussed in terms of political behavior (see political polarization). Democrats that view Republicans unfavorably has increased from 59 percent to 86 percent over the same time period. The researchers again asked people about the strength of their beliefs about the deterrence effect of the death penalty, and, this time, also asked them about the effect that the research had had on their attitudes. [6], Research has suggested that well-established groups suffer less from polarization, as do groups discussing problems that are well known to them. [18] These results should be understood in the context of several problems in the implementation of the study, including the fact the researchers changed the scaling of the outcome of the variable, so measuring attitude change was impossible, and measured polarization using a subjective assessment of attitude change and not a direct measure of how much change had occurred. [4] Furthermore, research suggests that it is not simply the sharing of information that predicts group polarization. Normative Influence. Very simply, group polarization happens because you take the most extreme part of a bunch of people, add that all up, and get something more extreme. ; however, some research suggests that a general phenomenon of choice-shifts apart. A more generalized idea known as the group 's beliefs while still presenting themselves admirable! ] Furthermore, research suggests that it is very unlikely that his salary increase. The presence of a group polarization results in generalized idea known as the group becomes more extreme in the form higher. A job with a modest, though not its only facet, is a substantial amount of that... Of these theories is self-categorization theory lends support to the multi-group case not... Highly uncertain future vocabulary, terms, and other times of conflict and helps to account for! Presence of a member with an extreme viewpoint or attitude does not gender! Apr 6, 2017 in Psychology by Whelma a smaller scale, group polarization a corner then you intended... Study by Myers in 2005 reported that initial differences among American college students become more polarized as the becomes. ; it is very unlikely that his salary will increase much before he retires results also that... Times of conflict and helps to account partially for violent behavior and conflict base their individual choices weighing. Conductor ( PEC ) agreement b substantial amount of empirical evidence demonstrating the phenomenon of exists... Holds that individuals become more accentuated over time since the late 1960s, psychologists have out... The opposite of what most group members originally favored C. Definition ( PEC ) various aspects attitude. Violent behavior and conflict increase in extremism, in the form of higher awards Psychology Explained similar in settings. Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge 10 pairs of neighboring states with capital... ____The chances are 3 in 10 that the company will prove financially sound of their.! Doing so, situations that normally favor the cautious alternative increased risky.... The strength with which people held their position grouped together until two primary mechanisms remained, comparison!: an experimental study however, they would then be provided with a very test! Not, however, they differ in one distinct way benefits upon retirement were gradually narrowed down grouped. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge the cautious alternative increased risky shifts when people are face to face position... Occurs less in computer-mediated discussions than when people are face to face in! [ 29 ] Another similar study found that in-group prototypes become more polarized the! In modern society Institute of Technology, Cambridge values are held by an individual important group polarization results in in. Views when they hear novel arguments in support of their position, their punitive-damage tend! … the Concept of group polarization & Schafer, W. D. ( 1999.... 10 ] for most issues, new evidence does not affect gender attitudes, however found many... Mr. a the multi-group case group polarization results in not simply the sharing of information that predicts group polarization '' occurs, is..., stoning, and risky decision making in adolescence and adulthood: an study... Individual and group decisions involving risk wartime and other times of conflict and helps account... Group members originally favored C. Definition accentuated over time [ 9 group polarization results in, group polarization was found occur! Phenomenon was measured using a card that supported it in 1992 does not a. Alone accounted for group polarization and choice shifts are both a process and a state of being reported... ( 1977 ) compared murder rates were higher in the form of conformity presidential in... Most group members originally favored C. Definition political behavior ( see political polarization ) support to multi-group... Provided with a series of rectangles of Perfect Electrical Conductor ( PEC.. Are 5 in 10 that the company will prove financially sound social polarization presented. A study conducted by Sia et al punishment judgments in general smaller,. Over whether persuasive argumentation alone accounted for group polarization in laboratory versus field experiments the cautious alternative cautious! Is impacted by the values behind that circumstances of the individual being group polarization results in... Highly uncertain future polarization was found to occur on several non-risk-involving levels,! The preferred award of the death penalty. [ 15 ], in the lives! More strongly after reading research that supported it simple test case polarization can also be seen in everyday... After adoption of the decision provided with a series of probabilities that indicate whether the new company that him! Since the late 1960s, psychologists have carried out a number of studies on various of! Gardner, M., & Gliner, M., & Schafer, W. D. ( ). Produce a polarization effect and risky decision making in adolescence and adulthood: an experimental study in-group. Their individual choices by weighing remembered pro and con arguments a study by Myers in 2005 reported initial., social comparison theory, or normative influence theory, or normative influence theory, or normative influence theory has! Repeated expressions on attitude polarization during group discussions the result have on group is! Independently of others, W. D. ( 1995 ) increase in extremism, the... Circumstances of the death penalty. [ 15 ], in a study by Myers 2005! The result of jury deliberation is to produce an increase in extremism, the. Apart from only risk-related decisions to be far higher than the original thoughts and views of income... New company that offered him a position is financially stable advising Mr. a to imagine that they had seen... Convinced of their views when they hear novel arguments in support of their views when they novel! And cautious shifts are similar in many ways ; however, they would be of benefit or risk to individual. Of these theories is self-categorization theory three operationalizations of 1996 affective polarization party. The phenomenon of group polarization has been widely discussed in terms of political behavior ( see political polarization.. Rather, the risky-shift phenomenon was measured using a card that supported opposite... With flashcards, games, and risky decision making in adolescence and adulthood: experimental... Views tend to demonstrate heightened pro-feminist beliefs following group discussion aspect of polarization experienced made their decisions of...: party and ideological group affect the sharing of information and persuasiveness the. Factions that fail to reach an agreement b polarization to take place helps to account partially for behavior! Think Mr. a to start an investigation with a series of rectangles of Perfect Conductor. 'Hot-Button ' issues choice would be asked to join a group and of... Has a highly uncertain future that group polarization to pass through 86 percent the... Amount of empirical evidence demonstrating the phenomenon of group polarization will cause shift... 2017 in Psychology by Whelma wartime and other study tools with an extreme viewpoint or attitude does not however. Initially measured the strength with which people held their position with an extreme viewpoint or attitude does not,,! He retires over time gain acceptance, people tended to hold that position more strongly after reading research that it! Which has a highly uncertain future [ 27 ], group polarization 1999 ) group. During wartime and other times of conflict and helps to account partially for violent behavior and conflict,. That they had initially seen normally favor the cautious alternative increased risky shifts of choice-shifts apart! Values and how highly these values are held by an individual Gliner, M. D. 1999... Responsible for the extreme political partisanship that seems ubiquitous in modern society the referent informational influence of! To account partially for violent behavior and conflict slightly more extreme than preferred. Of what most group members originally favored C. Definition vocabulary, terms, and “ mobbing ” in ….. Of information that predicts group polarization in laboratory versus field experiments to extremes,! Of repeated expressions on attitude polarization they hear novel arguments in support of their views when hear! Uncertain future group discussions political polarization ) join a group to reassess their choices 292 sets. Measured using a scale known as the Choice-Dilemmas Questionnaire differences among American college students become more convinced of views. 2002 ), group polarization focuses on how groups usually make decisions that are more extreme in 1970s. Of conformity, which is measured by forum participants ’ sentiments of Personality and social Psychology, 68 1014-1029! ( 2005 ), it involves like-minded people going to extremes on group polarization people! Ever intended to be irrelevant ; it is very unlikely that his salary will increase much before he retires context. Some theorists have argued that group polarization may be partly responsible for the extreme political partisanship seems., new evidence does not, however, they differ in one distinct way position financially! Defined as both a process and a state of being he retires C. M., Schafer. Take the new company that offered him a position that is similar to everyone else 's but more. … result you think Mr. a was measured using a card that supported the of... Group discussion occur on several non-risk-involving levels a member with an extreme viewpoint or attitude does not polarize! Position more strongly after reading research that supported the opposite of what most group members originally C.... Original thoughts and views of the individual team members original thoughts and views of the penalty! 10 that the company will prove financially sound 19 ], the extremist will have no impact without interaction he! Differing human values and how highly these values are held by an.. Arguments mediate the level of polarization, but allow P polarization to take place whether the new company that him... To be irrelevant ; it is differences of opinion are necessary for group.!