Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Experience about adolescence
Negative and positive consequences of groupthink
Experience of adolescence
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Experience about adolescence
Probably because of my own experience, I somewhat believe that adolescent life transforms people to behave more ‘mature’ by unconsciously gaining the consciousness of groupthink, the kind of lying which is unpremissible but always unavoidable with the proviso “under certain circumstances”. 1 year ago, I went to a school in Beijing as an exchange student. I was invited to vote for the way of class committee members’ selection in a freshman class, the teacher told me it was the first time they did so. I had two choices, “chairman selected by the teacher” or “chairman selected by classmates”. Affected by my three years of Political and Liberal studies in Hong Kong, I unwittingly took it as a question on asking me to choose between a powerful government and a republic system. Certainly I understood a “republic system” would bring positive effects to its people, which, in this circumstance, the students; And it was not only practical on the selection of the class’ chairman, but also meant a more significant change, or changes. I was the last one to vote, previous students all voted for “chairman selected by the teacher”. Eventually, the voting process, end with the self-censorship of my own ideas and ignoring facts, which caused by my loyalty, or perhaps respect to the class, I myself, voted for “selected by teacher” and lied. Somewhat I resonate with Stephanie Erricson’s because of this episode, and it is the reason why I’m holding my pen and going to write the following.
I’m a groupthink liar, who share the same characteristics with Erricsson’s groupthinker. The most obvious characteristic is self-censorship of the liar’s own ideas, which is a result of the groupthinking process, defined by Erricson as “dissent...
... middle of paper ...
...o be loyal to it as a way of respecting the culture and behaviors of those students, as a result, I voted for “selected by teacher” to show that I agree with their thought, I preferred to lie.
I’m a groupthink liar since I censored my own ideas and ignoring facts to be loyal and respect to the class, as Erricson said “the rest is history”, I can’t vote again in that class, this incident with its result have become a part of my personal history and memories, just like history won’t apologize to the victims and punish the disingenuous demagogue, for me, lying became an uncontroversial fact. I believed that groupthink is unacceptable but really does it unavoidable in this particular circumstance. After all, the rest is history, I farewell to the past and walk forward, let this episode be one of the life lessons, teaches me to understand human nature more deeply.
...adults compared to older adults were less likely to respond that voting was extremely important for good citizenship (133). He concludes that it is too late for the generation of young adults that do not feel voting is an important civic responsibility, however, that it is not too late to convince them that politics matter by showing them that they are giving their opportunity to make important decisions that may impact their lives to others who have different ideas. One may agree with Wattenberg’s idea that habits follow people throughout their lives instead of changing as they cycle in life. His personal accounts are an impactful way to illustrate the importance of building a sense of duty at a young age and carrying that responsibility throughout one’s life.
Stanley Milgram’s experiment shows societies that more people with abide by the rules of an authority figure under any circumstances rather than follow their own nature instinct. With the use of his well-organized article that appeals to the general public, direct quotes and real world example, Milgram’s idea is very well-supported. The results of the experiment were in Milgram’s favor and show that people are obedient to authority figures. Stanley Milgram shows the reader how big of an impact authority figures have but fails to answer the bigger question. Which is more important, obedience or morality?
...edience by authority, duty, even by the culture sometimes. People are fear to contradict the orders from leaders, because they fear to take responsibility for the result, like paying compensation, or being fired. As my friend’s example, she was limited by culture and the society in my country. In addition, I consider about the education system in my country. Most Chinese students are required to learning the knowledge by teachers and parents. It is right. However, the point is it is hard for students to doubt the things they are learning. For instance, after I study in America, I realized that there are lots of mistakes about English I learned in middle school. This mistake still exists in the middle school formal textbook, which my brother is learning. He told me that he has to learn by this way, because he won’t get grades if he answers question in the right way.
Political commentators often label American students not as liberals or conservatives, but simply as apathetic citizens unconcerned with political issues. The number of students venturing to the polls continues to be depressing to any advocate of a democratic form of government. Outside of political science classrooms, few students seem to be knowledgeable of simple political events and personalities.
A person once said “the truth does not cost a person anything, but a lie costs a person everything”. The aim of the study is to take an in depth look at how the kinds of lies and sex differences in lying demonstrated in the scientific article are related with Pamela Meyer's tedtalk.
As you grow older, you’ll be faced with some challenging decisions to make in your life. Some don’t have a clear choice or right or wrong answer- like should you listen to a person and make the decision to hurt someone or should you not listen to them. That is the decision you need to make. Making a decision on your own is hard enough, but when other people get involved and try to pressure you one way or another it can be even harder. Like said earlier in the essay, we pass the hat down to someone else to make the decision for us because we cannot make the decision
Groupthink was coined by Janis and is defined as “a psychological phenomenon in which people strive for consensus within a group”(Cherry). So people will essentially forgo their beliefs to conform to the group to obtain harmony or if they don’t agree with a group idea they will simply keep quiet about it rather than challenge ideas. Janis classified eight different “symptoms” of groupthink. They are Illusions of invulnerability, which leads the members of the group to take part in risk-taking and become overly optimistic. Unquestioned beliefs, leads the members to ignore the possible aftermath that their decisions can make. Rationalizing, hinders members from recognizing warning signs and from reexamining their own beliefs. Stereotyping, leads the members of the group to criticize or write off any other group who may have differing opinions. Self-censorship, makes group members who may have differing opinions not disclose them to the group. "Mindguards",certain members of the group who are self-appointed censors that withhold information they find may disrupt group consensus. Illusions of unanimity, leads the members of the group to think that everyone believes the same things. Direct pressure, this is put on members to conform when they do end up expressing their own opinions or the rest of the group feels as if they are having differing opinions. Janis’s work was influential because it helped us examine the
In 1972, Irving Janis presented a set of hypothesis that he extracted from observing small groups performing problem solving tasks; he collectively referred to these hypotheses as groupthink¹. He defined groupthink as “a quick and easy way to refer to a mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members’ striving for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action²” A successful group brings varied ideas, collective knowledge, and focus on the task at hand. The importance of groups is to accomplish tasks that individuals can not do on their own. The Bay of Pigs, Watergate, and the Challenger disaster are all forms of failure within a group. Specifically, you can see the effect of groupthink of Americans before September 11, 2001. The thought of harm to the United States was unfathomable, but only after the attacks did they realize they were not invincible. When a solid, highly cohesive group is only concerned with maintaining agreement, they fail to see their alternatives and any other available options. When a group experiences groupthink, they may feel uninterested about a task, don't feel like they will be successful, and the group members do not challenge ideas. Stress is also a factor in the failure of groupthink. An effective group needs to have clear goals, trust, accountability, support, and training. Some indicators that groupthink may be happening are; making unethical decisions, they think they are never wrong, close-minded about situations, and ignore important information. Many things can be done to prevent groupthink from happening. One way is to make each person in the group a “critical evaluator”. The leader must ...
Citizens of today’s society have to comprehend that by conforming to the pressures of others and imitating everyone else, they will get nowhere in life. First of all, a teenage boy attends his first big high school party at a friend’s house one weekend and he is pressured into drinking beer and smoking marijuana so he will seem cool in front of the popular jocks and cheerleaders. Since many teens are so terrified of ridicule and downright embarrassment in front of fellow students, they decide to give in to their peers even though their actions may go against their beliefs. Emerson believed that by being an individual “you shall have the suffrage of the world.” Furthermore, an innocent sixteen year old girl’s parents go out of town for the weekend and she invites her cute, popular, senior star quarterback boyfriend over, but he pressures her into having sex when she i...
There are eight symptoms of groupthink. The first symptom is when all or most of the group view themselves as invincible which causes them to make decisions that may be risky. The group has an enormous amount of confidence and authority in their decisions as well as in themselves. They see themselves collectively better in all ways than any other group and they believe the event will go well not because of what it is, but because they are involved. The second symptom is the belief of the group that they are moral and upstanding, which leads the group to ignore the ethical or moral consequences of the decisions. The group engages in a total overestimation of its morality. There is never any question that the group is not doing the right thing, they just act. The disregarding of information or warnings that may lead to changes in past policy is the third symptom. Even if there is considerable evidence against their standpoint, they see no problems with their plan. Stereotyping of enemy leaders or others as weak or stupid is the fourth symptom. This symptom leads to close-mindedness to other individuals and their opinions. The fifth symptom is the self-censorship of an individual causing him to overlook his doubts. A group member basically keeps his mouth shut so the group can continue in harmony. Symptom number six refers to the illusion of unanimity; going along with the majority, and the assumption that silence signifies consent. Sometimes a group member who questions the rightness of the goals is pressured by others into concurring or agreeing, this is symptom number seven. The last symptom is the members that set themselves up as a buffer to protect the group from adverse information that may destroy their shared contentment regarding the group’s ...
Wiltshire, Kenneth. "Sweet 16 and Too Immature to Vote." Australian (Canberra). 15 Oct. 2009: 12. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 15 Jan. 2014.
Numerous political scientists consider cognitive socialization to be the most effective form of political socialization. According to theory, cognitive socialization is doctored up information, which is strategically fragmented in such a manipulative manner, that the probability of its rationalization is highly predictable. The manipulative properties of cognitive socialization are so diabolical and Machiavellian in nature, that I consider it to be the ultimate perversion of the democratic process. In all seriousness, numerous intellectuals, and gentleman held in good stature agree, that cognitive socialization is the product of an evil genius.
Many human beings have been involved in a power struggle of some sort since the beginning of time. Between power in the business world, classroom, and government it is often clear who is subordinate and who is dominant. Subordinates may at times feel powerless; however, they can gain satisfaction out of aesthetics and hidden transcripts because of the personal freedoms it represents to them.
Among the numerous advantages promised by a well-constructed Union, none deserves to be more accurately developed than its tendency to break and control the violence of faction. A faction, as commonly understood, is a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passions or of interest, adverse to the rights of there citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community. There are two methods of curing the mischief of faction: the one, by removing its causes, and the other, by controlling its effects. To attack the causes of faction, there are two possible approaches, either destroy liberty, which is essential to its existence, or by give every citizen the same opinions, passions and interests. Obviously, in this case, the possible remedies are far more intolerable than the disease. The latent causes of faction are inherent traits of human kind, and therefore faction, to one degree or another, appears in almost every facet of society. To ameliorate society of this problem, it is necessary that no man have the ability to be a judge in his own cause because his interest would certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably corrupt his integrity. Even if some superlative people would be able to circumvent this trait, the fact that those in this position will not always be superlative negates this exception. By this reasoning, the causes of faction cannot be removed; and that relief is only to be sought in means of controlling its effects. If a faction consists of less than a majority, relief is supplied by the republican principle, which enables the majority to defeat its sinister views by regular vote; while this may lead to inefficient governing and the convulsion of society, it will effectively deter the violence of faction. The problem from there progresses to one of keeping a powerful majority in check so that it can not trample the interests of the population as a whole. For this reason, a pure democracy is without competence to remedy faction; only in a republic, representative democracy, is the prospect for the deterrence of faction present.
Since democracy is the context and the condition for everything else that is valued—work, family life, religion, politics, recreation, and leisure—preserving its vitality and integrity must be a central objective of adult education. (Boggs 1991b, p. 54).