Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Film analysis of twelve angry men
12 angry men scene analysis
Advantages and disadvantages of groupthink
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The term groupthink in this report is defined as, the social psychological phenomenon that results in groups during pressure situations. This social psychology theory is broken down into eight signs. Illusion of invulnerability, Collective rationalization, Belief in inherent morality, Stereotyped views of out-groups, Direct pressure on dissenters, Self-censorship, Illusion of unanimity, Self-appointed “mindguards”. According to research conducted by Irving Janis, there are three conditions to groupthink. The first, "high group cohesiveness" which is the direction for a group to be in unity while working towards a goal, or to satisfy the emotional needs of its members. Secondly, the structural faults such as insulation of the group, lack of norms and central leadership, in addition social background of group members. The third, situational context includes the circumstances of the groups meeting, social roles and expected behavior. This notion is exemplified during the movie, "12 Angry Men". The purpose of this essay is to examine the movie content to display the groupthink symptoms in place. Groupthink consists of eight major factors that occur during the film's scenes, as the twelve men debate a premeditated murder court case. All of the factors continue to rise as the jury discusses the young man's fate. During the film, a unanimous vote must be reached, despite this one man refuses to vote guilty. In 1957 the Orson Welles directed film opens as the judge explains the case and its severity. Soon after the group forms as the 12 men enter the jury discussion room. During these scene frames, the case evidence is explained. As the men talk they give details of an old man living beneath the boy testified, that he heard a fight, stat... ... middle of paper ... ...a unanimous vote of not guilty. The final scene takes place signifying the "adjourning stage". Two of the jurors, eight and three exchange the only character names mentioned during the film. The entire process of groupthink occurs in multiple ways that display its symptoms on individual behavior, emotions, and personal filters. These symptoms adversity affected the productivity throughout the juror's debate. In all, all twelve men came to an agreement but displayed group social psychological aspects. Works Cited "Groupthink - PsySR: Psychologists for Social Responsibility." Insert Name of Site in Italics. N.p., n.d. Web. 4 Apr. 2014 Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of Groupthink: a Psychological Study of Foreign-Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 0-395-14002-1.
12 Angry Men is about 12 men who are the jury for an 18 year old accused of murder. The judge states in the opening scene that it is a premeditated murder in the 1st degree, if found guilty will automatically receive the death penalty. The 18 year old male is accused of killing his father with a “one of a kind” switch blade, in their home. The prosecutors have several eye witness testimonies, and all of the evidence that they could need to convict the 18 year old male. In the movie it takes place on the hottest day of the year in New York City. There are 12 jurors whom are to decide if the evidence is enough to convict the teen of murder in the first degree. In the first initial vote it is 11-1. The only way that the jurors could turn in their votes was if there was unanimous vote either guilty or not guilty among the 12 jurors. As the movie progressed the jurors ended up changing their minds as new evidence was brought to their attention by simple facts that were overlooked by the police and prosecutors in the initial investigation. Tempers were raised, and words flew, there was prejudice and laziness of a few of the jurors that affected the amount of time it took to go over all of the eye witness testimonies and evidence. The eye witness testimonies ended up being proven wrong and some of the evidence was thrown out because it was put there under false pretense.
The topic of this paper is Irving Janis’s concept of groupthink. There has been an increase in the utilization of groups or teams of people who come together in the decision-making process. There are many benefits to group decision-making with each member brings their own perspectives, beliefs, and ideas to the table. However, there are also negative dynamics such as groupthink that can hinder this process. Groupthink can lead to members believing that their opinions don’t hold as much weight as their peers, a group becoming overconfident in their knowledge of what is right, and the minimization of threats. Lack of thorough analysis of all available options or opportunities can have costly and long reaching negative consequences. Proactive
In the play “Twelve Angry men”, the story line presents a variety of perspectives and opinions between twelve very different men. Some are more likely to be pointed out as prejudice, and others are more focused on reaching fair justice. Clearly, it is quite difficult for different people to vote ‘guilty’ or ‘not guilty’ in unity when coming to a fair decision. In all of the twelve jurors, I have chosen Juror 3 and Juror 8 for contrast and comparison. I believe that Juror number 3 is a very opinionated man, with more differences than similarities comparing with Juror number 8.
Guilty or not guilty? This the key question during the murder trial of a young man accused of fatally stabbing his father. The play 12 Angry Men, by Reginald Rose, introduces to the audience twelve members of a jury made up of contrasting men from various backgrounds. One of the most critical elements of the play is how the personalities and experiences of these men influence their initial majority vote of guilty. Three of the most influential members include juror #3, juror #10, and juror #11. Their past experiences and personal bias determine their thoughts and opinions on the case. Therefore, how a person feels inside is reflected in his/her thoughts, opinions, and behavior.
In the drama “Twelve Angry Men” by Reginald Rose, twelve men are called before the court to be apart of a jury. They must analyze a case in which a nine-teen year old is being convicted for the murder of his father. The twelve U.S. citizens must analyze the case and give a convincing verdict. Although all jurors played a significant role in the drama, jurors three and eight played an even more influential role than the rest of the jurors.
The 1957 film, Twelve Angry Men, follows twelve male jurors that must come to a decision on the fate of an 18-year-old Latino male who has been accused of stabbing his father to death. In this first-degree murder trial if the teenager is found guilty, the verdict means the death sentence. As the deliberations begin, the movie quickly develops an outlook of the jurors' intricate qualities, prejudices and backgrounds. Juror 1, the foreman, who is a cordial high school football coach, conducts an introductory ballot and, without reluctance, eleven jurors vote for the defendant to be convicted. Juror 2, a shy and hesitating bank clerk, appears to be conserving his guilty verdict because he feels intimidated by the more opinionated jurors. Juror 3, a middle-aged businessman who is not close
I thought it was obvious." Said timidly jury number two. This jury seems to be matching beliefs as a influence by fear of social intimidation. Some of the members seem to mimic thous in authority. Authority is earned by being the Foreman or by intimidating with seemingly valid arguments. There are three basic leaders observed, the Foreman, Jury number eight (voting non-guilty) and the tenth Juror (voting guilty). This three men seem to guide the crowd and persuading them to follow there ideology. The foreman balances the group by setting implicit or spoken regulations. The crowd Immediately identifies with the guilty group as its the most conformable, therefore they fight, just like the boys from the experiment, to protect it. "All right! Who did it? What idiot decided to change his vote?" Says after a long pause jury number three. This is an example of first signs of verbal
According to the book, conformity tends to happen when you have a small group of people who conform to a decision. This conformity can influence a change in behavior or a belief as a result of the group pressure. After watching the twelve angry men, I was able to witness how one man is able to convince the rest of the jury that the accused man who is waiting for his sentence, is not guilty and that the evidence given by the court was not sufficient enough to declare him guilty for the crime that he had committed. In this movie, I was able to identify four elements of conformity those being group size, unanimity, cohesiveness and the public response.
Many people believe they are their own person and are free to make their own choices; however, few explore just how much a group can influence their behavior. This realm of influential group power has been analyzed by several psychologist to see how far people will bend to stay within a group mentality. Psychologists Asch, Zimbardo, McEwan, and Lessing defined a group mind as a mass of people who ignore their own morals and conscious to act as one whole entity because of obedience and pressure. As a result, this creates the potential for the group to become a destructively dangerous force.
According to Myers and Twenge (2013), conformity is “a change in behavior or belief as the result of real or imagined peer pressure” (p. 188). In 12 Angry Men, conformity is seen in the beginning of the film. As the jury is voting on the suspect’s verdict, there is a hesitancy from a few of the jurors. In the beginning, only a couple jurors raised their hands for “guilty”. Slowly, more and more people started raising their hands as a result of peer pressure from those around them. In the end, everyone but one person was raising their hand for “guilty”, and the vote was 11 to 1 “guilty”. This scene relates to the study of Asch’s (1955) line comparison studies of group pressure. In this study, a line of people was supposed to tell
Every individual has faced a situation in which an opinion was required, yet no one was brave enough to speak about what is really on their mind. Due to the fear of going against what the rest of the group says they think, as well as the fear of feeling outcasted afterwards. This type of situation is called “groupthink,” theorized by Irving Janis, in which a person’s behavior is affected based off of those around him/her. One of the most controversial real world example of groupthink, would be the United States invasion into Iraq in 2003. The United States Government believed that Iraq withheld weapons that could cause major mass destruction, therefore the result to attack was decided upon, except the plan backfired in many ways. According
During the storming phase, the way in which group members should behave and relate towards one another are not always clearly defined. However, the storming process helps group members to extract the necessary norms that will allow for the group to get to a point where they can work together to reach common goals. It is in this stage where more positive emotions are exhibited (Gladding, 2017). For example, in 12 Angry Men (Lumet & Rose, 1956) the men finally began to listen to one another as they discussed their understanding of the case and the evidence that was presented. Group members began to respect one another’s opinion and even give assent to thoughts that were beneficial in reaching a verdict. Part of this was due to the process of identification, where group members began to feel a connectedness with one
The movie Twelve Angry Men is about twelve male jurors deliberating on a trial of a young man on trial for the murder of his father. The beginning of deliberations it appeared, all the men wanted to vote guilty immediately, so they could go about what they had planned for that evening. Nevertheless, on the first vote, eleven of the men voted guilty while, one voted not guilty. That being said, the majority did not influence this one man, and he went against the majority. Majority influence is “social pressure exerted by the larger portion of a group, the majority, directed toward the individual members and smaller fractions within the group, the minority” (Forsyth, 2010). Thus, the eleven which voted guilty could not understand why he would vote not guilty. His reasoning for voting not guilty was, he had reasonable doubt the young
“12 Angry Men” is a classic example of a movie, whose plot carries various group learning and social psychology theories. Released in 1957, the movie is about a team of 12 jurors who are totally strangers to each other, and are called upon by the judge to reach a consensus on whether to pronounce guilty or not, an 18 year old person accused of murdering his own father. A guilty verdict would lead to a death sentence and hence the onus was on the team of jurors to take a responsible call after examining all the evidences.
The second tenet of groupthink indicates that those individuals that feel victimized by the cohesive group may ignore the warning signs by thinking that the decision has been analyzed by others. The avoidance of critical thinking and rational discussions may lead victims of groupthink to take decisions that could have been prevented if the signs were detected since the beginning.