6.1 Groupthink
4 min read•august 15, 2024
can wreak havoc on decision-making in teams. It's when everyone gets so cozy they stop questioning each other. Think of it like an echo chamber where bad ideas bounce around unchallenged.
This ties into the bigger picture of how social dynamics mess with our choices. Groupthink shows how our need to fit in can override logic. It's a prime example of how our brains go haywire in group settings.
Groupthink: Definition and Characteristics
Concept and Key Traits
Top images from around the web for Concept and Key Traits
Shared Use Trails – Trailism View original
Is this image relevant?
Groupthink | Oscar Berg | Flickr View original
Is this image relevant?
Cognitive bias cheat sheet – Better Humans View original
Is this image relevant?
Shared Use Trails – Trailism View original
Is this image relevant?
Groupthink | Oscar Berg | Flickr View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
Top images from around the web for Concept and Key Traits
Shared Use Trails – Trailism View original
Is this image relevant?
Groupthink | Oscar Berg | Flickr View original
Is this image relevant?
Cognitive bias cheat sheet – Better Humans View original
Is this image relevant?
Shared Use Trails – Trailism View original
Is this image relevant?
Groupthink | Oscar Berg | Flickr View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
- 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
- Involves a deterioration of mental efficiency, reality testing, and moral judgment as a result of in-group pressures towards uniformity
- Key characteristics include:
- : Members believe the group is invincible and can do no wrong
- : Group members rationalize away any negative feedback or information that contradicts their views
- : Members believe their group is inherently moral and their decisions are beyond reproach
- : The group develops negative stereotypes of those who oppose their views or decisions
Pressures and Biases
- : Members who express doubts or disagree with the consensus are pressured to conform
- : Individuals withhold their true opinions and doubts to avoid disrupting group harmony
- : The group perceives a false sense of unanimous agreement, as dissenting views are suppressed or ignored
- Self-appointed "mind guards": Some members take it upon themselves to protect the group from negative or contradictory information
Conditions for Groupthink
Group Dynamics
- High , where members have a strong desire to maintain relationships within the group, can lead to groupthink (NASA )
- from outside opinions and critical evaluation can create an echo chamber effect that reinforces groupthink ()
- A lack of that encourages open discussion and dissent can allow groupthink to take hold ()
- and ideology can lead to a lack of diverse perspectives and critical thinking ()
Situational Factors
- High stress from external threats and pressure to make important decisions quickly can lead to a reliance on groupthink as a coping mechanism ()
- or moral dilemmas can cause a group to seek consensus and avoid confronting difficult realities ()
- and the perceived importance of the decision can exacerbate groupthink tendencies ()
- Overestimation of the group's power and influence can lead to a sense of invulnerability (Titanic's "unsinkable" reputation)
Consequences of Groupthink
Decision-Making Deficiencies
- Groupthink can lead to an , where the group fails to consider all possible options and narrows its focus prematurely ()
- The group may fail to examine the risks of the preferred choice, ignoring potential downsides and overestimating the chances of success (Challenger launch decision)
- Can cause a failure to reappraise initially rejected alternatives, where the group becomes locked into a decision and fails to reconsider other options in light of new information ()
- The group may make little or no attempt to obtain information from experts, relying instead on the collective knowledge and opinions of group members (Enron's disregard for financial analysts)
Biased Information Processing
- Selective bias may occur in processing information at hand, where the group focuses on information that supports their preconceptions and ignores contradictory data ()
- The group may fail to work out contingency plans to deal with foreseeable setbacks or risks ()
- Information that contradicts the group's assumptions may be discounted or misinterpreted to maintain cohesion (NASA's O-ring concerns before Challenger launch)
- The illusion of unanimity can lead to a false sense of consensus and suppress dissenting views (Bay of Pigs invasion planning)
Mitigating Groupthink
Encouraging Dissent and Diversity
- Encourage open discussion and dissent within the group, creating a culture where alternative viewpoints are valued and actively sought out
- Assign the role of "" to one or more members of the group to critically evaluate and challenge the majority position (Red Team in military planning)
- Invite outside experts to share their perspectives and challenge the group's assumptions ()
- Break the group up into smaller sub-groups to work on the same problem independently and then come together to share their conclusions ()
- Have members of the group discuss the problem with trusted members outside of the group to gain fresh perspectives ()
Structured Decision-Making Processes
- Conduct an anonymous survey of group members to surface doubts or dissenting opinions that individuals may be reluctant to express publicly ()
- After reaching a preliminary consensus, hold a "second-chance" meeting where members are encouraged to voice any remaining doubts or alternatives ()
- Use formal decision-making frameworks, such as the Devil's Advocacy approach or the , to systematically explore alternatives and challenge assumptions
- Assign a separate group to generate alternatives and critique the primary group's decisions (Janis' "two groups" approach)
- Encourage the group to consider worst-case scenarios and develop contingency plans to mitigate potential risks ()
Key Terms to Review (46)
Bay of Pigs Invasion: The Bay of Pigs Invasion was a failed military invasion of Cuba undertaken by the United States in April 1961, aiming to overthrow the Cuban government led by Fidel Castro. The operation was primarily carried out by Cuban exiles who were trained and supported by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). This event highlights the dangers of groupthink, as it reflected a lack of dissenting opinions and critical evaluation among the decision-makers involved.
Belief in the inherent morality of the group: This term refers to the assumption that a group's decisions and actions are morally right and justified, often leading members to overlook or rationalize unethical behaviors. This belief can create a strong sense of unity and loyalty among group members, which can contribute to poor decision-making processes, as ethical concerns may be dismissed in favor of group cohesion.
Challenger Disaster: The Challenger Disaster was a tragic event that occurred on January 28, 1986, when the Space Shuttle Challenger broke apart 73 seconds into its flight, resulting in the deaths of all seven crew members. This incident highlighted critical issues related to decision-making processes, particularly the concept of groupthink, as it revealed how a culture of conformity and pressure to meet deadlines can lead to disastrous outcomes in organizational settings.
Chernobyl Disaster Response: The Chernobyl Disaster Response refers to the actions taken by the Soviet Union and international community following the catastrophic nuclear accident that occurred on April 26, 1986, at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in Ukraine. This response included immediate firefighting efforts, evacuation of nearby residents, containment of radioactive materials, and long-term strategies for dealing with the fallout from the disaster. The incident highlighted flaws in decision-making processes, particularly issues related to groupthink among officials and engineers involved in the crisis management.
Collective Rationalization: Collective rationalization is a psychological phenomenon where group members dismiss or downplay warnings, challenges, or doubts that contradict the group’s beliefs and decisions. This often leads to a false sense of security and agreement within the group, allowing them to justify poor decisions without critically evaluating the consequences. Such behavior can prevent groups from recognizing risks and considering alternative perspectives, reinforcing the group's cohesion at the cost of sound decision-making.
Consultative decision-making: Consultative decision-making is a collaborative approach where leaders seek input and feedback from team members before making a final decision. This method encourages open communication, allows for diverse perspectives, and fosters a sense of ownership among participants, ultimately leading to more informed and effective outcomes.
Cuban Missile Crisis: The Cuban Missile Crisis was a 13-day confrontation in October 1962 between the United States and the Soviet Union over the placement of Soviet nuclear missiles in Cuba. This event is significant as it brought the world to the brink of nuclear war and highlighted the dangers of miscommunication and escalation during the Cold War, ultimately revealing the potential for groupthink among political leaders in high-stress situations.
Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: The Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill was a catastrophic industrial disaster that occurred in April 2010 when an offshore drilling rig operated by BP experienced a blowout, resulting in one of the largest marine oil spills in history. The spill released approximately 4.9 million barrels of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico, causing severe environmental damage and significant economic impacts on local industries, particularly fishing and tourism.
Delbecq-Van de Ven Technique: The Delbecq-Van de Ven Technique is a structured method used for group decision-making, particularly in gathering and prioritizing ideas from participants. This technique emphasizes the importance of individual input while minimizing the influence of dominant personalities, ultimately leading to more balanced group discussions and better decision outcomes. It connects closely with the dynamics of groupthink by addressing the potential pitfalls of conformity and ensuring that all voices are heard during the process.
Delphi Method: The Delphi Method is a structured communication technique used to gather expert opinions and achieve consensus on a particular topic through a series of rounds of questionnaires. This approach allows for anonymous feedback, reducing the influence of dominant individuals and facilitating more honest and diverse perspectives, which is crucial when trying to balance bias mitigation with decision-making efficiency and to avoid groupthink.
Devil's advocate: The devil's advocate is a role or approach taken to challenge a prevailing viewpoint or decision by presenting opposing arguments, even if one does not personally hold those beliefs. This practice is essential for encouraging critical thinking and debate, helping to uncover potential flaws in reasoning or group consensus. By deliberately introducing dissenting opinions, the devil's advocate fosters a more thorough evaluation of ideas, which can combat biases that may arise from conformity or groupthink.
Dialectical Inquiry Method: The dialectical inquiry method is a structured approach to decision-making that encourages the exploration of opposing viewpoints to enhance critical thinking and improve decision quality. By fostering a debate between different perspectives, this method aims to identify weaknesses in arguments, challenge assumptions, and ultimately lead to more informed and balanced conclusions. It serves as a countermeasure to groupthink, which often stifles diverse opinions and leads to poor decision outcomes.
Direct pressure on dissenters: Direct pressure on dissenters refers to the forceful and often coercive influence exerted on individuals within a group who express differing opinions or beliefs. This pressure often aims to suppress alternative viewpoints, promoting conformity and discouraging critical thinking. It is a key component of groupthink, where the desire for harmony and consensus leads to the stifling of dissenting voices, ultimately resulting in poorer decision-making outcomes.
Discounting contradictory information: Discounting contradictory information refers to the cognitive bias where individuals tend to ignore or undervalue evidence that contradicts their existing beliefs or opinions. This behavior often leads to flawed decision-making, especially in group settings where conformity can pressure members to overlook dissenting viewpoints.
Encouraging dissent and diversity: Encouraging dissent and diversity refers to the practice of promoting different viewpoints and encouraging individuals to voice their opinions, especially when they differ from the majority. This approach can lead to more thorough discussions and can counteract the tendency of groupthink, where the desire for harmony within a group stifles critical thinking and leads to poor decision-making. Emphasizing dissent allows teams to explore all angles of a problem, ultimately leading to better outcomes.
Enron's Corporate Culture: Enron's corporate culture was characterized by a highly aggressive, competitive environment that encouraged risk-taking and unethical behavior among its employees. This culture, which prioritized profits and success over integrity and transparency, ultimately contributed to the company's notorious collapse in 2001. The emphasis on meeting financial targets led to widespread manipulation of accounting practices and a disregard for ethical considerations.
Failure to examine risks: Failure to examine risks refers to the tendency of individuals or groups to overlook or inadequately assess potential negative outcomes associated with a decision-making process. This oversight often stems from cognitive biases, such as optimism bias or groupthink, where the desire for harmony and consensus can lead to a dismissal of dissenting opinions and cautionary evidence.
Failure to obtain expert information: Failure to obtain expert information refers to a situation where a decision-making group does not seek or utilize the knowledge and insights of experts in relevant fields. This oversight can lead to poor decisions, as the group may rely on limited perspectives and fail to consider critical data or viewpoints that could influence outcomes positively. Such failure is often linked to groupthink, where the desire for harmony and conformity in the group stifles dissenting opinions and discourages thorough analysis of available information.
Failure to reappraise alternatives: Failure to reappraise alternatives refers to the tendency of individuals or groups to stick with a decision or plan without considering new information or different options that may lead to a better outcome. This can result in missed opportunities and poor decision-making, particularly in collaborative settings where group dynamics can suppress dissenting opinions. The impact of this bias is often seen in scenarios where the initial choice is favored, leading to a lack of critical evaluation of other possibilities.
Failure to work out contingency plans: Failure to work out contingency plans refers to the lack of preparation for unforeseen circumstances or potential risks that could impact decision-making in a business context. This failure often leads to poor responses in crises, as teams may not have considered alternative strategies or solutions, resulting in negative outcomes. It is closely related to decision-making processes where groupthink can suppress dissenting opinions and critical evaluations of potential risks.
Fukushima Nuclear Disaster: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster refers to the catastrophic failure of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Japan that occurred in March 2011, following a massive earthquake and tsunami. This disaster highlighted critical failures in decision-making processes and crisis management, exposing the dangers of groupthink among the plant's operators and regulators who underestimated the potential risks involved.
Group cohesiveness: Group cohesiveness refers to the degree to which members of a group are attracted to one another and motivated to stay in the group. It emphasizes the bonds formed among members, often resulting in increased collaboration and communication. This sense of unity can lead to enhanced performance, but can also contribute to conformity pressures, potentially inhibiting critical thinking and independent decision-making.
Groupthink: Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that occurs when a group of people prioritize consensus and harmony over critical analysis and dissenting viewpoints. This can lead to poor decision-making as the group suppresses individual opinions and ignores alternative solutions, ultimately impacting the effectiveness of decision-making processes in various contexts.
High stress situations: High stress situations refer to moments or environments where individuals or groups experience intense pressure, anxiety, or urgency that can significantly impact decision-making processes. In these scenarios, cognitive functions may be impaired, leading to rash choices, increased likelihood of biases, and a higher risk of groupthink, where the desire for harmony in a group results in poor decision outcomes.
Homogeneity of members' social backgrounds: Homogeneity of members' social backgrounds refers to the similarity among individuals in a group regarding their social, economic, cultural, and educational characteristics. This concept is crucial as it can lead to a lack of diverse perspectives within decision-making processes, which often results in conformity and diminished critical thinking. When members share similar backgrounds, they may be more likely to experience groupthink, which stifles innovation and creates a risk of poor decision-making.
Illusion of invulnerability: The illusion of invulnerability is a cognitive bias where individuals or groups believe they are immune to risks and challenges, fostering an overconfidence that can lead to poor decision-making. This mindset can create a false sense of security, making groups underestimate potential dangers and overlook critical information that could lead to better outcomes. Such a belief often contributes to a lack of consideration for alternative viewpoints and dissenting opinions, reinforcing the notion that their decisions are sound.
Illusion of unanimity: The illusion of unanimity is a cognitive bias where individuals in a group believe that everyone else agrees with the group's decision, leading them to suppress their own dissenting opinions. This phenomenon can create a false sense of agreement and hinder critical discussion, often resulting in poor decision-making outcomes. It is closely related to the dynamics of group behavior and can be influenced by social pressures and the desire for harmony.
Impartial leadership: Impartial leadership refers to a management style where leaders make decisions based on fairness and objectivity, rather than personal biases or favoritism. This approach helps create a more inclusive and collaborative environment, encouraging diverse viewpoints and reducing the risk of groupthink. By valuing each team member's input equally, impartial leaders foster innovation and critical thinking, which are essential for effective decision-making.
Incomplete Survey of Alternatives: An incomplete survey of alternatives refers to the cognitive bias where decision-makers fail to consider all possible options before making a choice. This bias often leads to suboptimal decisions because individuals or groups may overlook viable alternatives, focusing only on a limited set of choices. It can arise from various factors like groupthink, where the desire for harmony or conformity within a group leads to the suppression of dissenting viewpoints and critical evaluation of all available options.
Insulation of the Group: Insulation of the group refers to a phenomenon where members of a group are shielded from outside opinions and dissenting viewpoints, which can lead to a lack of critical thinking and a higher likelihood of groupthink. This insulation can create an environment where individuals feel pressured to conform to the group's dominant perspective, inhibiting creativity and discouraging the expression of alternative ideas. Consequently, important information and diverse opinions may be overlooked, impacting decision-making processes negatively.
Janis's Two Groups Approach: Janis's Two Groups Approach is a concept in decision-making that highlights how group dynamics can influence the quality of decisions. It categorizes groups into two types: the 'good' group, which engages in open communication and critically evaluates options, and the 'bad' group, which tends to suppress dissent and prioritize consensus over critical analysis. This framework is essential for understanding groupthink, where the desire for harmony within a group can lead to poor decision outcomes.
Nominal Group Technique: The Nominal Group Technique is a structured method for generating ideas and prioritizing options within a group setting. It allows participants to contribute individually and anonymously, reducing the influence of dominant voices and preventing groupthink. This approach fosters a balanced discussion where all opinions are valued, leading to more thoughtful decision-making.
Overestimation of Group's Power: The overestimation of a group's power refers to the tendency for members of a group to believe that they are more capable or influential than they actually are. This phenomenon often leads to an inflated sense of confidence among group members, which can result in poor decision-making and a disregard for outside opinions or information. The overestimation of group power can exacerbate issues like conformity and groupthink, as individuals may suppress dissenting views, believing that the group's collective strength guarantees their success.
Pre-mortem technique: The pre-mortem technique is a strategic approach used in decision-making to anticipate potential failures before they occur. By imagining a future where a project has failed, teams can analyze the reasons for that failure, leading to better planning and risk management. This proactive method helps identify weaknesses and vulnerabilities that might not be evident during the initial planning stages.
Recent Failures: Recent failures refer to the recent negative outcomes or setbacks experienced by a group or organization, which can significantly impact decision-making processes. These failures can create a heightened sense of caution among decision-makers and contribute to the phenomenon of groupthink, where the desire for consensus overrides critical thinking and leads to poor decisions.
Selective bias in information processing: Selective bias in information processing refers to the tendency of individuals to focus on certain types of information while ignoring others, often based on preexisting beliefs or group dynamics. This bias can lead to skewed perceptions and decision-making, as individuals may favor information that supports their views and overlook contradictory evidence. In contexts like group decision-making, this bias can contribute to phenomena such as groupthink, where consensus is prioritized over critical evaluation of differing opinions.
Self-appointed mind guards: Self-appointed mind guards are individuals within a group who take it upon themselves to protect the group from dissenting opinions or information that could disrupt consensus. They often act as gatekeepers, filtering out perspectives that might challenge the group's prevailing beliefs, ultimately contributing to groupthink by suppressing critical analysis and alternative viewpoints.
Self-censorship: Self-censorship is the act of withholding or restraining one's thoughts, opinions, or expressions due to fear of negative consequences, social pressure, or the desire for group harmony. This behavior often arises in group settings where individuals may suppress their viewpoints to avoid conflict or maintain cohesion within the group, leading to a lack of diversity in perspectives and potential decision-making pitfalls.
Stepladder Technique: The stepladder technique is a structured group decision-making method that encourages participation from all members by gradually adding individuals to the discussion. This approach helps to mitigate issues like groupthink by ensuring that new members share their ideas before hearing the group's prevailing opinion, fostering diverse perspectives and reducing conformity pressure.
Stereotyped views of out-groups: Stereotyped views of out-groups refer to the oversimplified and generalized beliefs about individuals who belong to a different social, ethnic, or cultural group than one's own. These views often lead to negative perceptions and discrimination, as they fail to acknowledge the diversity and individuality within these groups. This concept is particularly relevant when examining decision-making processes, as such biases can lead to flawed judgments and poor collaboration.
Swine Flu Vaccine Rush in 1976: The Swine Flu Vaccine Rush in 1976 refers to the rapid development and distribution of a vaccine in response to fears of a potential swine flu pandemic after an outbreak at Fort Dix, New Jersey. This public health initiative, initiated by the U.S. government, aimed to immunize millions of Americans, but was later marred by issues related to safety and the consequences of group decision-making within health authorities.
Time pressures: Time pressures refer to the constraints imposed by limited time available to make decisions, which can significantly influence the quality and outcomes of those decisions. When individuals or groups face tight deadlines, they may rush their judgment, leading to hasty conclusions that can overlook critical information and alternatives. This phenomenon is particularly relevant in decision-making environments where the urgency can provoke shortcuts in reasoning, thereby increasing the likelihood of errors and biases.
Titanic's Unsinkable Reputation: The Titanic's unsinkable reputation refers to the widely held belief that the RMS Titanic was practically unsinkable due to its advanced safety features and design. This perception, fueled by marketing and media hype, led to overconfidence among passengers and crew, which ultimately contributed to the tragic sinking of the ship in 1912.
Vietnam War Escalation: Vietnam War escalation refers to the significant increase in U.S. military involvement in Vietnam during the 1960s, particularly after the Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964. This escalation involved deploying more troops, intensifying bombing campaigns, and expanding the war's scope, which ultimately led to deeper entrenchment and increased conflict. The decision-making process surrounding this escalation was heavily influenced by groupthink, where the desire for harmony and conformity within the U.S. government led to flawed assessments and ultimately a protracted war.
Watergate Scandal Cover-Up: The Watergate Scandal Cover-Up refers to the attempts made by members of President Richard Nixon's administration to conceal their involvement in the break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters and the subsequent illegal activities. This cover-up involved a series of actions, including obstruction of justice, abuse of power, and a manipulation of governmental processes to protect the administration from accountability. The scandal ultimately led to Nixon's resignation, highlighting the dangers of groupthink within a political environment where dissenting voices were suppressed.
WMD Intelligence Leading to Iraq War: WMD intelligence leading to the Iraq War refers to the information and assessments regarding weapons of mass destruction (WMD) that were used by the U.S. government to justify the 2003 invasion of Iraq. This intelligence was later found to be flawed, with no substantial evidence of WMDs found in Iraq post-invasion, raising concerns about the decision-making process and the impact of groupthink among policymakers.