Analysis Of The Movie ' Twelve Anger Men '

The 1957 film version of 12 Angry Men depicts the nature of a small group setting. Within this film, we can see the group as a system, the development of group climate, and the different roles portrayed in a group. Eleven out of the twelve jurors voted the boy on trial guilty when they were initially asked their vote. Later throughout the movie, the group went into detail on the trail, thanks to Juror 8, and eventually changed their vote. If it weren't for the call for communication on the topic, the boy who was being tried would have been sentenced to death.

The jury in twelve angry men did exibit signs that were common when group think was apparent. In the beginning majority of the men wanted to come to a decision quickly they felt the young boy was guilty and didn’t want to waist there time. So we can assume the group was mostly unified in there opinions. As well the men were isolated from outside opinion. You can even assume there is a group leader, although there was never really a distinct leader a couple men were very opinionated and made there thoughts heard.

The purpose of this article was to evaluate the impact that directive leaders, participative leaders, and devil’s advocates can have on group decision making – particularly the overall quality of the final decision, the process of the group decision making, and five groupthink symptoms for decision making groups. Experimenters directly manipulated the style of leadership being applied as well as devil’s advocacy in comparison to previous studies which also separately observed these same aspects of group decision making. This experiment also included measurements of the objective and subjective outcomes of group decision making by including the quality of the decision, the amount of disagreements before a group decision was reached, and any

When placed in a group with different personalities, you have to find a way to work and communicate effectively as a team; of course you’ll find yourself stuck at times because of certain barriers such as the lack of communication between members. However, group members have to find the ability to work together as a team. In the film “12 Angry Men,” we see a group of jurors who have to decide whether the defendant has committed the crime or is presumed innocent throughout a capital murder trial. As the audience, we witness how challenging it was for the jury to deliberate on a verdict and come to a true consensus because of the different personality role, and negotiation strategies. Specifically, I found six jurors

According to Irving Janes (1972), groupthink occurs when a group makes an irrational decision because of group pressure fostering and the deterioration of ‘mental efficiency, reality testing, and moral judgement” (Irving, Janis, Victims of groupthink, p.9). Social influence is the effect that people have upon the beliefs or behaviors of others (Aaronson, 2004). Both groupthink and social influence theory have a factor in what

In the play, 12 Angry Men, the vote was 11-1 in favor of a guilty verdict in the case being tried. The one juror stood his ground, explained his theory as to why a guilty verdict could not be delivered, and was unwavering in his stance. The jurors went around the table twice, and ended with everyone siding with the original juror. As the deliberations played out and jurors were questioned, some jurors were not able to justify their guilty verdict, merely stating “It just is”. This statement shows the effect of the groupthink mentality, especially since one juror was considerably vocal and angered by the time being spent on deliberations. The logical discussions the other jurors had with one another displayed a positive aspect

Groupthink is a problem-solving process in which proposals are accepted without a critical, careful review of the pros and cons of the alternatives, and in which considerable social pressure is brought out to bear against those expressing opposite view point’s (222). Groupthink is a process that almost occurred to the group at the beginning of 12 Angry Men. Eleven of the twelve men voted guilty without a review of the trail, almost sending a young boy to death. If it wasn’t for juror number eight, who expresses his opposing not guilty view, surely the group would have been a victim of the groupthink process. A young boy was almost sentenced to death, without even a discussion of what went on within the murder trial.

Idealized Influence – defined by the values, morals, and ethical principles of a leader and is manifest through behaviours that supress self interest and focus on the good of the collective.

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

When a mans life is at stake it calls for a jury due to this decision or task is to big for one person and needs a team effort to evaluate the evidence and agree on a verdict. The type of collaboration used in 12 Angry Men would be considered All Channel, a group in which everyone talks to everyone. Juror #1 did take the initiative and second as the forman of the group but all in all this was a Team based organization, an organization that has a flat structure rather then a heirochial one. In the beginning of the film when the judge provided instructions to the juroy you could tell in his voice that he was almost bored and felt that this was an irrelovent step to the prosacution and was just following protocol. Juror #8 had a huge impact in this film.

Twelve Angry Men is a courtroom drama that was brought to the big screens in 1957. The storyline follows twelve men selected for jury duty, who are trying to reach a verdict on a young man’s trial following the murder of his father. Throughout the debates and voting, the men all reveal their personalities and motives behind their opinions. Because of all the differences of the men, their communication skills lack in some ways and are excellent in others. The three small group communication variables that I found portrayed throughout the movie were prejudice, past experience and preoccupation.

Groupthink theory often occurs without the group’s realization. Irving Janis formed 8 different symptoms that indicate groupthink. The first of these symptoms is illusions of vulnerability. This occurs when members of the group are overly optimistic and believe that nothing negative will arise from their decision. Janis describes it as taking great risks and acquiring the attitude of “everything is going to be OK, because we are a special group”. Secondly we have belief in inherent morality. This symptom is characterized as the groups thought that they could do no wrong. They believe that they have high morality, that they are right in all situations and they ignore the ethical consequences that could arise because of their decisions. As the third

The movie Twelve Angry Men is about the twelve jurors that could adjust their influence in a decision-making process for conviction an eighteen years-old boy, whether the boy guilty or not guilty in murdering of his father. It represents a perfect example for applicable of a work group development framework. It also has examples of influence techniques among a group’s members. This paper is looking at those specific examples in the movie and focusing in analysis the reasons why Juror 8 is so much more effective than others in the meeting.

According to Fischer (Group Behavior) the benefit of group decision is that you get more perspectives and more voices, allowing you to see things from different viewpoints. This can also be a negative as well if the group dynamic leads to falsely believing an idea after presented. In one staff meeting I held we discussed the facts about the merger we recently had with another company and how the company held true to their words on pay increases. Even after the employees received the pay increases they still had this false idea that this would not be true. The overall group thought and fear of a merger still had power over the facts shown to them. As a manager I have learned that over time the majority of the group will trust you and have a successful meeting if the facts are presented. “Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15, ESV). Group behavior involving hindsight bias can be very difficult to manage however being consistent with the truth will outweigh that negativity in the staff meetings over

Groupthink is a phenomenon that happens in an organisation because often required to work in groups or teams. Almost all organisations work within groups on certain projects to reach a decision on ideas and plans. Groupthink requires the group to conform to the same beliefs and requires cohesiveness at all times. Groupthink occurs when a group makes faulty decisions because group pressure lead to a deterioration of “mental efficiency, reality testing and moral judgement” (Irving Janis).