Analysis of Carol Tavris' In Groups We Shrink From Loner’s Heroics

Mob mentality and herd behavior have a negative behavior on people because of their individuality and rational thinking. People are influenced by others behaviors in a group. They can have negative and positive acts on people having individual thinking and it changes people's rational thinking. In the teleplay “The Monsters Are Due On Maple Street” written by Rod Serling, the article “When Good people Do Bad Things” written by Ann Trafton, and the article “Why Do People Follow The Crowd” reported by ABC news, when someone does not want to share their own idea they do not feel like sharing as a groups. People can also act differently in a group because they do not want to be embarrassed with others.

Imagine you and your group of friends were responsible for a man's life who desperately sought for help, but your group mocked or even ignored him instead. This was the major plot that occurred in the story "The Man in the Well" by Ira Sher. An interesting theme of this story is that groups of people tend to act based on their groups impulse and not their own. Though the negative effect of peer pressure might be the cause of why groups, cliques, and gangs do what they do, their behavior alone tends to be much different than when they are alone. It's as if each character themselves goes through a sudden temporary transformation. However, an interesting p three key concepts, which are personality, actions, and decisions, tend to be influenced

It is often affirmed that as the most dominant species on planet earth, human beings essentially rule the way in which our world has evolved; we have cognitive abilities that allow us to explore a multitude of complex variables, utilize logic, formulate a wide range of choices, and act out our decisions. However, even as highly logical creatures, humans have the propensity to be influenced by the choices of others or information presented to them, form groups of like-minded individuals, and participate in behaviors they would likely not have undertaken on their own. This particular behavior has been coined the “mob mentality and under it, people appear to become mindless automatons that lack any ability to act on their own thoughts. While there are perfect examples of mob mentalities doing good, such as the pivotal march on Washington during the Civil rights movement of the 1960’s, to something as simple as the yearly gathering of like-minded individuals at the Burning Man Festival, there are far more insidious examples such as the Holocaust, the Salem Witch trials, and Bacon’s Rebellion. In the realm of human behavior, each of these “events” is representational of what psychology defines as a mob or herd mentality and this group behavior has been an intrinsic quality of human civilizations throughout history. As such, this writer believes that Bacon’s Rebellion is a prime example of the negative implications mob mentalities are capable of generating. However the

When people are part of a group, they often start to deviate from their personalities, and tend to focus on the opinions and actions of the group. Groups can generate a sense of engaging energy, which can lead to behaviors that a person would not typically engage in if they were alone. People seem to believe that certain behaviors are acceptable when they are in groups that would otherwise not be acceptable if they were alone. Many people believe they cannot be held responsible for their actions when they are with a group because they see the

Conformity or in this case compliance with standards of others and being afraid of being an individual plays a major role with bystanders especially in groups of people. For example, a smoke filled room experiment was tested once with a young man by himself and then again with the same person but in a group. The first time this young man saw the smoke he immediately went looking for help shouting and jumping to get the receptionist’s attention, but the second time when more people were added to the room or “experiment” they all acknowledged the smoke but did nothing. The first time the young man wanted to get help but when a group was added he conformed to that group and did nothing. The same thing happens in real situations like the famous 1964 Kitty Genovese murder and even the 2010 heroic homeless man murder both were witnessed by many, yet no one did

In this paper, I will use a personal experience in which my actions were greatly influenced by the pressure of groupthink to demonstrate my sociological knowledge and to further analyze the situation using Symbolic Interactionism. My experience with bullying and the role that I played in the situation is an excellent example of groupthink leading people to display uncharacteristic behaviors and make choices they would not have otherwise as an individual (Baker 2017).

In the following paper, I will be supporting Nietzsche’s theme that being part of a group can be harmful to individuality. I will support this claim by showing that a person’s behavior changes based on the groups they identify themselves to be in. In the book Subliminal, Leonard Mlodinow discusses different studies at length to prove that unconsciously, people are apt to behave differently once they identify themselves to be in a group. Studies have shown different cognitive biases and unconscious forms of behavior are heavily influenced by external factors. One factor that is especially influential is being part of an in-group or out-group, which creates a dynamic where perception and overall behavior towards self and others is greatly changed. In this essay, I will first show evidence from Nietzsche’s writings that support the claim, including his ideas on conformity and the herd versus the higher man. Then, I will discuss the article Nietzsche’s Sociology by Patrik Aspers, where he deliberates the sociology of Nietzsche’s ideas and discusses his contempt for groups, and shows that although there was an inevitable evolution of humanity that needed groups, they do not serve humanity beneficially. Afterwards, I will present empirical evidence of human behavior changing based on the groups they feel they are a part of. Finally, I will conclude by tying Nietzsche’s ideas on conformity with the observed changes in human behavior to

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

Growing up we find ourselves striving to be accepted, and to be loved by everyone. Although, that is just not the case, in Carol Tavris’s essay “In Groups We Shrink” she recounts the times she had experienced people not coming forward when something bad happened and she explains to us why she thinks this is. I agree with Tavris when she says, that when people are in groups, it causes them to act and think differently than they would if they were by themselves. When Tavris says, “The reason is not necessarily that they are lazy, cowardly or have 50 other personality deficiencies; it has more to do with the nature of groups than the nature of individuals” (Tavris 228).

Irving Janis, a social psychologist, studied how social behavior is influenced in group settings. In 1972, he coined the name ‘groupthink’ to describe observed behavioral changes in individuals belonging to groups. Groupthink is characterized by a group’s pursuit for unity, often resulting in individual members disregarding or altering their own beliefs to coincide with the majority, or group’s, beliefs. This disregard or altercation ensures that the group stays unified; however, results in the group committing illogical actions without considering

Collectively, people are weak. Humans constantly follow what is considered to be a dominant force or trend. No individual can survive separate from the group; therefore, no one strays from what is considered popular. People are biologically programmed to have this stick-with-the-herd mindset. This attribute is encoded into all humans and aids them in survival, which is why people try not to deviate from the group.

The story shows this by giving the town all the same idea even though it was wrong. Group thinking can be a plus in some cases, but in prejudice it is very destructive. It is destructive because once everyone thinks something, no one will want to share a new opinion. Group thinking also takes away or hides individual opinions. An example of this in “The Emperor's New Clothes” would be the old minister who first passed on the message to the emperor that it was the finest cloth he had ever seen. The lie of the old minister progressed the idea of the cloth and from then on it was nearly impossible to

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 analyzing social patterns and behaviors, is there a significant difference between the psychology of an individual and groups? Collective and individual behavior is surprisingly similar, and depending on the circumstances, identical. In Charles Siebert essay “An Elephant Crackup,” he validates to readers, through social elephant narratives and herd mentality theory, that similarly to an individual elephant all elephants behave in similar ways. Furthermore, Sherry Turkle in selections from her work Alone Together accounts

One of the facets of living within civilized society is that there are certain norms and social conventions that people must follow. Frequently, there is a large effort on the part of government, financial, and social institutions to keep people doing most of the same thing as others going to work, driving cars, buying homes, etc. Despite the fact that people engage in these efforts individually, the simple fact that they are all attempting to do the same thing, in much the same way, is indicative of the fact that they are engaged in collective behavior. THESIS: Those who are able to overcome collective behavior and allow for their individuality to determine their own outcomes exemplify the best of human nature.