Psychology Dictionary of Arguments
Search
Author
> Janis,
Irving L.
Item
Summary
Haslam I 182
Groupthink/Janis: Example: after the failure of the
1961 Bay of Pigs invasion which had been planned by
a group of highly intelligent people the question came
up how this failure had been possible.
Janis Thesis: Although Janis concluded that the CIA’s
faulty planning and lack of effective communication
was partially at fault for the Bay of Pigs fiasco, he
diagnosed the primary problem as stemming from
social psychological processes operating within the
president’s core advisory group. (Janis; 1972(1),
1982(2)).
Psychological tradition: Beginning of the 1970s theory
and research on group and organizational decision>
making were dominated by individualistic subjective
Groupthink utility theory (Kramer, 1998)(3), according to which a
single person’s subjective evaluations of risk and
reward affect their decision-making processes.
JanisVsTradition: stressed the group dynamics
underlying these decisions. In particular, he theorized
Haslam I 183
that the cohesiveness of groups could motivate their
members to prioritize group harmony and unanimity
over careful deliberation when making decisions.
Haslam I 184
Def Group think/Janis: ‘Groupthink’ [is] 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
overrides their motivation to realistically appraise
Meta data
Janis, Irving L.
Haslam I
S. Alexander
Haslam
Joanne R.
Smith
Social
Psychology.
Revisiting the
Classic Studies
London 2017
Psychology Dictionary of Arguments
Search
Author
Item
Summary
Meta data
1972(1):
alternative courses of action. (Janis,
9)
Janis thesis: a specific set of antecedent conditions
can lead the members of a group to seek consensus
with one another instead of engaging in careful and
deliberative decision-making.
Group think model/Janis:
a) the antecedent conditions expected to produce this
consensus-seeking psychology,
(b) a set of observable symptoms that should arise
from it, which in turn result in
(c) a set of defective decision-making processes.
The model suggests that these defective processes
tend, much of the time, to produce suboptimal
collective decisions.
Antecedent conditions: highly directive (e.g.,
charismatic or authoritarian) leaders, limited
information search, and insulation of the group from
outsiders with the necessary expertise to make sound
decisions.
Especially important: important: a strong sense of
group cohesion (i.e., a strong collective bond of some
sort) and a context of high stress or crisis, especially
likely when confronting a complex and consequential
decision.
^Haslam I 185
Groupthink symptoms: (Janis 1971)(3)
Over-estimation of group worth:
1.Illusion of invulnerability
2. Belief in morality of ingroup
Closed-mindedness:
3. Collective rationalization
Psychology Dictionary of Arguments
Search
Author
Item
Summary
4. Stereotypic views of outgroups
Pressures toward uniformity:
5. Self-censorship
6. Illusion of unanimity
7. Pressure placed on deviants
8. Mindguarding
Problems: decision-making objectives are
inadequately discussed, only a few alternative
Haslam I 186
solutions are entertained, originally preferred solutions
are not critically examined, initially discarded solutions
are not re-examined, experts are not consulted, advice
is solicited in a selective and biased fashion, and the
group fails to develop contingency plans.
Solution/Janis: group leaders should encourage all
group members to be ‘critical evaluators’ such that
they are able to freely express doubts or objections.
Additionally, group leaders should avoid stating their
initial preferences at the onset of any decision-making
venture(…). Janis advocated for the creation of
several independent groups, each with their own
leader, to solve the same problem. (…) group
members’ opinions should be frequently challenged,
either by allowing different external experts to attend
meetings, or by designating select members to serve
as temporary ‘devil’s advocates.’ Finally, Janis
stressed the importance of ‘second-chance’ meetings
in which group decisions could be reconsidered one
last time before being settled or made public.
Haslam I 187
Examples for groupthink: the invasion of North Korea,
Meta data
Psychology Dictionary of Arguments
Search
Author
Item
Summary
the Bay of Pigs, and the Vietnam War escalation.
Examples not exhibiting groupthink: the Marshall Plan
and the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Haslam I 189
Groups/Janis: thesis: the only goal of decision-making
groups is to engage in measured deliberation to make
accurate and logical decisions.
VsJanis: Groups may have other goals in mind, such
as gaining ‘satisfaction with and commitment to the
decision,’ ‘improved implementation by group
members’, or even ‘diffused responsibility for poor
decisions’ (McCauley, 1998(4): 148). >Group
think/psychological theories.
KramerVsJanis: Roderick Kramer (1998)(5) suggested
that at least some of Janis’ case examples are better
understood as flawed decisions arising from
politicothink rather than groupthink. President Kennedy
(…) sought to make accurate decisions regarding what
was the best political decision (e.g., would be popular
domestically) to the detriment of making the best
possible military decision. In other words, careful
appraisal of choices
Haslam I 190
(i.e., non-groupthink symptoms) in one domain may
produce apparent groupthink in another.
FullerVsJanis/AldagVsJanis: Sally Fuller and Ramon
Aldag (1998)(6) argue that the easy popularity of the
model has distracted social psychologists. They claim
that researchers have focused on testing the original
parameters of the groupthink model at the expense of
asking broader questions about group decision-
Meta data
Psychology Dictionary of Arguments
Search
Author
Item
Summary
making. (…) – ironically – some of the best evidence
for the groupthink model emerges from examination of
the way in which groupthink research has itself been
conducted. >Group think/psychological theories.
1. Janis, I.L. (1972) Victims of Groupthink. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin.
2. Janis, I.L. (1982) Groupthink: Psychological Studies
of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. Boston: Houghton
Mifflin.
3. Janis, I.L. (1971) ‘Groupthink’, Psychology Today,
November, 43–6: 74–6.
4. McCauley, C. (1998) ‘Group dynamics in Janis’
theory of groupthink: Backward and forward’,
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 73: 146–62.
5. Kramer, R.M. (1998) ‘Revisiting the Bay of Pigs and
Vietnam decisions 25 years later: How well has the
groupthink hypothesis stood the test of time?’,
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 73: 236–71.
6. Fuller, S.R. and Aldag, R.J. (1998) ‘Organizational
Tonypandy: Lessons from a quarter century of the
groupthink phenomenon’, Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 73: 163–84.
Dominic J. Packer and Nick D. Ungson, „Group
Decision-Making. Revisiting Janis’ groupthink studies“,
Meta data
Psychology Dictionary of Arguments
Search
Author
Item
Summary
Meta data
in: Joanne R. Smith and S. Alexander Haslam (eds.)
2017. Social Psychology. Revisiting the Classic
studies. London: Sage Publications
_____________
Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source,
arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding
books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the
sender of the contribution.
The note [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] is an addition
from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified,
the page numbers refer to this edition.
> Counter arguments against Janis
Authors A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Z
Concepts A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Z
Home
List view
Tables
Log-in and Sign-in
Legal Notice Contact Data protection declaration