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 incorrect or deviant decision-making outcome. Group members try to minimize conflict and reach a consensus decision without critical evaluation of alternative ideas or viewpoints, and by isolating themselves from outside influences.
Loyalty to the group requires individuals to avoid raising controversial issues or alternative solutions, and there is loss of individual creativity, uniqueness and independent thinking. The dysfunctional group dynamics of the "ingroup" produces an "illusion of invulnerability" (an inflated certainty that the right decision has been made). Thus the "ingroup" significantly overrates their own abilities in decision-making, and significantly underrates the abilities of their opponents (the "outgroup").
Antecedent factors such as group cohesiveness, faulty group structure, and situational context (e.g., community panic) play into the likelihood of whether or not groupthink will impact the decision-making process.
Groupthink is a construct of social psychology, but has an extensive reach and influences literature in the fields of communication studies, political science, management, and organizational theory,[1] as well as important aspects of deviant religious cult behaviour.[2]
Most of the initial research on groupthink was conducted by Irving Janis, a research psychologist from Yale University.[3] Janis published an influential book in 1972, which was revised in 1982.[4][5] Later studies have evaluated and reformulated his groupthink model.[6][7]
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 incorrect or deviant decision-making outcome. Group members try to minimize conflict and reach a consensus decision without critical evaluation of alternative ideas or viewpoints, and by isolating themselves from outside influences.
Loyalty to the group requires individuals to avoid raising controversial issues or alternative solutions, and there is loss of individual creativity, uniqueness and independent thinking. The dysfunctional group dynamics of the "ingroup" produces an "illusion of invulnerability" (an inflated certainty that the right decision has been made). Thus the "ingroup" significantly overrates their own abilities in decision-making, and significantly underrates the abilities of their opponents (the "outgroup").
Antecedent factors such as group cohesiveness, faulty group structure, and situational context (e.g., community panic) play into the likelihood of whether or not groupthink will impact the decision-making process.
Groupthink is a construct of social psychology, but has an extensive reach and influences literature in the fields of communication studies, political science, management, and organizational theory,[1] as well as important aspects of deviant religious cult behaviour.[2]
Most of the initial research on groupthink was conducted by Irving Janis, a research psychologist from Yale University.[3] Janis published an influential book in 1972, which was revised in 1982.[4][5] Later studies have evaluated and reformulated his groupthink model.[6][7]
-
As part of the "outgroup" it's your responsibility to come up with a critical thinking perspective. This is where you fail. Saying the have similar CFB records is false.
Sark in five years was 34-29 .540 24-21 Pac 12 .533
Mora in two years is 18-8 .692 12-6 Pac 12 .667
Now if you have some critical thinking that can refute those cold hard facts, than so be it. But don't give me a definition of Groupthink aka. Conformity and think you're legit.
I think Mora is better than Sark, and also that Mora inherited a better team from Neuheisel than what Sark got. But if you look at this year's results there is an eerie similarity of losses to the same teams. Mora took the Falcons to the NFC championship, but it was in his first year. After that it was down hill.
Don't get me wrong -- he's a capable coach. But I think that people are overhyping him off the charts in Seattle right now.
I think Mora is better than Sark, and also that Mora inherited a better team from Neuheisel than what Sark got. But if you look at this year's results there is an eerie similarity of losses to the same teams. Mora took the Falcons to the NFC championship, but it was in his first year. After that it was down hill.
Don't get me wrong -- he's a capable coach. But I think that people are overhyping him off the charts in Seattle right now.
But he is recruiting players right now no way he could be in negotiations with someone else....
NOT EVEN TOSH WOULD DO THAT! RIGHT?
It sounds like Mixon, (who paid for his own trip to Seattle for the AC), and the rest of us are waiting for this to shake out.
Mora uses his agent for a lot of the back and forth, (especially with UCLA, I hope). He's got time to do both recruit and negotiate. He hopefully stays arms-length with UCLA AD. USE YOUR AGENT!
"No comment", is the classy way to say, "Things are going on, they're in a state of flux, and I'll tell you when I know something for sure."
Mora is a classy guy. He doesn't want to seem that he bailed on UCLA at the drop of a hat. (For you Hatters out there.) He has to give UCLA a chance to counter, but Woodward has a bigger wallet.
Deep breaths everyone.
great. another chipocrit prediction. i've been waiting for so long for you to re-emerge to tell me my fortunes.
Comments
Get the fuck out.
BRB, heading to ER
Loyalty to the group requires individuals to avoid raising controversial issues or alternative solutions, and there is loss of individual creativity, uniqueness and independent thinking. The dysfunctional group dynamics of the "ingroup" produces an "illusion of invulnerability" (an inflated certainty that the right decision has been made). Thus the "ingroup" significantly overrates their own abilities in decision-making, and significantly underrates the abilities of their opponents (the "outgroup").
Antecedent factors such as group cohesiveness, faulty group structure, and situational context (e.g., community panic) play into the likelihood of whether or not groupthink will impact the decision-making process.
Groupthink is a construct of social psychology, but has an extensive reach and influences literature in the fields of communication studies, political science, management, and organizational theory,[1] as well as important aspects of deviant religious cult behaviour.[2]
Most of the initial research on groupthink was conducted by Irving Janis, a research psychologist from Yale University.[3] Janis published an influential book in 1972, which was revised in 1982.[4][5] Later studies have evaluated and reformulated his groupthink model.[6][7]
-
Washington should hire him!
Sark in five years was 34-29 .540 24-21 Pac 12 .533
Mora in two years is 18-8 .692 12-6 Pac 12 .667
Now if you have some critical thinking that can refute those cold hard facts, than so be it. But don't give me a definition of Groupthink aka. Conformity and think you're legit.
Don't get me wrong -- he's a capable coach. But I think that people are overhyping him off the charts in Seattle right now.