Social Psychology

Group Compromise: Taking the Middle Ground

The effect that the compromised position of a group is more moderate than the initial views of individual members is termed depolarization. This only happens when opinions of a group are evenly split.

Group Polarization: Going to Normative Extremes

It is more common that most groups initially lean in one direction, because groups are often formed because of shared views. In addition, evidence might also lean towards one direction.

Stoner (1961) demonstrated that when people work in groups, decisions are more risky than when people work alone. However this finding had nothing to do with risk, but was the first demonstration of group polarization; a group's initial average position becomes more extreme after group interaction.

Related website: More information on group polarization

Polarization in the jury room

Group polarization also takes place in the jury room (see SP p. 324).

Explaining Polarized Norm Formation

Group norms become polarized regardless whether the information that is discussed is processed superficially or systematically.

Superficial processing: Relying on others' positions

Group polarization occurs when processing information superficially because (1) undecided or dissenting group members adopt the majority consensus; and (2) people want to be the best possible member of the group, and want to represent the group ideal. Social comparison with other group members makes people realize that they are not above average, and people adapt their initial position to a more extreme one.

Systematic processing: Attending to both positions and arguments

When a decision is important, one pays attention to the arguments and positions of other group members. Group polarization occurs in this situation because majority arguments are more numerous, get more discussion, seem more compelling, and are presented as more compelling.

• Majority arguments are more numerous: When members lean towards one direction, more people talk about that specific direction, and about the arguments that should lead to that direction. So initial preferences bias the kind of arguments discussed, making the group's view more extreme. This is termed the persuasive arguments explanation of group polarization. Polarization becomes more extreme if evidence is of a high quality and/or novel.
• Majority arguments get more discussion: Arguments that people think others share are discussed more, because people think information they agree on is most relevant to what is discussed.
• Majority arguments seem more compelling: Majority arguments are more compelling because people tend to pay particular attention when different people come to the same conclusion (repetition). Information raised by a group member becomes confirmed, so has been socially validated. Unshared information is called into question because it is not verified by others.
• Majority arguments are presented as more compelling: Next to seeming more compelling, majority arguments are also presented as more compelling because (1) information that many group members share is more easily raised in discussion; and (2) majority arguments are expressed with confidence and presented effectively, whereas minority views are expressed with hesitation. These minority views may therefore be seen as more uncertain or as lacking commitment from the person expressing the view.