12 Angry Men Groupthink
Introduction
12 Angry Men is a good example of group and individual behavior. It clearly illustrates the pressure of conformity and groupthink. A group can be defined as two or more individuals, interacting and interdependent, who come together to achieve a particular objective. In the movie 12 Jurors come together with the sole obligation of concluding if the young man was guilty of murdering his father or not, beyond reasonable doubt.
This group of 12 men who did not know each other walked into the room to discuss this case, showed the first sign of groupthink, as they had already formed the perception of unanimity. Through the movie the group dynamics are on show with both the groupthink and group shift phenomena, the influencing …show more content…
The group quickly agreed to convict the boy as they were doing collective thinking (a group makes decisions faster than individuals) and also the individuals were not accountable separately. So like juror 7 wanted to go quickly to watch a game and juror 10 knew already that they would vote unanimously and they would all quickly leave. None of them but for one thought of thinking through the various pieces of evidence before reaching the conclusion. He uses various influencing methods to make the group go through the evidences. While the movie follows the path of rational thinking , it is not an immediate change. From the show of hand vote which led to an eleven to one split decision it moves to ten to two when the ballot is a secret ballot. This led to heavy outburst from the rest of the group still confirming, showing resistance to a deviant thought. Juror 3 and 10 at this point exerted heavy pressure on juror 8 and 9. Also interesting was when juror 5 abstained from giving a reason, may be he was not convinced of the group thinking at this time and yet was not ready to break the …show more content…
Through out the discussion juror 8 followed the appeal of logic and rational thinking in a measured and calm manner. As every time juror 3 and 10 would reinforce their basic assumptions, despite the strong contradicting evidence, juror 8 would ask them re examine the facts. He would bring the group back again and again to examine evidence till all of them changed their vote to give a unanimous decision of not guilty.
While the group decision making process was on, juror 8 did not negate any ones point of view, he patiently heard all, as he himself was not sure. He wanted to reach a conclusion after examining all the view points and evidence. Therefore he did not give in to the pressure tactics, even when members shouted at him. Though he showed his assertiveness when he wanted to make a
12 Angry Men is a good example of group and individual behavior. It clearly illustrates the pressure of conformity and groupthink. A group can be defined as two or more individuals, interacting and interdependent, who come together to achieve a particular objective. In the movie 12 Jurors come together with the sole obligation of concluding if the young man was guilty of murdering his father or not, beyond reasonable doubt.
This group of 12 men who did not know each other walked into the room to discuss this case, showed the first sign of groupthink, as they had already formed the perception of unanimity. Through the movie the group dynamics are on show with both the groupthink and group shift phenomena, the influencing …show more content…
The group quickly agreed to convict the boy as they were doing collective thinking (a group makes decisions faster than individuals) and also the individuals were not accountable separately. So like juror 7 wanted to go quickly to watch a game and juror 10 knew already that they would vote unanimously and they would all quickly leave. None of them but for one thought of thinking through the various pieces of evidence before reaching the conclusion. He uses various influencing methods to make the group go through the evidences. While the movie follows the path of rational thinking , it is not an immediate change. From the show of hand vote which led to an eleven to one split decision it moves to ten to two when the ballot is a secret ballot. This led to heavy outburst from the rest of the group still confirming, showing resistance to a deviant thought. Juror 3 and 10 at this point exerted heavy pressure on juror 8 and 9. Also interesting was when juror 5 abstained from giving a reason, may be he was not convinced of the group thinking at this time and yet was not ready to break the …show more content…
Through out the discussion juror 8 followed the appeal of logic and rational thinking in a measured and calm manner. As every time juror 3 and 10 would reinforce their basic assumptions, despite the strong contradicting evidence, juror 8 would ask them re examine the facts. He would bring the group back again and again to examine evidence till all of them changed their vote to give a unanimous decision of not guilty.
While the group decision making process was on, juror 8 did not negate any ones point of view, he patiently heard all, as he himself was not sure. He wanted to reach a conclusion after examining all the view points and evidence. Therefore he did not give in to the pressure tactics, even when members shouted at him. Though he showed his assertiveness when he wanted to make a