Show simple item record

Group Influence On Individual Risk Taking 1

dc.contributor.authorWallach, Michael A.en_US
dc.contributor.authorKogan, Nathanen_US
dc.contributor.authorBem, Daryl J.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-09-03T16:52:19Z
dc.date.available2014-09-03T16:52:19Z
dc.date.issued1962-06en_US
dc.identifier.citationWallach, Michael A.; Kogan, Nathan; Bem, Daryl J. (1962). "Group Influence On Individual Risk Taking 1 ." ETS Research Bulletin Series 1962(1): i-39. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/108371>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0424-6144en_US
dc.identifier.issn2333-8504en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/108371
dc.description.abstractDoes group interaction lead to greater conservatism or to greater risk taking in decisions than would obtain were the decisions arrived at individually.–or is there an averaging effect? This question was investigated with a procedure in which the protagonist in each of 12 everyday life situations must choose between two courses of action, one of which involves considerably more risk than the other but also is much more rewarding if successful. The S must decide on the lowest level of probability for the success of the risky alternative that he would deem sufficient to warrant its choice. A total of 218 liberal arts university students participated in the study. In the experimental condition, the S s first arrived at individual decisions concerning each of the 12 situations; then, they were brought together in discussion groups of six with the request that they reach a group consensus on each decision; and afterward, they were asked to make all their decisions privately once again. Some S s also made private decisions yet another time two to six weeks later. The group members' judgments of one another's relative degrees of influence and of popularity within the group also were obtained. There were 14 all‐male and 14 all‐female groups. In the control condition, S s made their decisions individually each of two times with one week intervening, under instructions the second time that encouraged them to change rather than simply to recall their earlier decisions. It was found that (1) group decisions exhibit greater risk taking than appears in pre‐discussion individual decisions; (2) post‐discussion private decisions exhibit the same increase in risk taking as occurs in the group decisions; (3) the increase in risk taking resulting from the discussion process is still maintained after a subsequent period of two to six weeks has elapsed; (4) no shift in risk taking level occurs over time in the absence of the discussion process; and (5) degree of risk taking in pre‐discussion individual decisions and degree of judged influence within the group are positively related. Two interpretations of these findings were suggested, either or both of which may apply: (1) the knowledge that one's decisions are being made jointly with others leads to a diffusion of personal responsiblity, the outcome of which is an increased willingness to take risks; (2) high risk takers are more likely to take the initiative in social situations, with the result that they become more influential in the group.en_US
dc.publisherAddison‐Wesleyen_US
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.titleGroup Influence On Individual Risk Taking 1en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelEducationen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelSocial Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/108371/1/ets200112.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/j.2333-8504.1962.tb00112.xen_US
dc.identifier.sourceETS Research Bulletin Seriesen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStoner, J. A. F. A comparison of individual and group decisions involving risk. Unpublished M.S. thesis, School of Industrial Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1961.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKomarovsky, Mirra. Functional analysis of sex roles. Amer. sociol. Rev., 1950, 15, 508 – 516.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLewin, K. Frontiers in group dynamics. Hum. Relat., 1947, 1, 2 – 38.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLonergan, B. G., & McClintock, C. G. Effects of group membership on risk‐taking behavior. Psychol. Rep., 1961, 8, 447 – 455.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcNemar, Q. Psychological statistics. ( Rev. ed. ) New York: Wiley, 1955.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMilner, Esther. Effects of sex role and social status on the early adolescent personality. Genet. psychol. Monogr., 1949, 40, 231 – 325.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOsborn, A. F. Applied imagination. New York: Scribner, 1957.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePelz, Edith B. Some factors in “group decision.” In Eleanor E. Maccoby, T. M. Newcomb, & E. L. Hartley (Eds.), Readings in social psychology. New York: Holt, 1958. Pp. 212 – 219.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchachter, S. Deviation, rejection and communication. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1951, 46, 190 – 207.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSiegel, S. Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw‐Hill, 1956.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTagiuri, R., & Kogan, N. Personal preference and the attribution of influence in small groups. J. Pers., 1960, 28, 257 – 265.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTaylor, D. W., Berry, P. C., & Block, C. H. Does group participation when using brainstorming facilitate or inhibit creative thinking? Admin. Sci. Quart., 1958, 3, 23 – 47.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceThibaut, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. The social psychology of groups. New York: Wiley, 1959.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTurner, R. H., & Killian, L. M. (Eds.). Collective behavior. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice‐Hall, 1957.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWallach, M. A., & Caron, A. J. Attribute criteriality and sex‐linked conservatism as determinants of psychological similarity. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1959, 59, 43 – 50.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWallach, M. A., & Kogan, N. Sex differences and judgment processes. J. Pers., 1959, 27, 555 – 564.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWallach, M. A., & Kogan, N. Aspects of judgment and decision making: Interrelationships and changes with age. Behav. Sci., 1961, 6, 23 – 36.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWhyte, W. H., Jr. The organization man. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1956.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAtthowe, J. M., Jr. Interpersonal decision making: The resolution of a dyadic conflict. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1961, 62, 114 – 119.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBack, K. W. Influence through social communication. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1951, 46, 9 – 23.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBrown, R. W. Mass phenomena. In G. Lindzey (Ed.), Handbook of social psychology, Vol. 2. Cambridge, Mass.: Addison‐Wesley, 1954. Pp. 833 – 876.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCartwright, D., & Zander, A. (Eds.). Group dynamics. ( 2nd edit. ) Evanston, Ill.: Row, Peterson, 1960.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFestinger, L. An analysis of compliant behavior. In M. Sherif & M. O. Wilson (Eds.), Group relations at the crossroads. New York: Harper, 1953. Pp. 232 – 255.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHorowitz, M. W., Lyons, J., & Perlmutter, H. V. Induction of forces in discussion groups. Hum. Relat., 1951, 4, 57 – 76.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHunt, E. B., & Rowe, R. R. Group and individual economic decision making in risk conditions. In D. W. Taylor (Ed.), Experiments on decision making and other studies. Technical report No. 6, AD 253952. Arlington, Va.: Armed Services Technical Information Agency, 1960. Pp. 21 – 25.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKelley, H. H., & Thibaut, J. W. Experimental studies of group problem solving and process. In G. Lindzey (Ed.), Handbook of social psychology, Vol. 2. Cambridge, Mass.: Addison‐Wesley, 1954. Pp. 735 – 785.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKogan, N., & Wallach, M. A. The effect of anxiety on relations between subjective age and caution in an older sample. In P. H. Hoch & J. Zubin (Eds.), Psychopathology of aging. New York: Grune & Stratton, 1961. Pp. 123 – 135.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.