Group Polarization
Group polarization is the tendency for group discussions to intensify members' pre-existing views, leading to more extreme positions. Social conformity and interaction with like-minded individuals reinforce this effect, making stereotypes and opinions more entrenched.
THE IDEA
WHY YANKEES FANS HATE RED SOX FANS
Once we’ve formed stereotypes, for both mental and social reasons it’s hard to undo them. Psychologist George Kelly observed that our beliefs are like pairs of reality goggles. We use them to make sense of the world and navigate our surroundings. A threat to our opinions cracks our goggles, leaving our vision blurred. It’s only natural to put up our guard in response—and Kelly noticed that we become especially hostile when trying to defend opinions that we know, deep down, are false. Rather than trying on a different pair of goggles, we become mental contortionists, twisting and turning until we find an angle of vision that keeps our current views intact.
Socially, there’s another reason stereotypes are so sticky. We tend to interact with people who share them, which makes them even more extreme. This phenomenon is called group polarization, and it’s been demonstrated in hundreds of experiments. Juries with authoritarian beliefs recommend harsher punishments after deliberating together. Corporate boards are more likely to support paying outlandish premiums for companies after group discussions. Citizens who start out with a clear belief on affirmative action and gay marriage develop more extreme views on these issues after talking with a few others who share their stance. Their preaching and prosecuting move in the direction of their politics. Polarization is reinforced by conformity: peripheral members fit in and gain status by following the lead of the most prototypical member of the group, who often holds the most intense views.
Grow up in a family of Red Sox fans and you’re bound to hear some unpleasant things about Yankees fans. Start making regular trips to a ballpark packed with people who share your loathing, and it’s only a matter of time before your contempt intensifies and calcifies. Once that happens, you’re motivated to see the best in your team and the worst in your opponent. Evidence shows that when teams try to downplay a rivalry by reminding fans that it’s just a game, it backfires. Fans feel their identity is being devalued and actually become more aggressive.
When to use it
In a corporate board meeting, be aware that group discussions may lead to riskier decisions; consider incorporating devil's advocates or anonymous voting.
When discussing controversial topics with like-minded friends, actively seek out dissenting perspectives to avoid extreme polarization.
In jury deliberations, ensure that minority viewpoints are heard and given weight to counterbalance the tendency toward harshness.
When managing a team, encourage diverse opinions and avoid letting the most prototypical member dominate the discussion.
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
Jury Deliberations
Juries composed of individuals with authoritarian beliefs tend to recommend harsher punishments after they have deliberated together, showing how group interaction amplifies existing biases.
Corporate Board Decisions
Corporate boards are more likely to support paying outlandish premiums for target companies after group discussions, as members reinforce each other's optimism or ambition, leading to riskier decisions.
Political Opinions
Citizens who initially hold clear beliefs on affirmative action or gay marriage often develop more extreme views after discussing these issues with like-minded peers, moving further in the direction of their political stance.
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
Can you recall a time when a group discussion made your opinion more extreme? What contributed to that shift?
How might group polarization affect political discourse or online echo chambers?
What steps can you take to recognize and mitigate group polarization in your own decision-making or group settings?
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- Think Again The Power of Knowing What You Dont Know (Adam Grant)