Groupthink

There are many factors that affect scientific objectivity. Even the most diligent and bias-free scientists may be influenced by various factors that compromise their impartiality. Like all people, scientists carry their own personal perspectives. These may be ideological, psychological, or other types of attitudes shaped by social influences. Scientific objectivity requires freedom from personal, political, religious, and social preferences. Of the many psychological factors that influence objectivity, I will focus on groupthink, which has not been adequately recognized as a bias factor in the evolution of science.

[Punitive] perspectives on artistic education and aesthetic knowing in classrooms void of creative expression. And how to get it back.
(A critique and response to the question:
What impact would art education have on creative cognition in both students’ ability to problem solve and on teachers’ ability to teach with passion as co-learners?)

The 1 st of May, 2017 will mark a turning point in the chequered history of the University of Limerick (UL), as a new president from the University College Dublin (UCD), Prof Des Fitzgerald (currently the UCD VP for Health Affairs), takes the UL's top helm. This peaceful transition of power takes place after a period in which UL had been haunted with allegations from past employee whistleblowers and students of financial corruption and misgovernance under Prof Don Barry's 10-year tenure. This transition period also presents a unique window of opportunity for the new president to clean house, distance himself from the past wrongdoings of UL, permit a State Visitor to come in and redress over a dozen grievance complaints currently pending with various government bodies brought forth against UL by the whistleblowers. The allegations put forth by the whistleblowers against UL are almost fabulous, unfathomable and incontournable for a publicly-founded third-level educational institution and would include cronyism, payments of hush money, kickbacks, existence of slush funds, human rights violations, covering up of racist hate crimes on campus, exacting retributions, lack of transparency, of public accountability and of due process, rampant existence of illicit drugs on campus, abuses of power, arbitrary use of authority, etc. This paper examines and analyses this chequered history of UL, its organisational structure, its Mafia culture, and attempts to address how it had become so corrupted and mismanaged, for it never was a simple function of Prof Barry's incompetence and complicity. It also describes the allegations brought forth by several former UL employee whistleblowers. The inadequacy of the Higher Education Authority's (HEA's) oversight and the failure of the Irish legal system permitted these illicit Mafia enterprises to flourish. These malfeasant activities should compel the Irish Government to ask how UL's gangster activities have gone unchecked for so long and were allowed to thrive for the better part of a decade in the western province of the country.

The terminology around blockchain technology is notoriously confusing, with disputes over whether a blockchain is the same as a distributed ledger, or whether an appcoin is the same as a protocol token. In this article, I examine the difficulties the rapidly shifting, contested vocabulary poses for regulators seeking to understand, govern, and potentially use blockchain technology, and offer suggestions for how to fight through the haze of unclear language.

In Part I, I provide examples of the fluctuating, contested language in the blockchain technology space, and describe the forces at play in shaping the language. In Part II, I lay out the problems the language raises for regulators, including challenges in identifying the facts about the technology, distinguishing among the many variations of the technology, and communicating clearly about the technology, as well as increasing the chances of regulatory capture, inconsistent regulation across jurisdictions and subject domains, and " perverse innovation. "

In Part III, I closely analyze the use of the term " immutable " in blockchain discourse, to illuminate the confusion a single term can cause for regulators (and the public at large). I argue that the widespread use of the term " immutable " as a defining feature of blockchain technology is misleading, given that (i) real world events have demonstrated that the unchangeable nature of a blockchain record is always limited by the decisions of its human governors to change it, and (ii) the source of a blockchain record's " immutability " is disputed, meaning that it is unclear whether any particular variation of the technology may be fairly described as creating an " immutable " record. This is problematic as regulators have already begun to craft legislation describing the records created by blockchain technology as immutable, and are making decisions to use the technology in large part because of its " immutability. "

In Part IV, I suggest ways regulators can become better educated about blockchain technology, as is essential for them to responsibly govern or use the technology. I also recommend that regulators take a highly critical approach that (i) seeks to separate hype from reality; (ii) is sensitive to how incentives may shape the way blockchain technology is portrayed by industry and those sponsored by industry, and how misleading terminology appears in publications of the highest prestige levels; (iii) includes diverse perspectives from proponents and critics of the technology, multiple disciplines, and from across the gender, race, geographic, and economic development spectrums; (iv) takes nothing, including descriptions of the technology itself, at face value, but deeply interrogates and scrutinizes the technology and its stated capabilities; and (v) asks regulators to think for themselves about the technology and its benefits rather than succumbing to herd behavior.

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the understanding of groupthink in temporary organizations. Only anecdotally has the literature touched upon how the temporary organization's structure may foster groupthink. Studies of faulty group processes are imperative since temporary organizations are becoming more common. Design/methodology/approach -Following the design used by several authors who analyzed the Everest events, this paper is an historic in-depth case study based on accounts of several survivors. Findings -Three out of four features of groupthink are found and analyzing the Everest events there are several symptoms to groupthink that may be present in any temporary organization.

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the understanding of groupthink in temporary organizations. Only anecdotally has the literature touched upon how the temporary organization's structure may foster groupthink. Studies of faulty group processes are imperative since temporary organizations are becoming more common. Design/methodology/approach -Following the design used by several authors who analyzed the Everest events, this paper is an historic in-depth case study based on accounts of several survivors. Findings -Three out of four features of groupthink are found and analyzing the Everest events there are several symptoms to groupthink that may be present in any temporary organization.

This encyclopedia entry explore the implications of social psychology for creativity research. Topics include motivation, interactions, collaborations, groups and groupthink, environments conductive to creativity, the role of "gatekeepers" and more.

Psychologists have demonstrated the value of diversity – particularly diversity of viewpoints – for enhancing creativity, discovery, and problem solving. But one key type of viewpoint diversity is lacking in academic psychology in general and social psychology in particular: political diversity. This article reviews the available evidence and finds support for four claims: (1) Academic psychology once had considerable political diversity, but has lost nearly all of it in the last 50 years. (2) This lack of political diversity can undermine the validity of social psychological science via mechanisms such as the embedding of liberal values into research questions and methods, steering researchers away from important but politically unpalatable research topics, and producing conclusions that mischaracterize liberals and conservatives alike. (3) Increased political diversity would improve social psychological science by reducing the impact of bias mechanisms such as confirmation bias, and by empowering dissenting minorities to improve the quality of the majority’s thinking. (4) The underrepresentation of non-liberals in social psychology is most likely due to a combination of self-selection, hostile climate,and discrimination. We close with recommendations for increasing political diversity in social psychology.

The requirements for effective contemporary leadership are changing along with leadership perspectives and priorities as more creative, innovative and entrepreneurial responses are required in the face of multiple challenges, opportunities and possibilities. Openness, diversity and collaboration and understanding the nature of the creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship required, their interrelation, and the factors that help and/or hinder them have become more important. Changing business models, challenges and opportunities are creating new arenas for both leadership and entrepreneurship and their success requirements are converging to such an extent that in certain contexts they may soon be almost indistinguishable.

Published in the June 2017 issue of Effective Executive (Vol. XX, No. 2, June, pp 12-30) a quarterly journal published by IUP Publications, a division of ICFAI. The citation is:

Coulson-Thomas, Colin (2017), Leadership for Creativity, Innovation and Entrepreneurship,  Effective Executive, Vol. XX No. 2, June, pp 12-30

Recently NATURE published a discussion on construction of sills in attempt to prevent or slow melting glaciers that are discharging ice into the ice fjords. Several further papers promptly followed publication of this essentially erroneous article in a respected NATURE magazine. Here it is pointed out that there is a discrepancy of several magnitudes thus excluding a long-term viability to manage the edges of ice fjords or continental ice shelves/sheets due to a phenomenon known as the mega-erratics. These are blocks of hard rocks that are several kilometres in size that have been dislocated by a warmed and wet edges of glacier/ice sheet/ice shelf. This Parliament evidence points out the error that was not apparent to the peer-reviewers at the time and in subsequent papers that followed. The Parliament was shown evidence that large enough obstacles cannot be possibly made to prevent ice discharges due to a progression of melting, that softens and lubricates glaciers, ice caps and ice sheets. The forces unleashed by the ice front exceeds several magnitudes from the conceived objects that sills were proposed. The only, and very only effect is temporary and limited to prevention of warm water incursion where these methods will work for a while in a cold, dry, and relatively stable ice formations. A long-term projections suggested to prevent warmed and water-infested glaciers from discharging ice into the ocean cannot be made as the forces of ice exceed many magnitudes of the sills and levies that can be made of concrete blocks, aggregates or other materials. Thus the prevention of sea level rise by this method for centuries or millennia is not functional one and thus the mitigation and prevention of rubbish gyros in ocean, the supply of housing, nuclear and food production security must be looked at as solution by the ocean littoral states. Several examples of various types of risk to the sustainability of oceans have been presented in addition to the above exposed misconception. This comes with much regret as it appears that one 'hoped-for-solution' to manage the future climate change impacts has largely foundered on the issue that the sills cannot be made strong enough to contain most important, warmed glaciers or edges of unstable ice shelves. However, for a short-term this may offer small-scale solutions provided that costs remain sufficiently small. Aggressively melting ice formations with darkened surfaces, wide spread melt water ponds, or water filled crevasses it does not offer much, if any, prolonged ice stability. (The document is best viewed as a .pdf file due to the lay-out of graph and legends.)

In the dystopian world of 1984, a totalitarian regime, called Ingsoc, is shown and its major name is Big Brother, a strong and unknown leader whose motto must be followed by everyone. Big Brother's party says that the individual's will is to be part of a group, it seems a coherent ideology for a collective society, but this kind of thought leads to groupthink.

Psychologists have demonstrated the value of diversity-particularly diversity of viewpoints-for enhancing creativity, discovery, and problem solving. But one key type of viewpoint diversity is lacking in academic psychology in general and social psychology in particular: political diversity. This article reviews the available evidence and finds support for four claims: 1) Academic psychology once had considerable political diversity, but has lost nearly all of it in the last 50 years; 2) This lack of political diversity can undermine the validity of social psychological science via mechanisms such as the embedding of liberal values into research questions and methods, steering researchers away from important but politically unpalatable research topics, and producing conclusions that mischaracterize liberals and conservatives alike; 3) Increased political diversity would improve social psychological science by reducing the impact of bias mechanisms such as confirmation bias, and by empowering dissenting minorities to improve the quality of the majority's thinking; and 4) The underrepresentation of nonliberals in social psychology is most likely due to a combination of self-selection, hostile climate, and discrimination. We close with recommendations for increasing political diversity in social psychology.

The present paper proposes an integrative account of social forms of practical irrationality and corresponding disruptions of individual and group-level emotion regulation. I will especially focus on disruptions in emotion regulation by means of collaborative agential and doxastic akrasia. I begin by distinguishing mutual, communal and collaborative forms of akrasia. Such a taxonomy seems all the more needed as, rather surprisingly, in the face of huge philosophical interest in analysing the possibility, structure and mechanisms of individual practical irrationality, with very little exception, there are no comparable accounts of social and collaborative cases. However, I believe that, if it is true that individual akrasia is, in the long run, harmful for those who entertain it, this is even more so in social contexts. I will illustrate this point by drawing on various small group settings, and explore a number of socio-psychological mechanisms underlying collaborative irrationality, in particular groupthink. Specifically, I suggest that in collaborative cases there is what I call a spiralling of practical irrationality at play. I will argue that this is typically correlated and indeed partly due to biases in individual members' affect control and eventually the group's with whom the members identify.

From the Moderna, to the AstraZeneca Drug testing for treatment of COVID-19 and the places affected by the newer convalescent serums: America, Europe, Germany, France, and Great Britain, and the methods of studies and latest information on the CDC, scientific hypothesis and the social scientific factor of the 'Groupthink' Analysis. The alarming cost of ‘groupthink’ robs managers with a more conservative approach with 1-3 managers who may lead the group. Irving Janis’s, research psychologist from Yale University, theory of ‘groupthink,’ reduces extreme views which cultivate innovation and protect groups from the illusion of invulnerability when making decisions. Fatal leadership may follow groupthink as one-sided opinion interrupting procedures to cultivate a different viewpoint and promote innovation.

Connotations of "shot" as a complex metaphorical nexus
Variety of uses of "shot"
Groupthink sustaining a "shot" mindset in a period of pandemic
Being "shot" as a rite of passage?
Identity of the "shot" and the "jabbed" in a community?
Community perception of the "unshot" and "unjabbed"?
The "unshot" as the archetypal outsider -- the "leprous" unbeliever?
Masked versus Unmasked in a pandemic of "leprosy"
Unexplored existential condition of being "unshot"
Self-identity of the "unshot" and the "unjabbed" -- as unfulfilled?
Embodiment of paradoxical cognitive dynamic between "shot" and "unshot"?

In 1933, the same year the Nazi regime ascended to power, Stanley Milgram was born into a working class Jewish family in the Bronx in New York City. During his formative years, Milgram was perturbed by the Holocaust. Later he became a social psychologist and obtained a tenure track position at Yale University. During the many Nazi war crime trials, “ordinary” Germans in the docks—like Adolf Eichmann in Israel—typically explained that in participating in the Holocaust they were just following higher orders. This led Milgram to wonder what would happen if he ran a social psychology experiment where ordinary (American) people were ordered to inflict harm on another person. Would they also do as they were told? He designed a basic procedure that tested this question and soon afterwards had his students run the first pilot.
The result from the first trial stunned Milgram—most subjects indeed obeyed
orders to inflict what appeared to be intense shocks on an innocent person. Milgram immediately sensed he had captured essential elements of the Holocaust in the laboratory setting. Thereafter he applied for funding to run an official research program so that he could better understand so-called obedience to authority. Milgram’s intentions were not entirely honorable—running such an innovative research program could greatly boost his then precarious career prospects and financial security. Pre-tenure, Milgram told Jerome Bruner, a professor from Milgram’s graduate program at Harvard University, “My hope is that the obedience experiments will take their
place along with . . .” contributions by the biggest names in social psychology: “Sherif, Lewin and Asch” (as cited in Perry, 2012, p. 57). Whatever drove Milgram on, he anticipated enormous benefits for both scientific knowledge and himself. So what exactly did he find? What follows is a basic overview of his two baseline procedures and the counterintuitive results they produced.

Britain's exit from the European Union on the 31st of January 2020 was the culmination of what was arguably the second major failure of statecraft by the British political class this century, following the UK's participation in the 2003 Iraq invasion. Drawing on elite theory as well as research into group behaviour, identity diversity and cognitive diversity, and decision-making and organisational performance, the article examines key stages of the Brexit process. The article argues that failures at each stage are attributable to a degree of 'groupthink' and 'group polarisation' linked to the relatively homogenous nature of the British political class and the structural attributes of British government. It goes on to advocate greater diversity in political recruitment and fundamental reform of modes and structures of British government.

Questioning and challenge, openness and candour, diversity, collaboration, and engaging and learning from the creative arts are all conducive of creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship. Creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship are inter-related. Creative ideas need to be adopted, implemented and commercialised for innovation to occur which can require entrepreneurial flair. Business leaders need to discuss, consult and consider where creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship are most needed, what they should be applied to and for what purpose, and what their relevance, significance and value might be for customers and prospects. They should also consider whether they should take a wider range of interests into account when deciding when, where and for whom to be creative, innovative and entrepreneurial. 

Published as: Coulson-Thomas, Colin (2017), Stimulating Creativity, Enabling Innovation and Supporting Entrepreneurship, Management Services, Summer, pp 26-29

Prior to the 2007 -9 banking crisis, the UK Financial Services Authority presented itself as a 'proportionate' and 'risk-based' regulator, preferring firms to adhere to the spirit of high-level principles rather than the letter of detailed rules. Simultaneously, it developed a supervisory regime that was unprecedentedly complex, producing a 'Handbook' of intricate secondary legislation that ran to some 8000 pages. Explaining these contradictory aspects of the pre-crisis regime demands a reappraisal of the dominant explanations of the supervisory failures that contributed to the banking crisis. In contrast to accounts that focus on officials' uncritical adherence to efficient market thinking (regulatory groupthink) or the political clout of the financial industry (regulatory capture), this article suggests that supervisory officials' actions can be understood only by reference to their institutional and structural contexts. Amid heightened public sensitivity to risk, officials developed an elaborate and transparent supervisory framework as a defence against potential political censure. At the same time, collegial firm -supervisor relationships were preserved as state-of-the-art risk-management ideas were recombined and repackaged in line with the institutional legacies of earlier 'club-like' modes of supervision. Together, these divergent tendencies contributed to overconfidence in the use of predictive risk assessment and neglect of banks' fundamental business risks.

This essay is a discussion of the causes and consequences of Groupthink in terms of effective decision-making. The paper makes recommendations on the most appropriate responses to Groupthink and the possibilities for managing its risks. Furthermore the essay highlights some ways in which the proposed solutions could be incorporated into decision-making models. Finally the paper highlights some of the lessons for decision-makers and organizations.

The concept of groupthink has dominated much of group research in Foreign Policy Analysis (FPA). However, groupthink’s success and proliferation in academic and popular circles has led to some general misinterpretations of the concept itself. While Janis’ groupthink concept has received a wide amount of attention throughout the years, it has also been subject to various strands of criticism. In fact, groupthink’s broad popularity has not been based on the success of research findings. Also, groupthink challenges much of the research of social psychology undertaken in recent decades which reveals that particular group dynamics can actually contribute to more efficient decision-making. In this paper we seek to demystify the groupthink phenomenon and present an alternative assessment of group dynamics in foreign policy decision-making. We argue in favour of adopting a social cognition approach which can advance our understanding of how decision-making groups define the particular challenges that they face in the international political environment. More precisely, we present a conceptual framework based on social sharing mechanisms for comprehending how groups develop the problem representations that inform their foreign policy decisions. Ultimately, we seek to highlight the positive contributions of group dynamics in effective decision-making.

The term ‘group­think’, coined by Irving L. Janis in 1972 is a phe­nomenon that is one of the worst factors dis­tort­ing de­cisions. Group­think evolves under pe­cu­liar ante­cedent con­di­tions (or pre-re­quis­ites) and shows spe­cific symp­toms when in ac­tion. In this art­icle, these con­di­tions and symp­toms are re­viewed, ex­amples are given from global his­tory to demon­strate its ad­verse im­pacts and the man­age­ment of the phe­nomenon is il­lus­trated by pos­it­ive ex­amples. Then an at­tempt is made at prov­ing that the rise and fall of for­eign cur­rency lend­ing, per­haps the largest eco­nomic dis­aster in post-com­mun­ist Hun­gary, can be traced back to the phe­nomenon called group­think.

The effectiveness of distributed ISD teams is often inhibited by tensions between contextual (macro) and localised (micro) factors. In light of these challenges, literature suggests that cohesion is a key determinant of team performance; however, competing literature asserts that conflict is essential for exploiting diverse knowledge. This suggests a paradoxical need for both cohesion and conflict. However, extant ISD literature has yet to explore how the interplay of macro- and micro-level factors affect cohesion and conflict in distributed settings. To address this gap, we present and utilise a theoretical framework to analyse ethnographic data from a distributed ISD project called ‘Athena’. The findings point to a ‘double edged sword’ of cohesion and suggest that moderate levels of task-based conflict are essential for addressing diversity in distributed teams. Additionally, excessive levels of cohesion can contribute to social conflict between subgroups when task conflict is constrained.

Resiliency is explained in several different ways. “Counterbalance” or “Paradoxical Personality” are terms coined by Al Siebert, a psychologist who is best known for his research on psychological resilience and the inner nature of highly resilient survivors. To explain these terms, he created a list of some of these counterbalance or paradoxical personality qualities usually observed in highly resilient survivors:

• Sensitive and Tough
• Unselfish and Selfish
• Optimistic and Pessimistic
• Stable and Unpredictable
• Creative and Analytical
• Serious and Playful
• Hard-working and Lazy
• Impulsive and Thorough

The more pairs of traits, the more mental and emotional flexibility essential for resiliency. Many of these resilient survivors feel delighted when they hear that counterbalanced traits are signs of resiliency. Some highly complex individuals say that their paradoxical nature has drawn negative reactions from others. A few of these individuals have privately thanked Dr. Siebert after they learned that they are not borderline schizophrenic and that it is emotionally healthy to have many opposite feelings.

Furthermore, counterbalanced or paradoxical personality traits are not signs of emotional instability—just the opposite. Well-integrated inner complexities increase your psychological stability and give you greater mental and emotional flexibility for dealing with many circumstances. In work teams, for example, a quickly adaptable person might assume informal leadership when things are in turmoil, or quietly follow along if things are running well. They may initiate creative brainstorming when a group is stuck or be the conservative voice of caution if others are trying too many new ideas. If the group is overly optimistic, this person might add a pessimistic perspective, but then turn around and be optimistic if the group is too pessimistic. Being flexible in groups is a good sign.

On the flip side, there is a phenomenon called the “good child handicap” or the “good child syndrome” where individuals who have been raised with programming to be “good” wind up with rules that become limitations and handicaps in later life and may actually threaten their survival and the survival of those around them. At the core of “rule-based living” there is a defining of who you are and your worth as a person, what you deserve in life and the level of "safety" you feel about life by how well you have followed the system of rules you have adopted from your upbringing and culture. In this way of life, the rules become measuring sticks for your personhood and in many ways your identity is defined by rules—not only the rules you keep, but also the rules about the way you keep the rules. So the rules become a double handicap, you are limited and handicapped when you keep them and you are emotionally tormented whether you keep them or not since the very presence of the rules means you aren’t good enough or loveable enough just as you are.

My cultural background is first generation Syrian-American Jew. My parents immigrated to the United States shortly before I was born. I grew up experiencing both the American and the Syrian cultures in my household and community. This was both a blessing and a challenge. The journey my parents took to escape Syria to the United States was both grueling and perilous. This experience left traumatic scars that impacted their adjustment to American culture and impacted how they saw my own relationship to navigating the path between the two cultures. Empathy and adaptability are attributes that I acquired on the path of resiliency as well as having a tough yet sensitive approach to life among several other traits.

It is obvious what the advantages are in being a highly resilient survivor, but there are a lot of disadvantages that come along with these qualities. I often heard the phrase “It’s lonely at the top.” After thinking that through, I wondered why people choose sides, for example, the political pressure to group oneself in choosing the subjective “right” side to be on. It is not clear why these sides do not communicate with each other, it is clear that what one side lacks the other side possesses a solution. Damage or absence of the callosum commissure, a tiny thick band of nerves yet the largest single structure of the brain, results in the two hemispheres to cease the exchange of information of both sides. This results in a lack of coordination, instability, and overcompensation for what each hemisphere lacks akin to what our society today displays in this political arena. A birth of false self forms in labeling an individual as “Right” or “Left” for an underlying sense of belonging to the point that the meaning behind these ideologies dissipate; the origin of how our republic was formed is long forgotten.

It is comfortable to have a sense of belonging, it is comfortable to be in a group, it is comfortable to the point where you can lose your mind and not have to think any longer. Not only do I not know how to be comfortable, but I am also incapable of it, it is like cutting strings and not being able to put them back together—I am not wired that way. A disadvantage is that I am at a loss at not being able to have that secure sense of belonging, there is a small degree of it when I join an athletic team of some sort but there is always a sense of it slipping through my hands in ever so lingering impermanence. Several Social Psychology experiments that were carried out right after World War II proved time and time again that blind obedience and conformity in a group lies the root of malevolence. Compulsory counterbalance of groups enables freedom to think for myself and form ideas wherein this disadvantage turns into an advantage. Another drawback is that I am often bored, yearning for someone to challenge my thinking. A worthy contender who I crossed paths with combated me with an enlightening proverb, “As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another” (Mishlei 27:17). When I thought that through, I began to question approach in terms of my interactions with an individual or a group. Open to pay attention, to pause and wait for someone to express something I do not know. This yearning for a worthy opponent leads me to publicly confront and expose acts of tyranny by corrupt authority. Freud and Jung drifted apart yet there was still this constant debate of ideas between them which gave birth to new ideas with several dimensions to conceptualize awareness for society to live better. There is a lack of building on top of ideas wherein a majority of society is stuck in a fixed mindset that hinders this drive for growth.

Today, technology is the opiate for the masses, not religion.

References

Siebert, Al (2005). The Resiliency Advantage: Master Change, Thrive Under Pressure, and Bounce Back from Setbacks. p. 129, 133.

Siebert, Al (1996). The Survivor Personality: Why Some People Are Stronger, Smarter, and More Skillful at Handling Li

What makes a consensus among scientists credible and convincing? This paper introduces the notion of a "hard-won" consensus and uses examples from recent debates over climate change science to show that this heuristic standard for evaluating the quality of a consensus is widely shared. The extent to which a consensus is "hard won" can be understood to depend on the personal qualities of the participating experts; the article demonstrates the continuing utility of the norms of modern science introduced by Robert K. Merton by showing that individuals on both sides of the climate science debate rely intuitively on Mertonian ideas-interpreted in terms of characterto frame their arguments.

The impact of coordination, ingroup attraction, collectivism and individualism on group performance was investigated in educational settings. Fourteen groups of British students (N=52) undertook a group task whose marks contributed to their final degree results. Each group had a team captain who kept a group log. Regression analysis found that coordination and individualism were significant predictors of group performance, accounting for 25.7% of the variance. The results imply that individualism in student task groups should involve task-division, giving individual members unique responsibilities, that coordination should be monitored through group logs and that group leaders should have a facilitative role.

Britain's exit from the European Union on the 31st of January 2020 was the culmination of what was arguably the second major failure of statecraft by the British political class this century, following the UK's participation in the 2003 Iraq invasion. Drawing on elite theory as well as research into group behaviour, identity diversity and cognitive diversity, and decision-making and organisational performance, the article examines key stages of the Brexit process. The article argues that failures at each stage are attributable to a degree of 'groupthink' and 'group polarisation'; linked to the relatively homogenous nature of the British political class and the structural attributes of British government. It goes on to advocate greater diversity in political recruitment and fundamental reform of modes and structures of British government.

Preface;

Part I: Theorizing Public Policy and News Media Representations

>Introduction: some notes on public policy and media;

Chapter 1: Political philosophy;

Chapter 2: Public policy;

Chapter 3: News media representations and discourse of public policy.

Part II: Group Processes and the Media as a Referee in Public Policy Making

>>Introduction: why group processes matter;

>>Chapter 4: When the common good is not so common: group identity motives in public policy making;

>>Chapter 5: Why and when media organizations referee public policy-making;

>>Chapter 6: Group processes among media workers, faulty decision-making processes and effects on public opinion about policy;

References;
Index.

Many boards appear reluctant to be open and transparent, especially in respect of organisational failings. Cynicism and distrust is the result. Complacency, groupthink and unfettered power can have corrosive consequences. Questioning, encouraging challenge, openness and internal competition, and securing balanced advice, identifying relevant inputs and ensuring diversity can be essential for remaining current, relevant and innovative. Vested interests should be avoided and In relation to corporate governance, there is sometimes too much stress upon the details of codes and insufficient attention is paid to basic principles, such as the avoidance of a concentration of power and the importance of checks and balances.

In this paper I argue that there are cases in which a speaker S’s observation of the fact that her assertion that p is accepted by another person enhances the strength of S’s own epistemic position with respect to p, as compared to S’s strength of epistemic position with respect to p prior to having made the assertion.  I conclude by noting that the sorts of consideration that underwrite this (happy) possibility may go some distance towards explaining several (unhappy) aspects of our group life as epistemic subjects – in particular, groupthink and group polarization.

“Are You a Werewolf?” (AYAW?) is a deception based party game that forces a group of villagers to pick out a pair of werewolves from the group and eliminate them before the werewolves destroy the village. Andrew Plotkin created this game as a derivative of Dmitry Davidoff’s “Mafia” and is a favorite of gamers as a representation of a “social game” (Chittaranjan & Hung, 2010). The game is often played late at night with many of the popular gaming conventions in the United States (Origins, GenCon, San Diego Comic Con, Dragon Con, etc.) as a way for gamers to socialize, to “decompress” from the convention experience, and as a means to participate in the act of gaming in a more “adult” manner (language, alcohol consumption, and other adult behaviors that normally frown upon at a family-friendly event).

Along the same style of game, “The Resistance” was inspired by AYAW? with only 5 to 10 players needed to make the game work, as opposed to the 15 to 21 players needed for AYAW? This change in the player structure allows for, according to the manufacturer of the game, “increase the resources for informed decisions, intensify player interaction, and eliminate player elimination.” Both “The Resistance” & AYAW? fit the classic definition of a social deception game (SDG)

One of the strengths of SDG is the primary interactions are communication-based. It is not a traditional role playing game (RPG) that uses dice rolls and generated player stats as the primary mode of interaction, nor is it a traditional card/board game where the main mode of interactions being the elements present on a tabletop. Bluffing and perception are the tools that players use within a typical game of AYAW? It is these two elements that make a great platform to teach about small group communication, specifically the power roles within small groups and the structures within a small group (Verderber, Verderber, & Sellnow, 2013).

Many of the academic studies of SDGs either relates to the mathematical probabilities connected to the various structural co-constructions based on role configurations and village engagements (Midgal, 2010) or as a proxy for analysis of deception (Chittaranjan & Hung, 2010). As communication scholars, it is important to look at the communication interactions themselves, rather than a proxied representation of social interactions present in the previous research.

The focus of this case study is to show how SDGs were used to teach aspects of small group communication (specifically the developments of roles with small groups & power structures that emerge with small group structures (Harris & Sherblom, 2011)) to multiple groups of students taking the basic communication course at a large university in the United States. The framework of the case study will begin with an explanation of the game. The next element will be a brief discussion of the previous literature related to SDGs are the ludological aspects of small group communication. This will be followed be a description of the lesson plan/course objectives that were used to frame the class time. An analysis of the reflective assignments will help describe the benefits of approaching small group communication with a ludological technique. There will also be artifacts from interviews with other werewolf players from popular gaming conventions to show how the students’ impressions of the game match “the reality” of playing the game with others (as opposed to playing the game in the academic realm). Finally, there will be a discussion of the effectiveness of SDGs within the college communication curriculum. 

Two of the major themes that were present in the reflective analyses conducted by the students were the understanding of “task-based” communication patterns and the impact of power roles and leadership within SGC. Artifacts will be presented in this case study to provide context behind these two themes.

It's hard to compare previous eras to this present one-which is always "the best of times and the worst of times." That said, there are features of life in our America that feel new to me. I'll mention two. On the one hand, an effective populist demagogue appears busy as a squirrel in October, laying up provisions for his renewed assault on the peaceful transfer of power through a national election. And what's that I hear? "Next time, no more Mister Nice Guy"? Are these desiderata hard to come by nowadays? Yeah they are. History requires a certain dose of patience and an equal degree of persistence.

A growing body of the scholarship within security studies looks at the influence that crisis has on decision making. Critical areas of focus provide insight into the political leader as a key decision-maker, groups as decision-making bodies, and the impact of organizational culture and bureaucratic politics. With crises becoming more complex, the security of states can be impacted in a variety of ways. Under extreme stress, a leader can succumb to flawed decision-making as a result of information-processing errors and cognitive biases which skew the way that information is assessed. These decisions can lead to policies and responses to security situations that may impact one or more political entities. When a looming threat is no longer imminent, attention turns inward and investigations into threat preparedness and decision-making processes are carried out. While the stress from the threat itself subsides, leaders can still feel the effects of extreme stress as inquiries into decision-making can lead to questions of accountability and blame placement.

A look at crisis decision-making also requires a foundational understanding for how someone’s leadership style will impact the way that information is sought and how advisory member guidance will be utilized. As leaders surround themselves with supporting advisory groups, it is important to consider the overall impact that advisory groups play during times of crisis, as well as the functionality of advisory group decision-making. Broadening this out to the organizational level, when assessing the impact that crisis has on decision making, it is essential to also consider how organizational dynamics and culture might come to be impacted by crises as well.