#4 Does my Psych Group suffer from Groupthink???

KEY : * = Refer to end of entry for examples

On Friday (26^th September), my psychology group stayed back to do some work on our up-coming presentation. Even though a few left early, 4 of us stayed back until 4pm (since 11am) trying to organise all our compiled information onto PowerPoint slides. During these 5 hours, we escalated from relaxed systematic revising, to caffeine driven ecstatic debaters (who were reduced to having to put our hand up to talk, to avoid the constant cut-ins).
While I was on the way home, I was laughing thinking about the events of the day, and thought how great it would be to use for my COM blog. As I went through the slides seeing where today’s scenario fit in, I came across the symptoms of groupthink as my topic.

The first symptom of groupthink is an illusion of invulnerability.

However, it doesn’t apply to “us” as the initial reason for forming the group was for an educational purpose and therefore not for any personal social motive. Meaning, the reason for the grouping was part of a requirement rather than a choice.

Since we didn’t really know anybody during the first week of school, we chose our members based on who “just so happened to be around”, rather than through the process of evaluation.

Therefore, our group’s potential is not based upon how well we have done together in the past (where, if we always scored high in the past, we would tend to assume we are always right); but on learning what each of the current individuals can contribute to the group (no reason to assume that our “group” is better)

*

At one point “we” almost unknowingly resulted in a minor case of belief in our group’s own morality.

We got caught up in a prolonged, in-depth, opinionative, argument trying to analyse a single Research Article (which we need to use to illustrate our presentation).

Each of us had (accidentally) completely disregarded the fact that if none of our group members shared the same understanding from the article, then how will our audience?

In turn, this could have led to our audience interpreting that our group only believed in its own actions and beliefs.

The third symptom, shared stereotypes, is not a problem interfering with our group, because we only state what is right, but don’t necessarily state who or what is wrong.

We encourage questions, and will respond factually. If there are no facts to back any specific answer, we will give a possible opinion, but state that it is simply an opinion.

The symptom that has had the most relevance with our group is collective rationalization.

We spent over an hour, trying to make sense of the same “single Research Article” as mentioned earlier. During the hour, we changed the way things were worded, incorporated our perceptions with each of the other member’s understandings, tried out different approaches via trial and error, and resulting in us drawing a conclusion based upon numerous mixed up bits of information, which were in fact inaccurate, and we were aware of it.

**

It is hard to say if our group suffers from self-censorship, as everyone seems open about their opinions, as well as the fact that I can’t read into their minds to see if they’re keeping some things to themselves. Personally, I know that I’m very outspoken, so if there is anything on my mind, I am likely to say so. However there was a small case in the beginning, when we picked the topic to present on. One of our members said we should do “Conditioning”, and the others agreed, but I wasn’t really interested in that topic, and found that it require a lot of work. I decided not to voice out my opinion, because I felt that it wouldn’t be right for me to try and change the topic for a selfish reason being that “I didn’t like it”.

By not voicing out my opinion about the topic chosen to present on, I found that we had suffered from a little illusion of unanimity. Turns out that most of the members just agreed because they didn’t mind anything, not particularly because they wanted to do that specific topic.

Most of us are very debatable, opinionative and aren’t shy to fight it out with each other (in terms of our views and reasons). The quieter members do an equal part in the deciding by listening, evaluating and responding to the information being debated. As a result, our group doesn’t suffer from “pressure on dissenters” because everyone is actively involved without any apparent fears.

The last symptom, mind-guards has the least impact on our group, as the information we are using are all based on facts. If there is any information we are unclear of, we can always look in our textbooks, within the Research Reports we are analysing, or as a last resort we can ask the lecturer. Thus the only “outside information” (other than stated facts) is that from our lecturer, which we’re likely to take advice from.

It is clear that the effects and likeliness of these symptoms occurring greatly depends on what type of group is being evaluated. Social groups are likely to have varying results from education based groups, as work groups are likely to have varying results from certain religious groups. Even though a lot of these symptoms are interlinked, it doesn’t necessarily mean that groups suffer from all 8 of them at any one given time. As some are overcome, others may present themselves.

(*) This is an example of the way our group formed.
Christine in class -> Random Girl(RG1) late for class sits next to Christine because it was the closest seat.
End of lesson, teacher say’s group members names need to be submitted -> Christine turns to RG1, “want to work together?”.
G1’s JC friend (GUY1) self invites to group, based on past friendship with RG1.
Random guy (RG1) spotted sitting alone-> RG1 askes him to join group.
2 girls who are friends have no group -> ask if they can join us.
Random girl 2 (RG2) walks up to Christine and asks if she can join group.
Our last edition to the group Late Guy (LG) joined 3 weeks later – 3 days ago – because he hadn’t realised there was a group project until GUY1 mentioned it while sitting next to him in ESL.

(**)

The scenario was that, we had to find a single article that compared two different methods using the same experiment. When we were unable to, we drew a conclusion that maybe it was impossible to be done, and were willing to state that during our presentation, even though the teacher had specifically asked us to talk about an article that does compare. Later on we decided that since it wasn’t factually stated in any given text book or Research Report that the comparison was impossible, it wouldn’t be correct to state it during our presentation. So now we are back to square-one looking for an article that does (sigh).

Interpersonal Relationships - Changing over the years?

Did you know that in America, approximately 38% of couples aged between 20 and 24 are getting divorced? When compared to Singapore, which is only 10%, this is an immense difference. Reading an article on www.women.timesonline.co.uk that talked about “What couples argue about - then and now”, I thought about the role of communication in relationships by DeFleur et al; the 3 processes.

The article is about “Relate, the nation's largest provider of relationship counselling” (which is celebrating its 70th birthday this month), analysing its archive data and comparing it with current notes and statistics. “It began offering counselling in 1943, and in the first five years saw more than 8,000 clients. But marital crises proliferated: in 1942, there were 12,000 petitions for divorce; by 1947 this had more than trebled to 50,000. Our current divorce figure is around 149,000, says the latest confirmed government research”.

In Relates earlier days, it was noted that a lot of the problems were to do with “Bad sex, jealousy, interfering in-laws, suicidal husbands, loose wives and spouses hiding in boxrooms”. However, in current trends, it has been observed that “One fundamental change since the Forties is the trend away from marriage towards cohabitation”. Two other major factors in changes that are likely to impose reason for more conflicts are “working lives and technology”. For instance, “Nowadays both members of a couple are probably working, so that creates pressures on both sides of the relationship, and problems with finding balance.”

As this article focuses on the results of 70 years of “Marriage Guidance Counselling”, it targets mainly the Relational Dissolution process (the last stage of 3 processes) by DeFleur. Some of the relational challenges about in this article are differences, boredom, change, poor communication skills, unrealistic expectations and especially actions that undermine trust.

It is clear that over the years, the elements of the 3 processes by DeFleur have changed gradually when looked into on a deeper level which is demonstrated by the differences mentioned above. Even though the Engagement stage involves the general idea of exchanging phone numbers, hanging out to get to know each other, and in turn getting together as an item, a lot of the context is different. With modern technology it’s harder for girls to subtly brush-off guys by simply giving them a fake phone number, because now with the invention of the hand phone they tend to “check” the number by giving it a missed call. To get the interest of another is complex as there is more than one aspect to base upon, some of which are physical appearance, similarity, proximity and complementarities.

As always, the Maintaining Stage is difficult and requires a lot of attention, patience, and understanding. This stage is where most of the self disclosure occurs naturally, conflict is bound to happen, and relational needs are to be met either by satisfying them or coming to a mutual understanding. Over the years so much change has developed through interpersonal communications that different cultural beliefs have merged to produce an even more diverse society.

Therefore, as illustrated the casualness of counselling and divorce is now a widely accepted topic in comparison to earlier years where “counselling itself was thought at the time to be rather absurd. You had to be careful when people asked what you did for a living. Many people thought it was ridiculous - that you were a quack”.




Article Link : http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/relationships/article4786340.ece

At what expense is the possibility of taking a person's life worth?

“Near-death experiences: What really happens?”. The title of this report struck me as interesting, but as I continued to read my perception on the article changed from natural curiosity, to utter shock and disgust. “Now scientists aim to study what really happens to the brain and consciousness when someone is on the verge of dying”. The first thing that came to mind when reading this was that if the person was on the verge of dying, wouldn’t you be trying to save them rather than studying what’s going on in their brain?

Perhaps I don’t have all the facts as the article was rather vague, and I’m guessing it’s just an initial announcement about the possible upcoming research. However, from seeing that the idea is that “doctors will examine patients in hospitals in Europe and North America who reach a state called cardiac arrest”, I wouldn’t think my perspective on the topic would change much from reading any further.

"Cardiac arrest is a process that begins when the heart stops beating, the lungs stop working and the brain ceases functioning”. It doesn't matter whether this patient was an average patient in a hospital, or a volunteer for the benefit of research, we have to ask ourselves, where is our ethics, and how far does “science” have to go before we decide to make a public stand? If cloning people for the benefit of “better-health-insurance” is disapproved world-wide, then how come studying the brain and mind of a dying person to satisfy our curiosity is even a subject of a possibility?

It’s obvious that I’m against the implications of this article, but it could be my own personal perception based on my character, environment, and knowledge of similar topics. Other’s may agree with this article, although I can’t possibly see any light there is to shed in this topic other then selfish curiosity to explain something that is currently unexplainable.




Article Link:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26675999/

It was MSNs fault!!

*this entry is for entertainment purpose only*

Over the weekend i remembered why i don't use MSN. To me, i find that mainly bad things come from it (At least when it i use it, lol).
When i was in highschool, I'd log on for "just a minute", but once you start chatting, you forget about time. By the end of the night, I'd be ready for bed, with no school work done.
Yesterday i logged on MSN for the first time in months.....
And to put things simply,
Now I'm blonde (or a yellowy, orangy, burnt apparently type of colour)!


Full (Silly) Story Below :
So, i decided i was a bit bored with my hair colour (which usually happens for me).
I thought that maybe some minor hightlights would be interesting yet subtle.

As I'm quite experienced with dying my own hair, because i've been doing it for many years now, i take out my "trusty" bleach confidentaly and start applying it in strands on my hair.
10 long minute later, after i've carfully lifted strands by strands of hair and applied this aweful smelling, wet, hair destroying product, ive got quite a bit of excess bleach left.
It seemed so little that i thought to myself "heck, why waste a handful, might as well use it".
So, i dipped my fingers into the bleach, transferring sheets of this terrible product messily over my hair, hoping to achieve the "rebel" highlight look.

Now that i've happily drentched my hair in something i cant stand the heaty-throat-gagging fumes of, im off to my computer.
I see MSN on my desktop, and think "ill just check who's online...".
Next thing i know, im happily chatting away with 3 different friends about i-have-no-idea-what.
Time flies as usual, untill suddenly i catch a glimpse of myself in my bed-side mini mirror, and to my uttur shock i see golden-like strings flowing down my neck from the hole's (pores) in my screaming scalp!! =O

Oh my gosh! I dont think i've ever jumpped out of my bed and into the shower that fast since....
Well i cant even think of the last time i was that "eager" for a sudden shower. -_-"
And here i am now.
Blonde (?) unintentionally.

Guess i might as well try it out! =D

World of Warcraft : More than a game?

World of Warcraft currently holds the Guinness World Record as the worlds largest Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game (MMORPG), with approximately 10 million subscribers.
Players range greatly in age, from 10 year olds who play after school until their parents kick them off the computer, to parents with full time jobs, who still somehow manage to find a way to fit gaming into their busy schedule.
Many of these players are considered addicts, either as a passing comment because of how much they play, or as an actually serious illness which requires professional help.
It is easy to become “addicted” to this game because of its wide social network and a surprisingly broad set of in-game goals which are slowly achievable over time.
Calling someone an addict is generally a negative term given to a player based on the frequency they play in comparison to yourself, and it is of no surprise that you fail to take into account what benefits can be gained, such as learning how to interact on a mass scale.

One of the major concerns in relevance with this game is that it “removes people from the outside world”, and therefore we worry about them socially.
What do we define communication as? And since when was it limited to a physical aspect?
Although yes it may be true that with the introduction of electronic games, children find it more fun to sit at home in front of the computer, rather then to go outside and play catch. However, in this case, shouldn’t online gaming be seen as a step up, rather then another target for criticism?
As anti-social as an online gamer might seem, in reality they are interacting with a wider range of people then can be achieved in the physical world at any one time.
So is it fair, or even accurate, to perceive an online gamer as antisocial? No, because you are judging them based upon something you don’t completely understand.

World of Warcraft is practically a reliable interactive model ("Models are simplified versions of very complex processes" - Thinking Through Communication. Fifth Edition. Sarah Trenholm) of the physical world we navigate in on a daily basis, or in simpler terms, a miniature less complex version of the world. It is run by an economic value which we refer to as “Gold” rather then “Dollars” for example. In a comical way, you can look at it as a Finance Management course for kids, in a fun first-hand experience way. We learn that there are many ways to many Gold, such as by our choice in Professions, what we sell in the Auction House (Which include deposits that must be made, and only get returned if the item is sold, as well as Auction House Cuts, which take a percentage of the money made from a sale for each item sold) and how we invest our money.
Children will be learning how to make money, manage their money, and use their skills to their advantage, and all this without even noticing.

As clearly stated, this game is extremely interactive, and a player’s success is dependent on how you communicate with others in the given environment.
No one in the real world wants the company of a mean, annoying, unreliable person whom has nothing of any intellect to share. So why would it be any different in the virtual world?
Children are forced into realizing that being rude wont get you any friends or help in the game, and not being reliable (for example saying you’ll be on every Saturday, but never making an appearance) wont get you invites to groups where attendance and being able to depend on players is important. Such as a school group project, every member is an essential edition to the team, so if one person is always late, or constantly cancels, they’ll soon find themselves without a group and no one willing to assist them.
People in general enjoy having power, but don’t realize the responsibilities that come with it. In WoW, its easy to become a leader, it’s whether you choose to take on the role, or not. Being a Guild Leader, is sort of like being the leader of a community, where all that follow look up to you for guidance, help, and organizational skills. Opening your own guild is as simple as just selecting a name for it, yet so many people choose to follow a leader, rather then become one themselves. When I ask people how come the don’t open a guild themselves, they often reply “I did, but it was so hard to manage, its so much easier being part of one instead, and letting them do the hard work of maintaining it”. Therefore, to an extent they do get to experience first hand the duties and responsibilities of having power, and whether or not they can cope with it.

Over the 2 years I have been playing WoW, I have made a lot of friends, who surprisingly are married with children of their own, or are children who play WoW with their parents and love it.
As much as online games may seem to be ideal for the independent type of player, there are a lot of people who enjoy the game as a means of family entertainment, or even a way of bonding. I have met a married couple who enjoy playing together, where they back each other up, or compliment each others skills by picking characters that work well together (for example a healer –heals- and a tanker –specializes in taking large amounts of damage-). Another girl I’ve met plays with her mum and sister and are very happy doing so. Perhaps it can be a source of comfort to have your family be there for you when you need them emotionally, as well as can be there virtually to back you up when bullies pick on you in-game. I personally find that that would be really awesome!

In conclusion when you are a long term player of World of Warcraft, it does become more then a game, because of the responsibilities, interaction, and real life happiness it can bring to you. Playing the game is like submitting yourself to becoming part of a whole new version of the fast pace world we already live in. To me, that deserves a lot more credit then it’s being given, and a lot less outsider criticism then it already has to deal with.

Introduction to me and my blog.

** Ms Kam Lin, don't mark this =O **


Hey all! =D

My name is Christine (we're not meant to put our full names right?) and this is just a little (informal) introduction to me and my blog.
A guide to reading this entry : If you want to only pick up the main points about me, then don't bother reading what's in brackets.
But if you want the whole "Christine" experience, then i hope you have the time. Ill help you all, by putting some stuff i think is interesting in Italics hehe. (because bold is too attention seeking
First of all, i assume that most of the people that are viewing it (hopefully there are people viewing it, besides the lecturer) are fellow student members of SIM University in Singapore, therefore you'll understand more of what I'm ranting on about -_-"

A bit of info about me before you start reading my opinions and perceptions on various topics, issues, critiques, and other random things i tend to ponder about.
I'm sure that my point of view will be quite different to a lot of many other peoples points of view on any given subject, and this brief intro is (supposed) to help you understand why i think the way i do. [Edit in: I say this because I believe that my lifestyle and experiences so far have been so much more intense then that of any other average young adult.
In short I'd say, "I am who I made myself, more then anyone will ever understand"]

I'm half Singaporean, and half Australian, but practically grew up in Indonesia.
I'm a single child, but have always asked my parents since young (especially when they asked what i wanted for my birthday present) "can i have a brother/sister please?", and i still consider asking them that question every now and then.
I can assure you that my personal life will be strikingly different from most of you reading this, even if compared when stripped down to the basic categories.
~ For example: ~

1. Family
2. Childhood
3. Experiences so far in life
4. My personality
5. My mind-set on life and everything that goes else that goes on in what we call "life". (this can get quite tiresome listening to, i suggest you don't ask me about it. lol)

A little about my personality:
- I'm honest. (most of the time, too honest for my liking and anyone else)
- I'm usually REALLY hyper! =D Like super-duper crazy hyper. aka energetic.
- I'm creative, but mainly when its to do with coming up with crazy idea's (that I'm not going to share with you =P *embarrassed look*)
- Ive always got my best intentions, so if i sound harsh, or accidentally ignore you, chance's are i didn't mean to. So give me a tap, put on a sad face and I'll apologize and rephrase =)
- And last but not least, as you can tell, I'm very expressive. Whether its by the way i say things, my facial expressions while telling a story, or all the emoticons i use in SMS. You'll always be able to tell if I'm interested in what I'm saying =P lol.

Ok, well i guess that's all for now...
I hope you'll continue to read what lies ahead, because I'm already curious about what I'll write about.

~~ Christine

P.S. I'm very open, and love to chat! ^_^