Closed-mindedness and insulation in groupthink: their effects and the devil’s advocacy as a preventive measure

Akhmad, Muqtafi; Chang, Shuang; Deguchi, Hiroshi

doi:10.1007/s42001-020-00083-8

Cited by 12 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some even argue that constructive deviance and intelligent disobedience should become socially expected behavior (Ralston, 2010). Schippers et al 10.3389/fsoc.2024.1194597 Frontiers in Sociology 16 frontiersin.org This is in line with recommendations to prevent groupthink to make sure to appoint a "devil's advocate" (Janis, 1982b;Janis, 1983;MacDougall and Baum, 1997;Akhmad et al, 2020). Interestingly, group members that strongly identify with the group are more prone to speak out on collective problems (Packer, 2009).…”

Section: Civil and Intelligent Disobediencementioning

confidence: 86%

Is society caught up in a Death Spiral? Modeling societal demise and its reversal

Schippers,

Ioannidis,

Luijks

2024

Front. Sociol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Just like an army of ants caught in an ant mill, individuals, groups and even whole societies are sometimes caught up in a Death Spiral, a vicious cycle of self-reinforcing dysfunctional behavior characterized by continuous flawed decision making, myopic single-minded focus on one (set of) solution(s), denial, distrust, micromanagement, dogmatic thinking and learned helplessness. We propose the term Death Spiral Effect to describe this difficult-to-break downward spiral of societal decline. Specifically, in the current theory-building review we aim to: (a) more clearly define and describe the Death Spiral Effect; (b) model the downward spiral of societal decline as well as an upward spiral; (c) describe how and why individuals, groups and even society at large might be caught up in a Death Spiral; and (d) offer a positive way forward in terms of evidence-based solutions to escape the Death Spiral Effect. Management theory hints on the occurrence of this phenomenon and offers turn-around leadership as solution. On a societal level strengthening of democracy may be important. Prior research indicates that historically, two key factors trigger this type of societal decline: rising inequalities creating an upper layer of elites and a lower layer of masses; and dwindling (access to) resources. Historical key markers of societal decline are a steep increase in inequalities, government overreach, over-integration (interdependencies in networks) and a rapidly decreasing trust in institutions and resulting collapse of legitimacy. Important issues that we aim to shed light on are the behavioral underpinnings of decline, as well as the question if and how societal decline can be reversed. We explore the extension of these theories from the company/organization level to the society level, and make use of insights from both micro-, meso-, and macro-level theories (e.g., Complex Adaptive Systems and collapsology, the study of the risks of collapse of industrial civilization) to explain this process of societal demise. Our review furthermore draws on theories such as Social Safety Theory, Conservation of Resources Theory, and management theories that describe the decline and fall of groups, companies and societies, as well as offer ways to reverse this trend.

show abstract

Section: Civil and Intelligent Disobediencementioning

confidence: 86%

Is society caught up in a Death Spiral? Modeling societal demise and its reversal

Schippers,

Ioannidis,

Luijks

2024

Front. Sociol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If the network of friends consists of people who are not aware of the infodemic, then that person will become more and more involved in spreading the infodemic because no one reminds him." Literary studies reinforce this opinion that social media networks can be negative group thoughts, where group members become uncritical and only support thoughts in the group (Akhmad et al, 2021;Kanthawongs et al, 2010). A group can become a group if there is illusive unanimity, does not question the ideas proposed, always gives justification reasons and stereotypes, self-censorship appears, and members are pressured (Lunenburg, 2010).…”

Section: G Network Of Friends On Social Mediamentioning

confidence: 97%

Uncovering the Factors That Influence the Public to Spread Infodemic in Indonesia

Widyatama,

Adiprabowo,

Ananda

et al. 2023

Channel J. Komun.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to explain factors that influence people to continue disseminating the infodemic even when they have a high level of education. This research uses a qualitative approach with data mined using interview techniques and literature studies. The qualitative research gathered data through in-depth online interviews and literature studies. Key informants, including experts in Communication Science, Religion, Social Media, and Health, were interviewed using semi-structured interviews, allowing for flexible yet focused discussions. The study's findings identify 12 factors contributing to the continued spread of the infodemic, including social media ownership, a critical attitude towards information, information-seeking skills, emotional maturity in processing information, the demands of daily life, the frequency of social media use, social media friend networks, efforts to enhance digital literacy, a tendency to avoid seeking information clarification, a narrow interpretation of religious teachings, belief in conspiracy theories, and specific underlying motives. This research contributes significantly by shedding light on this pressing issue, offering insights crucial for formulating evidence-based policies and interventions to enhance digital literacy and effectively counter the infodemic. Future researchers should concentrate on investigating motive aspects. Moreover, rigorous statistical tests in quantitative research can also be considered to enhance the depth of analysis, providing a quantitative measure of the influence exerted by each identified factor.

show abstract

“…As such, team members have varying degrees of training and knowledge, and each team member brings their biases to the interaction. Given that individuals may rate themselves as objective after using biased strategies (Hansen et al, 2014) and evaluators who correctly identify bias can believe ineffective strategies will mediate the effects (Zapf et al, 2018), it is important to understand how these personal biases may increase at the group level, affecting the quality of the decisions (Akhmad et al, 2020). Although clinical psychology programs are required to teach cultural responsiveness, inconsistencies are present in the depth and level of this type of training (Green et al, 2009; Gregus et al, 2020).…”

Section: Threat Assessment and Cultural Responsiveness: An Unexplored...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Special issue on cultural responsiveness in threat assessment.

Benincasa,

Wachsmuth,

Bolante

et al. 2023

Journal of Threat Assessment and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Closed-mindedness and insulation in groupthink: their effects and the devil’s advocacy as a preventive measure

Cited by 12 publications

References 49 publications

Is society caught up in a Death Spiral? Modeling societal demise and its reversal

Is society caught up in a Death Spiral? Modeling societal demise and its reversal

Uncovering the Factors That Influence the Public to Spread Infodemic in Indonesia

Special issue on cultural responsiveness in threat assessment.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About