Psychological Set and Social Conformity<sup>1</sup>

Thibaut, John; Strickland, Lloyd H.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1956.tb01292.x

Cited by 106 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These and other researchers found that group members are likely to influence one another's beliefs through communicating with one another, especially if the group is expected to work together to achieve a common goal (Deutsch and Gerard, 1955;Jones, Wells, and Torrey, 1958;Thibaut and Strickland, 1956). This is particularly likely to be true with regard to topics or issues where the group can act as a reference group (Israel, 1963).…”

Section: Beliefs Of Other Upper-echelon Team Membersmentioning

confidence: 87%

Determinants of executive beliefs: comparing functional conditioning and social influence

et al. 1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Beliefs Of Other Upper-echelon Team Membersmentioning

confidence: 87%

Determinants of executive beliefs: comparing functional conditioning and social influence

et al. 1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Cette orientation a influence des auteurs qui ont essayé de démontrer expérimentalement l'existence de deux sortes d'influence sociale (Deutsch et Gérard, 1955 ;Thibaut et Strickland, 1956) : la première que l'on appelle « informationnelle » ou « centrée sur la tâche » concerne la relation avec l'objet. La seconde, désignée sous le nom d'influence « normative » ou « centrée sur le groupe », renvoie à la nécessité de s'orienter vers des opinions identiques.…”

Section: Deuxième Propositionunclassified

Psychologie des minorités actives

Moscovici¹

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Thibaut and Strickland (1956) instructed groups to follow either a task or group set while they evaluated ambiguous stimuli in a conformity paradigm. Task set instructions asked group members to focus on the task features of the group interaction, whereas group set instructions led members to focus on their willingness to be part of the group.…”

Section: Processing Objectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processors.

Hinsz

Tindale²,

Vollrath³

1997

Psychological Bulletin

1,186

1,136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A selective review of research highlights the emerging view of groups as information processors. In this review, the authors include research on processing objectives, attention, encoding, storage, retrieval, processing, response, feedback, and learning in small interacting task groups. The groups as information processors perspective underscores several characteristic dimensions of variability in group performance of cognitive tasks, namely, commonality-uniqueness of information, convergence-diversity of ideas, accentuation-attenuation of cognitive processes, and belongingnessdistinctiveness of members. A combination of contributions framework provides an additional conceptualization of information processing in groups. The authors also address implications, caveats, and questions for future research and theory regarding groups as information processors.In this information age, groups increasingly perform cognitive tasks (Galegher, Krant, & Egido, 1990;Salas, Dickinson, Converse, & Tannenbaum, 1992;Walsh & Ungson, 1991;Weick & Roberts, 1993 ). The nature of small-group research has changed correspondingly (see Bettenhausen, 199 l;Guzzo & Shea, 1992;Levine & Moreland, 1990; and Moreland, Hogg, & Halns, 1994, for reviews) to emphasize intellectual and cognitive tasks (e.g., Hinsz, 1990;Sniezek & Henry, 1989;Stasser, Taylor, & Hanna, 1989;Tindale, 1989;and Vollrath, Sheppard, Hinsz, & Davis, 1989). This change resembles a paradigm shift (Ktthn, 1970), albeit not as dramatic, perhaps because no one paradigm dominates small-group performance research (McGrath, 1993). The emerging view of groups as information processors extends methodological and theoretical developments in cognitive psychology to research in small-group performance. In this article, we selectively review relevant research to highlight how taskperforming groups process information. Rather than advocate that small-group research ought to examine groups as information processors, we document how research has already moved in that direction. To integrate our review, we identify several important dimensions of information processing in groups and

show abstract

Psychological Set and Social Conformity¹

Cited by 106 publications

References 9 publications

Determinants of executive beliefs: comparing functional conditioning and social influence

Determinants of executive beliefs: comparing functional conditioning and social influence

Psychologie des minorités actives

The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processors.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Psychological Set and Social Conformity1

Cited by 106 publications

References 9 publications

Determinants of executive beliefs: comparing functional conditioning and social influence

Determinants of executive beliefs: comparing functional conditioning and social influence

Psychologie des minorités actives

The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processors.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Psychological Set and Social Conformity¹