Groupthink
From RationalWiki
Groupthink occurs when individuals in a group fail to express their doubts about the group's dynamic, direction or decisions because of a desire to maintain consensus or conformity. Thus the group may be on a headlong rush to error or disaster and no-one speaks up because they don't want to rock the boat.
Affected group members tend to ignore their own doubts "for the good of the group." The group itself may also ignore external suggestions, and can become paranoid when faced with criticism, even when the criticism is helpful or well-meant. Groups are most vulnerable to the results of groupthink when their members are of similar backgrounds, when the group is insulated from outside opinions, and when there are no clear rules for decision making.
The term was coined by social psychologist Irving Janis in 1972. Although others[1] suggest the term originated with William H. Whyte of Fortune Magazine, in 1952. It is related in some ways to the older concept of crowd psychology, although groupthink refers not to the spontaneous actions of crowds but to the activities of groups with a shared interest or objective, including many small groups, and groups of people who may be physically distanced from each other (e.g. people in an internet community).
Contents |
[edit] Groupthink at Conservapedia
Do we really need to spell it out?
[edit] Groupthink at RationalWiki
All groups suffer the danger of groupthink. Consequently we must be open to criticism while remembering that some people really are cranks.
Groupthink is different than when we go on site-wide editing binges, such as the Great War to Remove All Red Links From teh RatWiki.
It is more likely to occur when we all agree, and get sloppy with our arguments or conclusions in an article. Luckily, we have some diversity of background and opinion here, which helps stop us from going off the deep end with, say, a U.S.-centric or dogmatically atheistic perspective. We might even play host to sane conservatives (or sane, rational people generally), to temper our outrageous liberal bias.
[edit] Role of the Iconoclast
By the nature of human interaction a community's "drift" seems to be automatic. This drift is frequently kept in check by the iconoclast. An iconoclast seeks to redefine that which has come to be defined precisely because of the group's drift. This serves to shock the group out of the automatic "go with the flow" and the more insidious "go along to get along" attitudes which can eventually get in the way of the group's stated goals.
