一分鐘音頻,有趣又省時:

>>下載本期科學(xué)60秒<<

Groupthink is a phenomenon in which the members of a group override their individuality in favor of unanimity. Scholars have ascribed bad decision making to groupthink, for example, in U.S. policy during the Vietnam War.
?
集體審議是這樣的一個現(xiàn)象:小組中的成員為了達(dá)到一致性將個人的想法抑制了。學(xué)者們將糟糕的決策歸咎于集體審議,比如在越南戰(zhàn)爭中美國的決議。?

But how do outsiders interpret groupthink when they observe the behavior of a group and its members?
但是作為局外人,當(dāng)他們看到集體和個人的行為的時候,如何來看到這樣的集體審議呢??

A research team had subjects rate groups, such as corporations, sports teams and government parties, about how much the group has its own collective intelligence. Subjects also rated how much each member of the group had a mind of his or her own. Finally, they rated the perceived cohesiveness of the group.
一個研究團(tuán)隊有諸如公司、運動隊和政府黨派的課題組,研究關(guān)于每個團(tuán)隊有多少集體智慧。這項課題同樣也也測試出組中的成員有多少他們自己的想法。最終他們獲得了所謂的團(tuán)隊的凝聚力。

And the perception was that the more cohesive a group the less its individual members are thought to have independent thought. The study is in the journal Psychological Science.
得到的觀念是一個團(tuán)隊越凝聚,其中的成員越少有自己獨立的想法。這一發(fā)現(xiàn)在《心理學(xué)》中。

A second experiment revealed that subjects did not hold members of a very cohesive group responsible for their individual actions. Indeed, some people argue that John Pike, the now infamous pepper-spray cop, was not accountable. And that the responsibility for his actions rests higher, with the police force and local government. Such notions may get tested in court. With psychologists as expert witnesses.
第二個實驗顯示,很有凝聚力的團(tuán)隊并不為成員的獨立行為負(fù)責(zé)。事實上,很多人認(rèn)為,John Pike,現(xiàn)在臭名昭著的向群眾噴辣椒水條子 是不應(yīng)該受到責(zé)備的。并且他的行為的責(zé)任上升到更高的高度,介入警方和當(dāng)?shù)卣?。這樣的觀點將在法庭上得到驗證,將由心理學(xué)家作為權(quán)威目擊者。?

是否喜歡這個廣受歡迎的節(jié)目呢?那就別猶豫啦~點擊下圖訂閱吧~已有3.7萬滬友訂閱了哦~

或者訂閱我的相關(guān)節(jié)目