7.4.2. Group Polarisation

We all know that important decisions are taken by groups and not by individuals alone. For example, a decision is to be taken whether a school has to be established in a village. Such a decision has to be a group decision. We have also seen that when groups take decisions, there is a fear that the phenomenon of groupthink may sometimes occur. Groups show another tendency referred to as ‘group polarisation’. It has been found that groups are more likely to take extreme decisions than individuals alone.

Group polarisation means that after discussing an issue, group members often adopt a more extreme position than they held before the discussion. This can lead to decisions that are much stronger or more intense than what individuals might decide on their own. For example, if a group is deciding on the punishment for a colleague caught in wrongdoing, they might choose a harsher penalty after discussing rather than if an individual were to decide alone.

Imagine a group of friends deciding on a restaurant. If they initially consider a casual dining spot but discuss, they might end up choosing a very expensive steakhouse instead, believing they should celebrate something special. The initial mild preference for casual dining now turns into a strong choice for high-end dining due to the influence of group discussion.

Suppose there is an employee who has been caught taking a bribe or engaging in some other unethical act. Her/his colleagues are asked to decide on what punishment s/he should be given. They may let her/him go scot-free or decide to terminate her/his services instead of imposing a punishment which may be commensurate with the unethical acts s/he had engaged in. Whatever the initial position in the group, this position becomes much stronger as a result of discussions in the group. This strengthening of the group’s initial position due to interaction and discussion is referred to as group polarisation.

Group polarisation occurs for several reasons. When group members share their views, they may hear arguments that bolster their initial opinions, creating a more solidified stance. If the majority supports a specific view, individuals might feel a bandwagon effect, believing that this view represents the broader public opinion. Additionally, seeing their views reflected by others can enhance a sense of belonging to the group, convincing members that they are right in their stance, thus making their opinions more extreme.

Consider a classroom debate about the welfares of capital punishment. If a student believes in capital punishment and discusses this with peers who share the same view, they may become even more convinced of that position after hearing others reinforce it. This could lead to a stronger collective opinion, pushing them towards more extreme positions than when they started.

This strengthening of the group’s initial position may sometimes have dangerous repercussions as groups may take extreme positions, i.e., from very weak to very strong decisions.

The tendency of groups to arrive at more extreme viewpoints can lead to unjust or harmful outcomes. If a group veers towards extreme positions, it may overlook more balanced or reasonable solutions. This could have serious implications, for example, in legal or policy-making contexts where decisions affect many lives. When a group fails to consider the possible negative impacts of extreme decisions, it can lead to significant consequences.

Think of a group of advisors to a government that decides on war. If everyone in the group believes war is necessary and they become more adamant about it after discussion, they may overlook diplomatic solutions. The initial mild reservations some advisers may have could fade into total agreement for warfare, leading to drastic implications for both nations involved due to the failure of more moderate discussions.

--