Group Dynamics

Group No 7 Amit Anand Tiwari Dinkar Kumar Vidyarthy Karri B T K Sravani Kumar Shaurya Muthukkumaran K Prachi Lal Pooja Jha FPM14010 PGP29152 PGP29162 PGP29142 PGP29172 PGP29122 PGP29132

Group Dynamics
Definition: System of behavior and psychological process within a social group or between groups Dependence: Dynamics of a group depend on how one defines the boundaries of the group Scope: Study of group dynamics is useful in
Understanding decision making behavior Thin Slice Technique Following the emergence and popularity of new ideas and technologies

Evolution of Group dynamics

The greatest benefits are to those who avail the unique opportunities that

group living provides, while avoiding the unique dangers associated with groups. Example : Fitness of ancestral human beings by sharing valued resources and avoiding a risk of non reciprocation. Natural selection helped to bridge this gap

Individual

Laughter

Music

Dance

Groups

These are the manifestation of psychological processes

Group Formation (Starting)

Social cohesion group : Based on psychological bond

and Interpersonal attraction

Social Identity Group: Based on social category

(doctors, cricketers, smokers)

Emergent Groups: Spontaneous formation( Born out

of earthquake, flood)

Factors to be considered
Membership

What are the structural features that inuence the decision of a given individual to join a particular group?
Growth

What are the structural features that inuence whether a given group will grow signicantly (i.e. gain a large net number of new members) over time?
Change

A given group generally exists for one or more purposes at any point in time; in our datasets, for example, groups are focused on particular topics of interest. How do such foci change over time, and how are these changes correlated with changes in the underlying set of group members?

Concepts involved
Group dynamics can be conceptualized as falling into the following interrelated categories: Participation Communication Collaboration Influence Trust Cohesion Empowerment Satisfaction

Group Dynamics in Educational Leadership Cohort and Non-Cohort Groups

Factors Participation Details Suggest ideas, add information and contribute to discussion Good listener Support ideas of others and group works together Friendliness of group members Willing to speak and express opinions Members feel comfortable expressing points of view Am listened to and listen to others Members work together and solve problems Each member contributes and has a voice Satisfied with and committed to decisions made by class members Cohorts Vs Non cohorts More participation in non-cohorts

Communication

Little difference

Collaboration

Positive for cohort groups

Factors

Details

Cohorts Vs Non cohorts Little difference

Influence

Certain members talk more and opinions are weighted more Certain members have more influence over topics discussed and over the decision-making process Opinions of others are listened to Pressured to go along with decisions of cohort Trust and openness exists among class members Trust and openness has increased and continues Feelings of belonging Sense of ownership over what cohort does Desire to remain in group

Trust

Higher in cohort Higher in cohort

Cohesiveness

Empowerment

Influence on group goals and decisions Attainment of group goals Influence on instructor, content, and program
Satisfied with personal growth and with program

Higher in cohort
Higher in cohort

Satisfaction

Conclusion- Cohort Vs Non-Cohort

Significant differences were identified in trust,

cohesiveness, and satisfaction. Little effect on cohort structures in the areas of participation, communication, influence, empowerment, and collaboration. Cohorts have emerged as dynamic and adaptive entities with attendant group dynamic processes that shape collective learning and action.

Decision Making Thin Slicing Technique

Short films can be used as a pedagogy to recognize group

behavior In the thin-slicing technique quick decisions are made in a short time window(genesis) Decisions depends on speaking time, turn taking, emotions and mimicking Outcome of narrow window study marginally different from long periods of study Thinking conscious behavior Vs Thin slicing Unconscious behavior

Virtual Group Dynamics

Groups on internet , social networking sites
Similar to real world groups

Same interest, same goals Critical differences Anonymity and text based Can participate any time , any place
Anonymity increases conformity to group norms

References and Bibliography

Beyond 12 Angry Men: Thin-Slicing Film to

Illustrate Group Dynamics Mary J. Waller, Golchehreh Sohrab and Bernard W. Ma A Study of Group Dynamics in Educational Leadership Cohort and Non-Cohort Groups Bobbie J. Greenlee and Zorka Karanxha Virtual Group Dynamics Katelyn Y. A. McKenna and Amie S. Green

Thank You