Towards a theory of collective phenomena: Consensus and attitude changes in groups

This study presents the outline of a model for collective phenomena. A symmetry-breaking model combines a number of well-established social psychology hypotheses with recent concepts of statistical physics. Specifically we start out from the regularities obtained in studies on the polarization of attitudes and decisions. From a strictly logical point of view, it is immediately clear that aggregation effects must be analysed separately from group effects as such. The conceptual analysis of the assumed mechanisms reveals that when we deal with phenomena that have until now been designated as polarization phenomena, we are faced not with a single phenomenon, as was believed hitherto, but with a whole class of phenomena. For this reason it would be appropriate to deal with them differentially both from an empirical and from a theoretical point of view. It is possible to show, moreover, that in principle polarization is a direct function of interaction and, beyond a critical threshold an inverse function of the differentiation between group members. A certain number of verifiable conjectures are presented on the basis of physio-mathematical-psychological considerations. It is to be hoped that these theoretical outlines will make it possible to give a new lease on life to a field of research that has established solid facts, but that became trapped in a dead-end road, for lack of a sufficiently broad analysis.

[1]  E. Ising.  Beitrag zur Theorie des Ferromagnetismus , 1925 .

[2]  F. H. Hankins,et al.  The Psychology of Social Norms , 1937 .

[3]  L. Festinger.  Informal social communication. , 1950, Psychological review.

[4]  S. Moscovici,et al.  The group as a polarizer of attitudes. , 1969 .

[5]  R. Baron,et al.  Why do Groups Make Riskier Decisions Than Individuals?1 , 1970 .

[6]  Amiram D. Vinokur,et al.  Review and theoretical analysis of the effects of group processes upon individual and group decisions involving risk. , 1971 .

[7]  D. G. Pruitt.  Choice shifts in group discussion: An introductory review. , 1971 .

[8]  H. Stanley,et al.  Introduction to Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena , 1972 .

[9]  Dorwin Cartwright,et al.  Risk taking by individuals and groups: An assessment of research employing choice dilemmas. , 1971 .

[10]  Serge Moscovici,et al.  Studies in group decision II: Differences of positions, differences of opinion and group polarization , 1972 .

[11]  Serge Moscovici,et al.  Studies in group decision I: Social space, patterns of communication and group concensus , 1972 .

[12]  J. H. Davis.  Group decision and social interaction: A theory of social decision schemes. , 1973 .

[13]  A. Vinokur,et al.  Testing two classes of theories about group induced shifts in individual choice , 1973 .

[14]  D. Myers,et al.  The group polarization phenomenon. , 1976 .

[15]  Geneviève Paichler.  Norms and attitude change: I. Polarization and styles of behaviour. , 1976 .

[16]  F. Alberoni.  Movimento e istituzione , 1977 .

[17]  J. Forgas.  Polarization and moderation of person perception judgements as a function of group interaction style , 1977 .

[18]  G. Paicheler.  Polarization of attitudes in homogeneous and heterogeneous groups , 1979 .

[19]  S. Galam,et al.  Sociophysics: A new approach of sociological collective behaviour. I. mean‐behaviour description of a strike , 1982, 2211.07041.

[20]  S. Moscovici,et al.  The age of the crowd , 1985 .

[21]  Serge Gallam.  Majority rule, hierarchical structures, and democratic totalitarianism: a statistical approach , 1986 .

[22]  P. R. Laughlin,et al.  Demonstrability and social combination processes on mathematical intellective tasks. , 1986 .

[23]  D. Mackie.  Social identification effects in group polarization. , 1986 .

[24]  John C. Turner,et al.  Rediscovering the Social Group , 1987 .

[25]  N. Kerr,et al.  Asymmetric influence in mock jury deliberation: jurors' bias for leniency. , 1988, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[26]  J. H. Davis,et al.  Effects of straw polls on group decision making: Sequential voting pattern, timing, and local majorities. , 1988 .