All questions of Social Influence and Group Processes for Humanities/Arts Exam

Understanding Minority Influence
In the film "Twelve Angry Men," the dynamics of persuasion and decision-making among the jurors illustrate the concept of minority influence, which is a form of social influence.
Definition of Minority Influence
- Minority influence occurs when a smaller group or individual influences the majority's beliefs or behaviors.
- It often leads to a change in attitudes or opinions among the majority, despite initial resistance.
Key Characteristics of Minority Influence in the Film
- Lone Juror's Persistence: The character played by Henry Fonda embodies steadfastness in his belief that the accused is not guilty. His commitment to justice prompts reflection among the other jurors.
- Challenging Majority Views: The lone juror asks probing questions and presents reasonable doubt, which encourages other jurors to reconsider their initial judgments.
- Gradual Change: Over time, as the jurors engage in discussion, several begin to shift their perspectives, illustrating how a determined minority can foster critical thinking and reassessment of the situation.
Why It's Not Conformity or Other Forms
- Conformity typically involves adjusting one’s beliefs to align with the majority, often due to social pressure. In this case, the lone juror is not conforming but rather influencing others to change their views based on reasoned argument.
- Normative Influence refers to changing one's behavior to fit in with the group, usually to avoid rejection. However, the juror does not seek acceptance; he advocates for justice.
- Informational Influence occurs when individuals change their beliefs based on new information. While this plays a role, the emphasis on the minority's persuasive power makes the case distinct.
Conclusion
Ultimately, "Twelve Angry Men" exemplifies how a single determined individual can effectively sway the majority, demonstrating the profound impact of minority influence in a group decision-making process.

Understanding Bystander Apathy
The murder of Kitty Genovese is a pivotal case in social psychology that highlighted the phenomenon of bystander apathy.
Definition of Bystander Apathy
- Bystander apathy refers to the tendency of individuals to be less likely to help a victim when others are present.
- It suggests that the presence of multiple witnesses leads individuals to assume someone else will take responsibility.
The Genovese Case
- Kitty Genovese was attacked in 1964, and despite 38 witnesses reportedly seeing the incident, no one intervened or called the police.
- This incident sparked significant research into social behavior and the bystander effect.
Key Factors Contributing to Bystander Apathy
- Diffusion of Responsibility: When many people are present, individuals feel less personal responsibility to act, thinking others will intervene.
- Social Influence: People look to others for cues on how to behave; if no one else responds, they may interpret the situation as non-threatening.
- Fear of Judgment: Witnesses may fear making a mistake or appearing foolish if they intervene in a situation that is not serious.
Implications of Bystander Apathy
- This phenomenon has profound implications for emergency situations and has led to initiatives aimed at encouraging individuals to take action.
- Understanding bystander apathy can foster a sense of personal responsibility and encourage people to act in critical situations.
In summary, the Kitty Genovese case is a classic example of bystander apathy, illustrating how social dynamics can hinder individual action in emergencies.