What is group polarization?

In the field of psychology, there are numerous fields of research and action. Just as there is clinical psychology, other things are also important. disciplines of this science, such as social psychology or group psychology. It is in the latter where the phenomenon of group polarization is encompassed.

The study of groups becomes relevant because it is useful for understand, predict and influence immediate reality. It is the immediate reality because practically all our social relationships are established within a group: family, class at school, friends…

The groupsspecifically humans, are one of the most important sources of differences and similarities around thoughts, feelings and behaviors. Therefore, movements, flows of ideas and even conflicts between various parties can arise through groups.

Several characteristics are shared in the groups. For example, there is an element called shared identity, which is activated when two people find themselves outside their group context and that group unites them (for example, being Spanish in an oriental country). Understanding how a group works is sometimes of utmost importance to understanding a person’s behavior or thoughts.

What is group polarization?

Group polarization is a phenomenon that takes place between people in the same group. Refers to the intensification or strengthening of a group’s initial preferences. We talk about ideas or behaviors -as a form of manifestation of these ideas- that become stronger.

In polarization, the decision made by the members of the group moves away from the midpoint, and approaches one of the poles of the spectrum of opinions that already existed previously in the group. So to speak, in polarization, the group tends to move away from the middle or moderate point of a continuum of positions following the predominant tendency in the group.

Polarization is not synonymous with extremization

Although it seems that we are talking about an extremeization of the group’s ideas, this is not entirely the case. Polarization refers to the accentuation of the initially dominant position in a group..

For example, we separate a group of people individually to answer questions about a dilemma. Regardless of the responses, when we bring group members together to discuss the problem, separating them again can cause group polarization to change individuals’ responses, and tend to to the position that has been discussed in the group and that has had the most approval. It does not matter whether the subsequent responses are individual or anonymous; The answers often change.

Regarding extremization, polarization implies a change in the direction of the predominant tendency, while extremization implies a change in any direction. Although polarization is a modality of extremization, this does not have to imply the former.

How is the phenomenon of group polarization explained?

There are several theories that try to identify the variables that stimulate group polarization. These groups do not have to be very old or have very strong ties, as can occur in family groups.

A group can also be made up of the few women who may be on the council of delegates of a company – their group identity can be activated by being women and forming a group, even if they do not know each other – the only three French people in a school in Spain or the five people in a job who have children.

Some theories that try to explain the function of group polarization are the following.

Model of social comparison and normative influence (Festinger, 1954)

People are continually comparing their opinions with those of others and are usually influenced by what is normative in that group. It is important, therefore, distinguish between different types of influence.

In some cases, depending on the subjects’ previous motivation, people can get carried away by the normative influence —people who seek to agree with the majority—or by the informational influence —people who seek the truth—.

Normative influence is about satisfy the needs for social approval and avoidance of rejection. People who are influenced by these are generally relationship-oriented people. This generates acquiescence and sometimes, conversion—only sometimes, because saying that one thinks like the majority is not synonymous with really believing in what is publicly defended.

The majority consensus in the group is considered reflection of a reality that is desirable to approach in order to be a model member of the group (prototype). This gives an advantage to majority thinking, facilitating the emergence of polarization.

Model of persuasive arguments through informational influence (Burstein, 1982)

The people in a group who are sure, agree, give arguments and data, and address people with sympathy have a series of characteristics that can precipitate polarization. On many occasions, we see that the most extreme people—or those who have a stronger opinion, which does not have to be bad—have several of these characteristics. persuasive

In the case of informational influence, the processing is more central and elaborate, analytical and systematic, so when it is possible to convince a person as a rule, yes you get stronger persuasion.

The convinced are much more certain that they are right. This may therefore be an explanation of polarization: conviction based on the consideration of arguments taken as solid.

Theory of social identity and self-categorization (Tajfel, 1972)

The theory of social identity and self-categorization explains the phenomenon of polarization at the intragroup and intergroup level. According to this approach, polarization would be a consequence of the exaggeration and accentuation of differences attributed to people. by the mere fact of belonging to different categories, as a consequence of the comparison process.

They bring together the opinions of the majority and distance those of the outgroup, that is, the minorities. For example, in a discussion, those who agree with our opinion will be integrated into a type of group. This fact will make us despise in some way what differentiates us, making the similarities more salient. On the other hand, those who have a different opinion will join or be part of another group and the cognitive phenomenon that will occur will be the opposite: the accentuation of differences and the “contempt” of similarities.

Therefore, polarization would be a logical consequence of this way of processing informationgroups uniting and cohering around what is taken as shared, accentuating differences to be even more distinctive.

a little further

In theory we all know how to listen, in practice this is not always the case. In this sense, we know that different variables come into play; among them, the topic of debate, which can make us pay more or less attention to what the other person says. Thus, the norm tells us that, the more involved and important the issue is for the person, the more conflict. The more intense the debate, the more difficult it will be to control the emotion and, therefore, maintain moderate positions.

Thus, everything that allows different points of view to be highlighted and their confrontation—through intensity and involvement—leads to polarization. On the other hand, we also know that When the need to differentiate from the other disappears, polarization tends to reduce.

On the other hand, polarization, as a consequence of debate and exchange of ideas, is not bad or good.. Everything will depend on those ideas and the means that each group uses to defend them. Finally, and contrary to what one might think, the polarization of one group in many cases does not awaken the polarization of another that defends contrary ideas.

You might be interested…