NEO-Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R) and NEO-PI-3. Five-Factor Personality Inventory (FFPI).

Strong interest inventory

Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF): Based on factor analysis, useful for normal and abnormal personality evaluation. California Psychological Inventory (CPI): Derived from the MMPI, measures traits like responsibility and tolerance. Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI): Based on Carl Jung’s personality type theory, used widely in corporate settings.

also group stability

percolation

• fosters mutual reliance, collaboration and reduces prejudice

Unprejudiced individuals were found to feel guilty when they exhibited stereotypical responses, while prejudiced individuals did not show similar feelings of guilt.

• reduced status indicators and disinhibition encourage self-discolsure and intimacy
• positive virtual interaction can build confidence for future offline relationships

• personalization of outgroup members helps break stereotypes and foster individual connections

of majority

tourism-based contact

Pettigrew's recommendation: A fifth condition for the contact hypothesis is opportunities for friendship, enabling self-disclosure and bonding

-must be with structure and copperation

• cognitive processes can shift toward inclusive identities
• groups can learn to respond positively through targeted interactions

• competition, differences in power, norms and negative emotions can fuel intergroup hostilities
• distinguishing between us and them leads to rejection and animosity

• brain regions for social cognition show no activity
• areas associated with disgust are activated
• groups described as animalistic provoke greater hostility

• low-status members and those with threatened self-esteem exhibit more extreme biases
• favoring ingroups enhances self-esteem, though this effect is inconsistent
• derogating outgroups may boost self-esteem when aligned with group norms

• Characteristics of Dehumanization: Denial of human uniqueness (e.g., culture, moral standards, rationality).
• Denial of emotional depth (e.g., refined emotions like guilt, admiration).
• Association with impurity and disgust.

factors promoting moral exclusion: - histories of societal devaluation - norms emphasizing authority and obedience

advocates for the destruction of outgroups through violence, fueled by moral exclusion

Even mild negativity is often unconsciously expressed through nonverbal actions, nervousness, or social awkwardness.

• more typical of higher-status groups looking down on lower-status groups

• common in lower-status groups feeling threatened by higher-status groups

• high warmth but low competence
• felt for groups that evoke sympathy without blame

• low warmth and low competence
• directed at groups viewed as responsible for their failings

• low warmth but high competence
• felt toward groups perceived as successful, but threatening

• high warmth and high competence
• rarely occurs but arises when the outgroup is seen positively and their accomplishments do not harm the ingroup

• Self-fulfilling prophecies: Stereotypes shape interactions that reinforce the stereotype.
• Memory bias: Stereotype-consistent information is remembered better than inconsistent information.

• Positive ingroup behaviors are described abstractly (e.g., “They are kind”), while similar outgroup actions are described concretely (e.g., “They helped once”). -Negative behaviors are described abstractly for the outgroup (e.g., “They are bad people”) and concretely for the ingroup (e.g., “They made a mistake”).

competiotion andn cooperation also plays a role

ingroup favoritism is generally stronger than outgroup hostility

The mere perception of belonging to distinct groups is enough to prompt favoritism toward the ingroup.

• even minimal group distinctions lead to intergroup hostility

While humans developed altruism and cooperation, these traits were primarily reserved for ingroup members and sustained by hostility toward outgroups

• Evolution favored cooperation within groups, leading humans to become a social species. -Groups often competed for resources, leading to territorial disputes and violence. -Outsiders posed significant threats, leading to evolved mechanisms for distinguishing insiders from outsiders. -External threats from outgroups promoted unity within groups. -Cooperation was vital for survival and was reinforced by reciprocal altruism among group members. -While humans developed altruism and cooperation, these traits were primarily reserved for ingroup members and sustained by hostility toward outgroups.

• mennonites and Amish -> avoid conflict and strive for peace
• gangs -> aggressive -> young girls -> relational aggression

People in face cultures don't typically take matters into their own hands but rely on the group to deal with the situation

-Aggression is less common here and is more characteristic of economically prosperous, individualistic countries

• maintain personal or group honor
• seen in rural economies, where civil authorities are weak

minor issues lead to major violence

-Scapegoating provides an outlet for frustration and is more likely when groups experience prolonged negative conditions. -Extreme forms of scapegoating can lead to genocide or violence against oppressed groups, with minorities sometimes turning against each other rather than confronting more powerful groups.

pain, threats, stressors that increase arousal

tendency to support or oppose group based hierarchies; individuals with high SDO are more likely to endorse the idea that some groups should dominate others

The dominant group justifies this power imbalance, claiming it’s natural, whereas the subordinate group often resists.

• Group-focused collectivists respond negatively to group-level conflicts, while individualists respond more to personal conflicts (Derlega et al., 2002).
• When social identity is more salient than personal identity, individuals are more likely to engage in competitive behavior towards other groups (Böhm et al., 2013).

tend to communicate in a more antagonistic way

When individuals played, only 6.6% of interactions were competitive, while 36.2% of interactions were competitive when triads played against each other. This figure increased to 53.5% when triads communicated through representatives.

Groups struggle to obtain desired resources while preventing the other group from succeeding leading to conflict - can lead to various societal issues -> class struggles, rebellions, international warfare, racism and organizational conflcits

• also resolved conflicts in unemotional, fact-driven discussion
• cohesive and focused on task success, with no relationships conflict

also force the examination of assumptions, strengths and weaknesses

satisfaction with the mediator depends on how well the mediator performs and the conflict's intensity

Techniques for managing anger include: - counting to ten - calling a timeout - writing concerns down - using humor - groups can minimize anger by developing norms against displaying strong negative emotions or by discussing controversial issues in controlled environments

focusing on compromosing, or reconciling differences - often overlaps with yielding or cooperation

it can either reduce or exacerbate conflict - If messages are hostile or inconsistent, they may escalate conflict. - However, if communication fosters cooperation, trust, and unity, it can help resolve conflict.

• people may perceive criticisms as personal attacks

• seek solutions that benefit everyone and use objective criteria to guide decisions, rather than relying on pressure or self-interest

prefer to make concession to build rapport

• look for solutions that benefit all parties
• emphasizes cooperation for long-term success

involves bargaining or compromise

or de-escalation: hostility may eventually decrease

• loss of control (calm -> shit into negative emotional exchanges)
• negative reciprocity -> retaliating worse when treated badly)
• anger's function -> communicate displeasure, tool to influence others, reframe situations from cooperative to conflictual, expression of angers perceived as contempt -contagion of anger
• anger and onlince interaction -> people may less restrain themselves than in face to face

anger tend to escalate conflicts, making thzm more negative. It often results in verbal abuse or physical aggression

The fear of retaliation plays a critical role. If retaliation is a realistic concern, parties may avoid using threats leading to less itnense conflict

soft tactics: ( promises, rewards, discussions, negotiation) are typically used in the ealry stages of a conflict. These tactics are indirect, rational and often cooperative hard tactics: are more direct, contentious, and unilateral often used as conflicts escalate. These tactics can provoke a defensive response leading to further conflict.

• Distrust makes it difficult to rebuild cooperative relationships.
• Competitors often fail to recognize cooperative or altruistic behaviors, creating further conflict.

• Misinterpret cooperative behaviors as competition.
• Are biased toward information that confirms distrust.
• Sometimes deliberately misrepresent their intentions.

people often reject options framed as demands rather than suggestions

people seek information that reinforces their stance (confirmation bias)

• individuals become more committed to their positions
• arguments intensified, involving other group members

• conflicts between liked individuals increase tension, but between disliked ones, open hostility arises
• agreement with enemies or disagreement with friends create psychological discomfort

often leads to exclusion, ostracism, disruption within groups - common both in adults and children - productive conflict resolutions improves group cohesion and understanding - ineffective management of self-serving behaviors or dissent can lead to negative perceptions

may clash over decision-making processes, role assignments or task completion methods

and provoke negative reactions toward dissenters

• when group members estimate their responsability, their combined percentages often exceed 100%

• competitive men paired ith older women won more money
• competitiveness was unrelated to stake size

groups with more individualist are less cooperative and more conflict-prone

• men cooperate more in all-male groups, while women cooperate more in sharing contexts
• women's behavior is influenced by attractiveness and likability of their partners

-often engage in abrasive behavior leading to higher conflict levels -Cooperators adjust their behavior to the group, becoming less cooperative if surrounded by individualists - competitors maintain their confrontational style

positive reciprocity fosters cooperation negative reciprocity escalates conflict, as individuals retaliate against harm more strongly than they return kindness

to cross this person again, - labels also play a big role

• cooperative choices benefit both parties
• competitive choices may maximize individual gain, but harm overall group success

positive competition: - motivation, excitement, and pride in controlled scenarios like sports

reasons for conflict: - diverse goals, interests and perspectives among members - competition for resources and power - emotional and interpersonal discord within groups

• minor disagreements can be resolved easily, but deeper misalignments lead to the conflict cycle

• developed a comprehensive list of ten options, ranging from inaction to invasion
• prepared deetailed backup strategies for each course of action
• coordinated efforts to ensure smooth implementation
• communication
• fine tuned the chosen strategy
• ensure clarity of roles and reponsabilities

• discouraged conformity and prioritized critical thinking
• sought feedback from younger, lower-level staff for unbiased perspectives
• consulting unbiased external feedback and contingency plans for failure

• rushed decision under stress or ambiguity
• ingroup favoritism, stereotyping, and centralized leadership

directive leaders: can enhance outcomes if they guide processes rather than control results

• Task cohesion: improves decision-making, as groups focus on obejctives
• Interpersonal cohesion: More symptoms of groupthink,as relationships overshadow task evaluation

criticism or marginalization of those who voice doubts

• group cohesion -> high levels of bonding can suppress dissent
• sutrcutral fault in the group -> group insulation from outside opinions, leadership style discouraging open critiaue, lack of standarduzed decision making procedures
• provocative situational context -> high stress or external threats

align with perceived prototypical positions of their group, which may also shift toward greater extremes for differentiation

generate more arguments supporting the dominant view, leading members to adopt more extreme positions consistent with these arguments

adjust their views to align with the group's norms, striving to present themselves in a socially favorable way

Participants decide the minimum acceptable probability of success beofre recommending risky courses of action. Group discussions often shift these thresholds

depending on the scenario and initial positions

feeling less responsable

group decision-making can intensify risky choices. Contrary to the assumption that groups moderate individual decision, they often amplify them

ways to avoid the bias: - experienced leadership - extended discussion - structured approaches (opinions, adovacy, new topic) -group decisions support systems (shares information collectively, tools for analysis communication and decision making) - introducing dissent - diversity of opinions -

bias is stronger when: - when members seek closure - when problems are complex or lack clear right or wrong answers bias is weaker: - under time pressure - when there are few alternatives to consider

The tendency of groups to commit these decisional sins is stronger than in individuals, as groups are even more susceptible to these errors

• groups have greater informational resources and the ability to process information more effectively
• groups can detect errors in reasoning better than individuals
• members often find group decision more satisfying, particularly when consensus-building methods are used

• negative effects of meeting that are seens as ineffective, such as participants experiencing anxiety, depression and dissatisfaction if meetings aren't viewed as productive -effectiveness of meetings and their drawbacks, such as how people often view them as time-wasters, especially when they don't lead to decisions or solutions. It references research on how ineffective meetings lead to frustration, stress, and dissatisfaction.

can cause internal politics and conformity

• also grandstanding

• also leveling, and sharpening
• also due to poor communication skills -> including summarizing, giving directions and defending opinions

• Groups perform poorly when trying to recall disorganized information, even though they perform similarly to nominal groups when recalling organized information. -group memory improves when members **reminisce together, but a written record is necessary

group members exchange large amounts of information during discussions (e.g., 27 pieces of information in one study). They share ideas, ask for clarifications, and discuss alternatives, which strengthens decision-making by processing information more thoroughly. Forsyth further highlights that active, critical evaluation during group discussions leads to better decision quality.

group discussion is central to a collective information processing model

• due to optimism bias -> tendency for people to overestimate the likelihood of positive outcomes and underestimate the likelihood of negative events or obstacles

improves decision-making, problem-solving and efficiency

distinguishes between goal clarity (setting specific, attainable goals and reviewing overall mission, problems, results, and evaluation criteria) and goal-path clarity (detailing how to achieve goals, including identifying tasks, roles, responsibilities, decision-making processes, and setting deadlines and milestones).

The quote from Yogi Berra (“If you don’t know where you’re going, you might not get there”) is included, emphasizing the importance of clarity in decision-making.

• idealized : leaders act as ethical role models and express their values clearly
• inspirational motivation: leaders articulate an appealing vision of the future and encourage followers with high standards
• intellectual stimulation: leaders challenge assumptions and encourage innovative thinking
• individualized consideration: leaders provide personalized support, coaching and development for their followers

due to their transformational leadership style which is seen as more effective than the others, prejudices diminish and promotional practices become fairer

• transformational ( motivates and changes individuals at a deeper level)
• transactional ( based on maintaining standards and rewarding compliance)

Bass's work draws on Burn's framework to outline the components of transactional, transformational, and laissez-faire leadership

Transactional leadership is about managing and maintaining the status quo rather than inspiring or changing people. - characterized by measures and reluctant doses of change

through their personality, spoken words and dynamic presentation style - Max Weber's View on Charisma: The text references Max Weber's view of charismatic leadership, where he describes these leaders as possessing a “divinely inspired gift” that sets them apart from regular leaders.

stars

yes people

sheep

collective and distributed function

Research has shown that ingroup members tend to outperform outgroup members due to the positive relationship they share with the leader. However, leaders can improve group dynamics by minimizing the size of the outgroup, ensuring fairness in how they interact with team members, and striving to build stronger relationships across the entire team.

require achieving goals or managing difficulties

require balancing tasks and relationships

motivational style

and developmental stage

studies indicate that new employees benefit more from task structuring, while experienced or highly educated employees prefer less directive leadership

importance of production/results and group member's feelings

women are preffered as leaders in cooperative tasks, but men in competitive tasks

while preferences for older, skilled or experienced leaders were once adaptive, these genetic tendencies may no longer be as functional in modern contexts

Leadership originated in small, genetically related groups where coordination was vital for survival. Forsyth emphasizes how early leaders facilitated movement, decision-making, conflict resolution, and defense, demonstrating its multifaceted nature.

Leadership is distinguished from dominance contests. It is cooperative and benefits both leaders and followers, as illustrated by the Yanomamö people, where leadership is based on service to the group rather than physical strength or heredity

increased the representation of genetic material in future generations

• dramatic increase in George W. Bush's approval ratings post-9/11 as an example of TMT in action, noting that his promises to address the crisis provided an antidote to citizens' existential fears.

such as cultural meaning, organization

These challenges cal lead to underrepresentation of women in leadership positions

This bias is more pronounced when women adopt task-oriented leadership styles, seen as inconsistent with their gender role

dominance, competition and high energy

group members favor leaders who champion the ingroup's strengths and differentiate the ingroup from the outgroup

Results showed that group members who identified strongly with their group preferred leaders matching the group's prototype

leaders are idealized representations of the group identity

biases in evaluations of leaders

group members evaluate leaders based on how closely they match the prototype or standard that the members have for a leader. If a leader fits the follower's ideal leadership qualities, they are more likely to be seen as effective

explains how individuals' beliefs, expectations and assumptions about leadership guide their perception of leaders

• gendered dynamics are evident in group leadership
• men are more likely to emerge as leaders in mixed-sex groups
• could be linked to gender expectations and stereotypes about dominance and authority

due to structural biases and gender-based expectations

• minorities such as African American or Asian American, and Latinos often face discrimination or bias
• the underrepresentation of ethnic minorities in high level leadership is linked to various structural and interpersonal factors such as biases in evaluation and promotion practices

high quality comments are more valuable than simply talking a lot

leaders identified in leaderless-group tests

The quote "high intelligence may mean skilled leadership, a group prefers to be ‘ill-governed by people it can understand'"

agreableness is a weaker predictor of leadership emergence, but may predict effectiveness once someone has become a leader and conscientiousness and extraversion the most

genetic marker rs4950 is associated with leadership

A cohesive group where members support each other may not need much relationship leadership

These differences are often rooted in evolutionary pressures that favored communal tendencies in women an task-focused behavior in men

boring tasks that fail to engage the group members even when the leader is energetic

more productive with a leader than non

Leadership is based on a cooperative and reciprocal relationship between the leader and followers. It is not about coercion but rather a consensual relationship where group members accept guidance from the leader and work toward common goals.

Holding a managerial position does not automatically mean someone is a leader. Many people in formal positions of authority are not effective leaders, and many leaders do not hold formal titles. The process of leadership can occur without any formal position of authority, as leadership is about influence, not just being in charge.

• indirect methods involves setting organizational procedures, persuading through emotional appeals, or leading by personal example. subtle influence: structure and messaging

• leadership is primarily about influence, not just authority
• leadership is not a position or title; it's a process that involves guiding others, whether or not the leader holds formal authority

• Leadership has existed for thousands of years, with references to leaders and leaderships in ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphics and epic literature

based on contributionq (proprotionality)

Ball Toss Method:

A social psychology experiment where participants play a virtual ball-toss game. Unknown to the participant, other "players" are part of the research team and exclude them. Excluded participants report emotional pain, frustration, and distress. "Life Alone" Manipulation:

Participants are told that their personality test results predict a lonely future, suggesting they are likely to be excluded throughout life. This method provokes feelings of sadness, alienation, and hopelessness.

an uncomfortable psychological state stemming from disagreement with the group

Hollander proposes that members who first conform to group norms earn credits that allow for later dissent. This concept explains why high-status group members who have contributed to group goals can deviate without severe consequences. Hollander’s approach differs from Moscovici’s in that it emphasizes early conformity to build influence before dissenting, whereas Moscovici focuses on consistent nonconformity. Research indicates that both strategies are effective, with idiosyncrasy credit-based influence being particularly effective in all-male groups

Effective minorities balance assertiveness with group cohesion, maintaining credibility and commitment without threatening group unity. Groups are more likely to tolerate dissent if it does not divide the group. In settings where group identity is strong, dissenters must avoid actions that undermine the group’s collective identity to prevent backlash.

consistency

Conformists tend to be more rigid in their thinking; their con ventionality, conservative values, and unwillingness to confront authority increase their willingness to accept the majority’s opinion. They let the situation and other people influence their perceptions, opi nions, and outlooks. People who rely on situational cues when making perceptual judgments, self conscious individuals, and those who are continu ally checking to see how well they are fitting into the group or situation (high self-monitors), are more likely to make certain that their actions match the group’s standards. People who conform show a greater interest, overall, in other people. They have a higher need for social approval, are more interpersonally oriented, and are more fearful of social rejection. Factors that undermine self confidence—low self-esteem, incompetence, low intelligence—also increase conformity

common in groups working with deadlines

Norms are not only external standards but can also become internalized, shaping personal values and behaviors. Members of a group adopt norms as part of their own beliefs, leading them to conform out of personal conviction rather than external pressure.

people often follow others’ behaviors as social proof of correctness.

interpretation of test scores

combined scores derived from multiple individual measures or sub-scores to provide an overall summary or total score.

systematic sample of behavior

' the branch of psychology concerned with evaluation and use of psychological tests the application of statistical and mathematical techniques to psychological test