Differentiate the forming, norming, storming and adjourning stages of group development.

Managing a team can be hard with the many different personalities in human society.
Learning to collaborate with those personalities are imperative to building a successful,
organized team to ensure the organization’s goal is met. Ensuring your team is consistent and
collaborative, one must understand the developmental stage processes. Bruce W. Tuckman
created a framework for stages of group development that include forming, storming, norming,
performing, and adjourning. These stages are essential in recognizing behavior patterns within
the team.

Forming is the first step to structuring a team. To feel needed and wanted in a team, most
people avoid conflict and look to ‘vote’ a team member as their leader. The team will envision
goals and form structure and roles to begin the trust process. This stage is essential for setting
clear expectations for the long-term function of the group. Most times everyone’s behavior and
emotions are either likable or filled with anxiety. When advancing to the next stage, those
behaviors and emotions can change and cause conflict. The storming stage can consist of issues
with team structure, roles, and interpersonal conflicts. The heightened excitement decreases and
feelings of frustration and confusion and disagreements and power struggles increase. This stage
is essential to finding how the team will handle conflict. Once the kinks of conflict are solved,
you can enter the norming stage. In this stage, the group is now able to work through conflict and
produce successful productivity. Communication strengthens and interpersonal relationships are
formed. The last stage, performing, is not always reached but is beneficial to the team’s
progression. In the performing stage, the team feels and acts as one whole instead of parts. Roles
are interchangeable between members and responsibilities and tasks are shared. The next stage is
not always the most looked forward to stage. The phrase ‘all good things must come to an end’ is
the motto for the adjourning stage. The adjourning stage is a big change to a team and can cause
the team to feel anxious about one or more members leaving the team. Feelings of sadness,
anger, and mourning can happen but can also be partnered or trumped with a sense of
accomplishment.

Tuckman’s stages of development are not always followed in that order and it does not
mean that once a team gets in or out of a stage, that they stay there. There may be times where
the team can be functioning in the norming or even performing stage but a member can do or say
something that can cause the team to fall back into the storming stage. Knowing these stages and
the feelings and behaviors within each stage can help develop a strong and successful group.

References
Stein, J. (n.d.). Using the stages of team development. MIT Human Resources.
https://hr.mit.edu/learning-topics/teams/articles/stages-development.

WCU. (n.d.). Tuckman’s stages of group development. West Chester University.

https://www.wcupa.edu/coral/tuckmanStagesGroupDelvelopment.aspx.

What are the dangers of groupthink?

Sometimes when you are a part of a group, you can tend to find that you lose yourself.
Losing a part of yourself to the point of realization that you are not making your own decisions is
a result of groupthink. Groupthink occurs when the majority of a group ends on a decision
together and other members of the group just follow along with their decision so that the group
stays happy and in balance. Although it may sound like happiness for the greater good, it can
cause strife and a lieu of bad decisions through irrational and unsatisfactory decisions.
Our human instinct to belong to a group, be accepted, wanted, and needed, and
contributing to harmony within the group is a psychological theory behind groupthink.
Conformity is at the center of the groupthink phenomenon. When a group puts a priority over
consensus rather than critical analysis, it can have detrimental and harming effects to not only the
group but also the individuals. Most groupthink decisions do not include additional viewpoints,
discussing potential problems, or the ability to predict possible negative outcomes. Instead, it
includes irrational decision-making, unrealistic optimism, and arrogance. Members of the group
are more susceptible to having their thoughts and opinions overpowered and suppressed because
they are scared of causing animosity or rejection within the group. The greatest way to combat
groupthink is to have an effective leader or you, yourself, effectively lead. Effective leadership
can evolve the group to have open communication between all members, encourage analytical
thinking, and create a culture that has value for the group.
So that one can avoid a graveyard for their personal opinions and ideas, one must practice
enough awareness to know when they are falling into groupthink. If your group is under pressure
to conclude a situation, allowing appropriate time for everyone to answer and contribute to the
situation would be beneficial to avoiding a groupthink environment. Another strategy to
encourage individual thinking rather than groupthink is to recognize and celebrate moments of
progress and to encourage morale.

References
DBEM. (n.d.). Groupthink: Overcoming its dangers in decision-making.
Ihttps://dbem.org/groupthink/.

Mueller, J., Harvey, S., & Levenson, A. (2022). How to steer clear of groupthink. Harvard
Business Review. https://hbr.org/2022/03/how-to-steer-clear-of-groupthink.

Describe three factors which influence interpersonal attraction.

More than likely there have been times where you found yourself attracted to another
person but could not quite figure out why or how you got to that point. The elements of attraction
can be extremely subjective however, there are some psychological explanations surrounding the
basis of what contributes to our attraction to others. Among various factors of attraction,
proximity, physical attractiveness, and reciprocity can give you a deeper insight into
interpersonal attraction.
Have you ever wondered why it can be so easy for coworkers to get into fraternized
relationships or to cheat on their spouses with their coworkers? That underlying attraction can be
a result of proximity. A proximity attraction occurs when two people frequently cross paths with
one another and eventually develop a relationship. Most people are attracted to what they are
familiar with and proximity is to thank for that. Constantly being near the same person increases
the chances of an interpersonal attraction. Studies have shown that we also spend more time with
people based on their physical attractiveness. Being physically attracted to another person makes
that person seem more exciting, smarter, kinder, and favorable rather than being faced with
someone you find less physically attractive. This phenomenon is commonly referred to as beauty
bias. When one finds a person physically attractive, they tend to pay more attention to that
person which can also tie into laws of proximity, physical attraction can lead to spending more
time with someone. Another factor that can influence interpersonal attraction is reciprocity. We
are more likely to be attracted to someone who equally engages with us. Having that mutual
reciprocity allows us to feel wanted and valued which in turn increases attraction on a deeper
level.
There are many factors that can contribute to interpersonal attraction. Most are positive
and there are also some factors that can influence interpersonal attraction in a negative way.
Some people are driven to attraction with mating in mind and others find that they are attracted
to outside extremities. Although proximity, physical attractiveness, and reciprocity are
contributing factors to influencing interpersonal attraction, there are many more factors to
consider the next time you think to yourself, how and why you are attracted to this person.

References
Daffin, L. & Lane, C. (2021). Principles of Social Psychology. PressBooks. Washington State
University, 2nd edition. Module 12.2.
https://opentext.wsu.edu/social-psychology/chapter/module-12-attraction/.

Rahman, S., Bowman, N., Jackson, D., Lushtak, A, Newman, R., & Sunder, P. (2022). Sexuality,
the self, and society. CC Echo. Module 8.3.
https://socialsci.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Gender_Studies/Sexuality_the_Self_and_Society_(R
uhman_Bowman_Jackson_Lushtak_Newman_and_Sunder)/zz%3A_Back_Matter/
21%3A_Detailed_Licensing.

What hypothesized cause of aggression did Albert Bandura's famous Bobo doll experiment
investigate and how?
Aggression is one the most common forms of behavior in humans. It is easy for someone
to show aggression and sometimes can be shown with less effort than being peaceful. However,
aggression and attaining peace are not natural for human behavior, they are actually a result of
our social environments. Much research has surrounded aggression as a social behavior and
influential psychologist, Albert Bandura, has made leaps into investigating if aggression is a
learned behavior. Bandura hypothesized that boys would show more aggression than girls and
that children were more susceptible to mirroring aggressive behavior through observational
learning.
Bandura conducted a lab experiment with young children that were divided between their
levels of aggression and further observed. The experiment was split into three conditions where
an aggressive adult model was shown, a non-aggressive adult model was shown, and no model
shown. The children were split into rooms with toys and things to do. In the room with the
aggressive model, the children witnessed the adult aggressively attacking the Bobo doll and the
children showed the most mirrored aggressive behavior than any other group. In the other two
rooms with the non-aggressive model, the children witnessed the adult ignore the Bobo doll and
play with another toy and the room with no adult model and just toys resulted in a mixture of the
children showing no aggression toward the doll and a few children showing non-imitative
aggression. Results of the experiment showed that boys behaved more physically aggressive than
girls and girls showed more verbal aggression. The boys were shown to imitate more aggressive
behavior when witnessing a male adult model rather than a female adult model.
At the end of Bandura’s experiment, he deemed successful at suggesting that children can
learn aggressive behaviors through social and observational learning and that boys showed more
aggression than girls. Bandura’s experiment led the way in understanding why children who
witness aggression firsthand in the households growing up were more likely to be aggressive
adults and most times become bullies. The results of Bandura’s experiment has been the
foundational framework for psychologists to follow to investigate aggressive behavior and the
link between violence shown on technology.

References
Cherry, K. (2022). What the bobo doll experiment reveals about kids and aggression.
Verywellmind. Social Psychology. https://www.verywellmind.com/bobo-doll-experiment-
2794993.

Galanki, E. & Malafantis, K. D. (2022). Albert bandura’s experiments on aggression modeling

in children: A psychoanalytic critique. Frontiers in Psychology.
https://doi.org.10.3389/fpsyg.2022.988877.

McLeod, S. (2023). Bandura’s bobo doll experiment on social learning. Simply Psychology.
https://www.simplypsychology.org/bobo-doll.html.

How does the military battle commitment to "leave no man behind" exemplify the vested interest
model of human helping behavior.
Nemo resideo, a latin phrase meaning ‘leave no man behind’ originated in Greek
mythology and has been a motto for veterans of the United States Armed Forces. The phrase has
planted itself as a core value for veterans both in and out of war. The motto is also a paradigm
for prosocial behavior. The social psychology term, prosocial behavior is behavior that benefits
another person or persons, which should not be confused with the term altruism. The altruism
concept refers to behavior being motivated rather than instinctual. The phrase, ‘Leave no man
behind’ exemplifies a sacred promise to not leave your fellow comrade behind no matter the
circumstances.
Prosocial behavior is the heart of being ethical and moral. Research surrounds the
behavior with individuals showing more happiness and living healthier and longer lives.
Individuals who choose to act in contrast to the behavior show signs of guilt and depression in
the long run. Because of the selfless act of helping another without intention to receive anything
back, the individual is rewarded internally. Social psychologists have suggested that along with
just the need to help another, there are other reasons why individuals choose to show prosocial
behavior. Some do it for egotistic reasons like increasing self-image or reciprocity expectations.
Others may do it because they have an overwhelming sense of empathy or others may choose to
do it because they know them or are close to them. There are times, however, where the
individual who is exemplifying the helping behavior can experience negative effects. Sometimes
the individual will put themselves in danger to help another or become drained depending on
how frequently they participate in the helping behavior. Those negative effects can also have a
damper on why the bystander effect is so prevalent. The bystander effect is when people are less
likely to respond to a person in need of help when there are many others around thinking the
others will step in instead, or an individual may fear judgment, negative responses, or
embarrassment.
Human helping prosocial behavior can be contagious. Develop and practice skills to
overcome the negative stigmas so that you can experience the euphoria of leaving no man
behind. Executing helping behavior has been known to combat mental health issues and increase
life satisfaction. The behavior can only help the community so, why not spread it?

References
Cherry, K. (2022). The basics of prosocial behavior. Verywellmind. Behavioral Psychology.
https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-prosocial-behavior-2795479.
Dunfield, K. (2014). A construct divided: prosocial behavior as helping, sharing, and
comforting subtypes. Frontiers. Developmental Psychology.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00958.

Ethics Unwrapped. (n.d.). Prosocial behavior. McCombs School of Business.

https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/glossary/prosocial-behavior.