The theory on Functional Perspective on Group Decision talks about how group discussion can generate better decisions by following the four functions. Number one is the group analysis of the problem. This is the process where the group looks at the situation and search for the source of the problem. Number two is goal setting, where they establish criteria to reach their solution. Third is generating alternative methods to solve the problem. The fourth is to understand the consequences and know the positive and negative characteristics of each alternative. An example I have for this theory is a scene from Avengers, where they assembled and follow Captain America’s instructions on how to reach the goals of closing “the portal”. In the scene, everyone stand around each other to analyze the source of the problem, which is the portal. Captain America then announce to them that the goal is to contain their enemies by closing the portal. They understand that the alternative of them failing would cause millions of lives. Thus, Captain America divides up the team and assigns each of them to different location in order to prevent these aliens from killing the innocents.
Symbolic Convergence is a group communication theory where two or more private symbol worlds incline toward each other or even overlap; group consciousness, cohesiveness. In simple terms symbolic convergence theory is about sharing group fantasies. Concepts such as dramatizing message, fantasy chain, and symbolic cue are important for this theory. An example of this is in the movie “You’ve Got Mail.” In this movie, Meg Ryan and Tom Hanks create a fantasy relationship that makes them forget about their life problems. They have created personalities and characters for the person that they are emailing with. The book states that “Bormann suggested that group members’ meanings emotions, motives, and actions are all apparent in their fantasies themes.” You can see in the movie that Meg and Tom are not happy in their current relationships that Meg is frustrated and sad about losing her book store and that Tom is not good with relationships because of the example his father has set.
The functional perspective is a prescriptive approach to describe and predict how well people will work in a group using 4 functions. The four functions in this process are analyzing the problem, setting goals, identifying alternative plans, and evaluating the positive and negative characteristics of the decision. An example of this is in the movie “Apollo 13” when both the NASA members on land and the ones in the space shuttle work together to solve the problem increased carbon monoxide in the air. First the problem was analyzed by the members in the shuttle and then analyzed for a solution on ground. Then the goal of finding a way to keep the carbon monoxide out was set by the group. When the bag they were using tore, the members in the air and on the ground had to reevaluate and find alternatives. With this alternative plan, the members had to identify the positive and negatives of the options: by using the last bag, if something else happened they would die. This all took reflective thinking and teamwork. Apollo 13
The functional perspective specifies what communication must accomplish for a jointly made decisions to be wise. This is shown in the film “Twelve Angry Men”(1957). The film is about a jury coming to a decision on a homicide. At first it seems to be unanimous vote for guilty, accept for one man. His reason being that as long as there is reasonable doubt he will not vote guilty. Throughout the film he gets the rest of the jurors to agree that there may be reasonable doubt. In the end there is a unanimous vote for not guilty. This movie is a great example of how communication through committees are essential to coming to a well thought out conclusion. Throughout the movie they displayed all of the four functions of effective decision making. The jurors analyzed the problem and figured out what was required for imrovement. For them this was simple deciding weather the boy was guilty or not guilty. Next they set a goal, they were clear in letting everyone know what was required in order to make a proper decision. Then they identified the alternatives, asking questions and trying to consider alternatives to what they boy may have been doing during the time of the murder. Lastly, the jurors evaluated the positive and negative characteristics of what might happened. They evaluate and come to the conclusion that he was not guilty.
Symbolic Convergence Theory, or SCT, explains human’s tendency to interpret and give meaning to symbols and signs. Specifically, it describes the motives, emotions, and meanings shared between people in a group over a common experience. SCT is a useful theory in that it helps explain the general tendencies of human behavior. SCT can have a direct effect on humans without them even realizing it. For example, businesses in all areas utilize different marketing strategies strengthened by SCT. Many political campaigns cater their messages to different groups based on their beliefs. Specifically, Super PAC’s supporting a candidate of one party would cater their messages very differently based on different constituents.
Chapter 17 talks about Cognitive Dissonance Theory which Leon Festinger defines as “the distressing mental state that people feel when they find themselves doing things that don’t fit with what they know, or having opinions that do not fit with other opinions they hold.” Festinger makes a very good point that people want to avoid dissonance because we crave consistency in our lives. We have our beliefs and opinions and do not want to have conflict with them. This is referred to as “selective exposure” which I found most interesting. Festinger explains that this is seen mainly in politics. Republicans only want to know the positive points of their political, as do the Democrats. Therefore, to avoid contradicting beliefs they will watch news stations and read newspapers that favor their specific political party. Republicans do not want to know about Democrats points of view because they want to avoid dissonance. This concept was interesting to me because my parents are both Republican’s and I always caught them watching FOX News which leans more to the Republican Party. But when I asked my friend whose parents are Democrat which news station they watched she revealed that they usually only watched CNN which is directed towards Democrats.
The Cognitive Dissonance Theory is a very interesting reaction that people have when holding two or more contradictory beliefs. This reaction often causes people to decide to change their mind to one side or the other. Interestingly, I have come across this theory now in two classes, psychology and communication which seem to have a number of overlapping concepts seemingly due to the fact that the interactions we are having with others and the reactions that we send back are strongly based on our psychological make up. An example that came to mind for me although it is quite extreme, is someone who enters a prison and is forced to do things that they would have never considered doing in the past. But, in order to survive and feel safe this person may feel that they need to prove something or do something immoral in order to gain an affiliation. In this case I think it can be said that this action which conflicts with their morals, is a case of cognitive dissonance that will eventually lower this persons morals until they feel more comfortable doing the things they once felt were horribly immoral.
Below is a picture of an inmate before and after a prison sentence.
The theory of Coordinated Management of Meaning is quite an interesting concept but at the same time is quite simple and logical at its basic level; being the fact that communication allows us to create a social environment and control that environment with how we communicate. This theory has two processes, the first being the actions that we utilize to communicate with one another, such as body language or facial expressions. The second being the way we manipulate the meanings of our words and sentences. This is apparent in any and all face-to-face human interactions as well as many that are not face-to-face. A particular example that comes to mind is a white lie, a wife asks her husband if her dress looks pretty, he may not like it but he will tell her that it is beautiful on a lot of occasions. If the woman were to be paying enough attention to the body language and facial expressions (actions) of her man she might be able to see that the things the man is doing are not consistent with what he does when he actually believes her to be beautiful. This man is understanding the constructs the conversation and manipulating them through the way he communicates in order to achieve a simpler social reality rather than fighting with his wife.
The cognitive dissonance theory is when an individual has two conflicting beliefs or ideals in their head causing stress or discomfort. It can also occur when an individual believes one thing and preforms a contradictory action. Dissonance itself is described as a motivation “to change either our behavior or belief in an effort to avoid an unpleasant feeling” (griffin). because the individual is experiencing conflicting beliefs or values or contradictory actions, the cognitive dissonance theory states that the individual will be compelled to change a belief in order to restore a positive and content feeling. This is accomplished usually through a change in attitude, if the individual can change their attitude they might not feel discomfort. It is said that close-call decisions or actions produced by peer pressure often cause dissonance for the individual.
The Cognitive Dissonance Theory explores the idea of internal mental conflict, specifically, the idea that a feeling of discomfort can lead to an alteration is a persons ideas or beliefs. A clear example that demonstrates this idea is when people continue to smoke cigarettes knowing that it can lead to cancer and other health issues. I believe this theory applies to most people, especially in their teenage years. Many rebellious teenagers take action knowing that the action can be harmful to themselves or others. Even adults can fall under this theory whether its in business, politics, family issues. In politics, for example, many politicians have double standards on issues such as spending. They support cutting the fiscal deficit, however, if their districts or states are facing the cuts, they are strictly opposed to such cuts.
