Findings

    One does not have to observe our society for any great length of time in order to see that symptoms of groupthink exist, to varying degrees of severity, within our government here in the United States of America, as well as throughout society abroad. Strappado's article on this matter is vividly helpful, albeit perhaps a bit overly dramatic, in coming to the realization that groupthink is a reality in our society. With political parties often entrenched deep within the hills of two opposing ideological fronts true collaboration and the free exchange of ideas seldom occurs within today's pollitical landscape. This reality is often manifest in three main behavioral patterns, overoptimism, lack of vigilance, and dogmatic thinking about the frailty and lack of moral judgment on the part of other groups (Irving Janis, 1973). In fact, when viewed in lieu of these behaviors as well as Rothwell's definition of groupthink (see intro page) the political parties of today seem to more closely resemble the zealous conscripts of countries at war than the embodied, rational politic our forefathers likely imagined. Our findings, throughout the course of our project, have led us to believe that a solid understanding of groupthink, its causes, and the means with which we can attempt to guard ourselves against groupthink's negative effects represents the best place to start combating this problem.

    So what exactly is groupthink? At this point in our analysis some brief definitions have been offered; however, there has been a broadening field of research ever since Irving Janis published his initial essay addressing the topic in 1973. Essentially, groupthinnk is a form of defective judgment known as a concurrence-seeking tendency. Groups find themselves tied up in concurrence-seeking tendencies when their desire to reach unanimity outweighs their desire to accurately and objectively appraise the result of the groups decision. Becasue this psycological phenomenon often occurs in groups that are highly cohesive, experienced, and motivated its effects are much more dangerous and more difficult to combat than other forms of faulty decision making. Examples within history demonstrating the symptoms of groupthink throughout history are numerous, they include but are not limited to our involvement in Vietnam, the Watergate scandal, and the Great Recession we currently find ourselves recovering from.   

    In regards to the Great Recession Mckenzie makes a compelling argument that groupthink had a large role to play in the actions leading up to the recession. Mckenzie argues that the recession was the result of the repeal of the Glass-Steagal act which prevented commercial banks from being active in investment banking in order to prevent taking too much risk with depositor’s money. Mckenzie goes on to cite the voiced concerns of men like Senator Byron Dorgen who asserted that the repeal of the act would lead to a financial crisis "within 10 years". These warnings, however, were not heeded by those in support of repealing the Glass-Steagall act, such as Senator Jack Reed, and in an attempt to reach consensus the act was repealed. When asked on a later date whether of not Senator Reed recalled these objections he is reported to have replied that he did not. Essentially rendering the objections to nothing more than what Mckenzie calls "voices in the wilderness." The purpose of this website is not to agree or disagree with Mckenzie's analysis of the recession but rather to point out the uitility of these kind of reflections in beginning to combat groupthink. The question as to whether or not any of the negative consequences of the Great recession may have been avoided if the alleged "voices in the wilderness" had been heeded prior to the repeal of the Glass-Steagall act is, in reality, a moot one. In spite of this, exercises in critical thinking like this train us to be vigilant throughout the entirety of our decision making processes. This should help us combat such events from reoccurring later in our history. 

    An analysis of the circumstances surrounding an event such as the Great Recession gives us a unique opportunity to observe the effects of groupthink first hand within our culture. In fact, a great measure of hope lies in the reality that here in the United States many of these events are recorded and available as "public records." Which is good news as these records are invaluable if we hope to make break our cycle of groupthink. In addition to learning from our mistakes positive steps can be taken to help combat concurrence-seeking tendencies. One solution being tested currently is to better prepare the youth of today for the decision making of tomorrow by placing a greater emphasis on critical thinking at a young age. In Ireland primary schools are looking into incorporating philosophy into the curriculum of students as early as first grade. The idea being that by promoting individual critical thinking and imbuing confidence in a students individual thought process as early as possible we can better prepare students for the rigor of hard decision making later in life. In a sense confidence that one's intellectual ideas are valid and worth voicing even if they are the dissenting minority, is a skill that is not inherit but rather one that must be trained over the course of a lifetime. The fact of the matter is if we continue fail to learn from our mistakes in the past, maintain the proper level of vigilance over the decisions we make as a society currently, and fail to prepare tomorrow's leaders to effectively combat groupthink its negative effects will continue to hinder progress as a nation, and as a global society.