Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and FiascoesGroupthink - the psychological drive for consensus at any cost that suppresses disagreement and prevents the appraisal of alternatives in cohesive decision-making groups. In the first edition (Victims of groupthink), Iriving L. Janis showed how this phenomenon contributed to some of the major U.S. foreign policy fiascos of recent decades: the Korean War stalemate, the escalation of the Vietnam War, the failure to be prepared for the attack on Pearl Harbor, and the Bay of Pigs blunder. He also examined cases, such as the handling of the Cuban Missile Crisis and the formulation of the Marshall Plan, where groupthink was avoided. Here, in this revised and expanded edition, Janis applies his hypothesis to the Watergate cover-up, portraying in detail how groupthink helped to put the participants on a disastrous couurse and keep them there. In addition, he presents some fresh ideas on how and why groupthink occurs and offers suggestions for avoiding it. |
From inside the book
Results 1-3 of 84
Page 194
It requires examining the facts carefully in order to answer the following series of
four key questions before concluding that groupthink was a contributory cause of
any fiasco : 1 . Who made the policy decisions ? Was it essentially the leader ...
It requires examining the facts carefully in order to answer the following series of
four key questions before concluding that groupthink was a contributory cause of
any fiasco : 1 . Who made the policy decisions ? Was it essentially the leader ...
Page 198
After having developed the theory , I realized that in order to determine whether
the groupthink hypothesis can be applied to any given fiasco , several kinds of
questions have to be answered . It does not suffice merely to see whether the ...
After having developed the theory , I realized that in order to determine whether
the groupthink hypothesis can be applied to any given fiasco , several kinds of
questions have to be answered . It does not suffice merely to see whether the ...
Page 199
It is useful to repeat the five key questions at this point because they provide the
basic outline for the case study presented in this chapter : 1 . Who made the
policy decision ? Was it essentially the leader alone or did group members
participate ...
It is useful to repeat the five key questions at this point because they provide the
basic outline for the case study presented in this chapter : 1 . Who made the
policy decision ? Was it essentially the leader alone or did group members
participate ...
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Contents
Why So Many Miscalculations? | 2 |
The Bay of Pigs | 14 |
Or Why the Fortress Slept | 72 |
Copyright | |
4 other sections not shown
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
accept according action administration Admiral advisers alternative American appears asked assumptions attack avoid Bay of Pigs become called Chiefs cohesive Committee concerning consensus consequences continued course cover-up crisis critical Cuba Cuban danger Dean decision decision-making Defense deliberations Department discussion effect errors evidence example Executive expected fact factors feel fiasco forces give groupthink Haldeman invasion involved issues Japanese Johnson judgment Kennedy leader leading major March meetings military missile moral Nixon norms North objections officers operation participants Pearl Harbor policy-making political position possible present President pressures probably problem procedures proposed questions responsible result risks role says Secretary seems Senator shared social Soviet staff stress strong suggested symptoms of groupthink thinking threat tion transcripts Truman United Vietnam warning Watergate White House