In psychology, an attitude refers to a set of emotions, beliefs, and behaviors

toward a particular object, person, thing, or event.

Attitudes are often the result of experience or upbringing. They can have a
powerful influence over behavior and affect how people act in various
situations. While attitudes are enduring, they can also change. The main
components of attitude are cognitive, affective, and behavioral, which means
they incorporate thoughts, feelings, and actions.

This article explores what attitudes mean in psychology and how they are
formed. It also covers how attitudes impact behaviors and factors contributing
to attitude change

Nature of Attitude
 Attitude are a complex combination of things we tend to call personality,
beliefs, values, behaviors, and motivations.
 An attitude exists in every person’s mind. It helps to define our identity, guide
our actions, and influence how we judge people.
 Although the feeling and belief components of attitude are internal to a person,
we can view a person’s attitude from his or her resulting behavior.
 Attitude helps us define how we see situations, as well as define how we behave
toward the situation or object.
 Attitude provides us with internal cognitions or beliefs and thoughts about
people and objects.
 Attitude cause us to behave in a particular way toward an object or person.

All definitions of attitudes agree that an attitude is a state of the mind, a set of
views, or thoughts, regarding some topic (called the ‘attitude object’), which
have an evaluative feature (positive, negative or neutral quality).
It is accompanied by an emotional component, and a tendency to act in
a particular way with regard to the attitude object. The thought component is
referred to as the cognitive aspect, the emotional component is known as the
affective aspect, and the tendency to act is called the behavioural (or
conative) aspect. Taken together, these three aspects have been referred to as
the A-B-C components (Affective-Behavioural
Cognitive components) of attitude. Note that attitudes are themselves not
behaviour, but they represent a tendency to behave or act in certain ways. They
are part of cognition, along with an emotional component, and cannot be
observed from outside
 What is Attitude?
About:
o It is a psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular
entity with some degree of favour or disfavour.
o The evaluations which people make can range from extremely
unfavourable to the extremely favourable, or can be more moderate.
o Attitudes can be mixed, and with regard to the same object, may vary from
time to time.
o

 Classification:
o Explicit:

 If a person is aware of his attitudes, and they influence his behaviour and
beliefs, his attitudes are explicit.
 Explicit attitudes are formed consciously.
o Implicit:

 A person may be unaware of his implicit beliefs though these still have
some influence on his conduct and behaviour.
 Implicit attitudes are subconscious attitudes.
What are the Components of the Attitude?
 Attitude has three components.

o Affective (Emotional):
 It consists of the feeling which the object, person, issue or event evokes.
The behavioural part consists of the manner in which the attitude
influences a person’s behaviour.
 For example: I am scared of spiders.

o Behavioural (Conative):
 Conative in psychology means a mental process involving the will–
impulse, desire or resolve.
 For example: I will avoid spiders and scream if I see one.

o Cognitive:
 It means ‘relating to the process of acquiring knowledge through reason,
intuition and perception’.
 It consists of a person’s thoughts and beliefs about the attitude object.
 For example: I believe spiders are dangerous.
Functions of Attitude?
 Knowledge Function:
Attitudes have a knowledge function, which enables individuals to
understand their environment and to be consistent in their ideas and
thinking. Most attitudes serve this basic function in some measure.

 Utilitarian Function:
Attitude helps individuals in maximizing benefits and minimizing
disadvantages while interacting with individuals, groups and situations in
their environment. Utilitarian attitudes lead to behaviour that optimizes one’s
interests.

 Performing a Social Role:

Attitudes help perform a social role, helping in an individual’s self-expression
and social interaction.
o Subscribing to a given set of attitudes signals one’s identification with
important reference groups to express one’s core values, and to establish
one’s identity. This social role of attitudes is known as social identity
function, it underlies an individual’s desire to establish his individual and
social identity.

 Maintain an Individual’s Self-Esteem:

Attitudes can serve as defence mechanisms for handling an individual’s
internal mental conflict which reflect tensions within the individual psyche.
o The defence mechanisms hide an individual’s true motives from
himself or psychologically isolate him from groups perceived as hostile or
threatening.
o Attitudes maintain self-esteem in other ways also. An individual’s attitudes
toward many things are influenced by his view on how they affect his own
self-assessment.

 For Example: Our attitudes toward our friends and social acquaintances
depend on whether we regard such association as enhancing or lowering our
social standing.

Process of Attitude Formation

The processes and conditions of learning
may be different, resulting in varying
attitudes among people.
•
Learning attitudes by association : You might have seen that students often
develop a liking for a particular subject because of the teacher. This is because
they see many positive qualities in that teacher; these positive qualities get
linked to the subject that s/he teaches, and ultimately get expressed in the form
of liking for the subject. In other words,
a positive attitude towards the subject is learned through the positive association
between a teacher and a student.
•
Learning attitudes by being rewarded or
punished : If an individual is praised for showing a particular attitude, chances
are high that s/he will develop that attitude further. For example, if a teenager
does yogasanas regularly, and
gets the honour of being ‘Miss Good Health’ in her school, she may develop a
positive attitude towards yoga and health in general. Similarly, if a child
constantly falls ill because s/he eats
junk food instead of proper meals, then the child is likely to develop a negative
attitude towards junk food, and also a positive attitude towards eating healthy
food.
•
Learning attitudes through modelling
(observing others) : Often it is not through association, or through reward and
punishment, that we learn attitudes. Instead, we learn them by observing others
being rewarded or punished for expressing thoughts, or showing behaviour of a
particular kind
towards the attitude object. For example, children may form a respectful attitude
towards elders, by observing that their parents show respect for elders, and are
appreciated for it.
•
Learning attitudes through group or
cultural norms : Very often, we learnattitudes through the norms of our group
or culture. Norms are unwrittenrules about behaviour that everyone is supposed
to show under specific
circumstances. Over time, these norms may become part of our social cognition,
in the form of attitudes. Learningattitudes through group or cultural norms may
actually be an example of all three forms of learning described above —
learning through association,
reward or punishment, and modelling. For example, offering money,
sweets,fruit and flowers in a place of worship isa normative behaviour in some
religions.When individuals see that such behaviour is shown by others, is
expected and socially approved, they may ultimately develop a positive attitude
towards such behaviour and the associated feelings of devotion.
•
Learning through exposure to
information : Many attitudes are learned in a social context, but not necessarily
in the physical presence of others. Today, with the huge amount of information
that is being pr ovided
through various media, both positive and negative attitudes are being formed.
By reading the biographies of selfactualised persons, an individual may develop
a positive attitude towards hard work and other aspects as the means of
achieving success in life.

PREJUDICE

Prejudice is an assumption or an opinion about someone simply based on that person's

membership to a particular group. For example, people can be prejudiced against someone
else of a different ethnicity, gender, or religion.

If someone is acting on their prejudices, they are pre-judging (hence the term "prejudice")
someone before even getting to know them on a deeper level. This is an irrational attitude and
mindset which does no good for anyone involved.

"Prejudice" comes from the Latin prejudicium ("injustice") and praeiudicium ("prior
judgment"), which referred to judicial examination before trial.1

For example, a person might have a lot of preconceived ideas about someone who is
Christian, Muslim, or Jewish and will allow those judgements to affect the way they view and
treat those people. The same can be true for people who are Black, White, or Asian.

Common features of prejudice include:2

  Negative feelings
 Stereotyped beliefs
 A tendency to discriminate against members of a group

In society, we often see prejudices toward a group based on race, sex, religion, culture, and
more.

While specific definitions of prejudice given by social scientists often differ, most agree that
it involves prejudgments that are usually negative about members of a group.3

What is the Realistic Conflict Theory?

The realistic conflict theory posits that in an environment where people of equal skills and
attributes are made to compete for the same resources, the intergroup conflict will directly
relate to the resources' value and scarceness.
The realistic group conflict theory goes beyond the assumptions made by realistic conflict
theory, including the perception of competition for resources between groups. At a certain
threshold of similarity between groups, i.e., when people perceive comparable strengths and
qualities between themselves and others, they will position the other as a threat based on their
differences. These differences are used to differentiate between an in and out-group, where
the in-group treats the out-group as a threat to their status quo, leading to prejudice and
conflict between groups.
Superordinate goals are goals that can only be achieved through participation between a
minimum of two groups. Therefore, superordinate goals can be utilized as a strategy to
counteract conflict, harmful stereotypes, and discriminatory belief systems.

The Robber's Cave Experiment

Realistic conflict theory predicts that a competitive environment can result in enduring
enmity and repetitious prejudice. In 1954, Muzafer Sherif conducted the first experiment with
substantive reliability of the realistic conflict theory.
The Robber's Cave experiment involved twenty-two young boys of similar socio-economic
and religious backgrounds, ages, and build, who were divided into two equal groups- the
Rattlers and Eagles. Participants were recruited based on similarity to ensure friction between
groups was not the outcome of prior or general social prejudices.
The three-stage experiment went as follows:

 group formation
 the introduction of conflict between the competing groups and the test groups; and
 the resolution of conflict through the introduction of superordinate goals.

During the first stage of the experiment, the groups formed social attachments and established
a social hierarchy through group activities such as hiking and swimming. At this point in the
experiment, each group did not know the other group existed. Hierarchical structures
functioned as a strategy to achieve group objectives by categorizing subjects and creating a
social divide between the otherwise similar boys. They completed activities that required
teammates to work together collectively to achieve rewards, including a treasure hunt with a
$10 reward that the group could spend however they wanted.
Stage two of Sherif's experiment provided evidence that the introduction of competition
creates conflict between the groups and that competition over desirable resources would lead
to negative attitudes between groups. The formation of these stereotypes is predicated on the
social hierarchy established in the group formation stage of the experiment and seeks to
highlight in-group and out-group differences. As the experiment progressed, the relations
between the two groups disintegrated swiftly, and animosity ran rampant. On the baseball
field, the Eagles burned the flag of the Rattlers, resulting in the Rattlers vandalizing the
Eagles' cabin.
In the final phase of the experiment, the researchers intentionally tried to leverage
cooperation between the two groups. This experiment stage attempted to determine what
would be required to repair the relationships between the two groups post-conflict. Although
the two groups interacted socially through excursions, shared mealtimes, and the removal of
competition for resources, the Rattlers and the Eagles rebuffed everyone from the other
group. The researchers took a more active approach to encourage a connection between the
two groups by requiring the previously competing groups to work toward a superordinate
goal. In doing so, the researchers aimed to observe the removal of intergroup stressors and
competition. The participants were motivated to avoid conflict and cooperate as the resources
and efforts of a single group were insufficient to accomplish their superordinate goal. For
example, researchers removed the freshwater source from the entire camp, claiming vandals
had destroyed the equipment. Both groups worked together to find the source of the problem.
Once the groups discovered that an outlet faucet had a sack stuffed into it, they worked
together to find a solution to clear the blockage. After working together for 45 minutes, the
problem was fixed, water started to flow, and both groups cheered and rejoiced together.
There was no arguing over which group contributed more to the solution, or which group
could drink first.

The Robber's Cave experiment demonstrates that a perceived or simulated competition could
result in hostility between in and out-groups. Realistic conflict theory considers group
identification as a common denominator of intergroup conflict. However, groups do not need
to organize or exhibit predetermined norms for out-group discrimination and prejudicial
behavior. Although the Robber's Cave experiment is a keystone study of realistic conflict
theory, it has since been criticized for the ethical issues of doing social experimentation on
children without their consent.
Social Identity Theory, proposed by Henri Tajfel and John Turner in the
1970s, posits that individuals derive a portion of their self-concept from
their membership in social groups.
 The theory seeks to explain the cognitive processes and social conditions
underlying intergroup behaviors, especially those related to prejudice, bias,
and discrimination.

SOCIAL IDENTITY
THEORY
Social identity is a person’s sense of who they are based on their group
membership(s).
Tajfel and Turner (1979) proposed that the groups (e.g., social class, family,
football team, etc.) people belonged to were important sources of pride and self-
esteem.

Social identity groups can give you a sense of:

1. Belonging: Being part of a group can instill feelings of connection and unity,
giving individuals the comforting sense that they’re not alone in their experiences
or perspectives.

2. Purpose: Group affiliations often come with shared goals or missions, which can
provide direction and purpose to individual members.

3. Self-worth: Affiliating with a group can boost self-esteem as individuals derive

pride from group achievements and a positive group image.

4. Identity: Groups provide a framework to understand oneself in the context of a

larger community. They can help define who you are based on shared attributes,
values, or goals.

Stages

1. Social Categorization

This refers to the tendency of people to classify themselves and others into
various social groups based on attributes like race, gender, nationality, or
religion.
We categorize objects to understand them and identify them. In a very similar
way, we categorize people (including ourselves) to understand the social
environment. We use social categories like black, white, Australian, Christian,
Muslim, student, and bus driver because they are useful.

Categorization helps individuals simplify the social environment but can also lead
to stereotyping. If we can assign people to a category, that tells us things about
those people.

Similarly, we find out things about ourselves by knowing what categories we

belong to. We define appropriate behavior by referencing the norms of groups
we belong to, but you can only do this if you can tell who belongs to your group.
An individual can belong to many different groups.

For example, you have categorized yourself as a student, chances are you will
adopt the identity of a student and begin to act the ways you believe student act.

2. Social Identification

Once individuals categorize themselves as members of a particular group, they

adopt the identity of that group. This means they begin to see themselves in terms
of group characteristics and adopt its norms, values, and behaviors.

If for example you have categorized yourself as a student, the chances are you
will adopt the identity of a student and begin to act in the ways you believe
students act (and conform to the norms of the group).

There will be an emotional significance to your identification with a group, and

your self-esteem will become bound up with group membership.

3. Social Comparison

After categorizing and identifying with a group, individuals compare their group
to others. This comparison is often biased in favor of one’s own group, leading to
in-group favoritism.

This is critical to understanding prejudice, because once two groups identify

themselves as rivals, they are forced to compete in order for the members to
maintain their self-esteem.
 Competition and hostility between groups is thus not only a matter of competing
for resources (like in Sherif’s Robbers Cave) like jobs but also the result of
competing identities.

4. In-group (us) and Out-group (them)

Within the context of SIT, the ‘in-group’ refers to the group with which an
individual identifies, while ‘out-group’ pertains to groups they don’t identify
with.

The theory asserts that people have a natural inclination to perceive their in-group
in a positive light while being neutral or even negative towards out-groups, thus
enhancing their self-image.

5. Positive Distinctiveness

The desire for positive self-esteem will motivate one’s in-group to be perceived
as positively different or distinct from relevant out-groups.

Prejudiced views between cultures may result in racism; in its extreme forms,
racism may result in genocide, such as occurred in Germany with the Jews, in
Rwanda between the Hutus and Tutsis, and, more recently, in the former
Yugoslavia between the Bosnians and Serbs

EXAMPLES.

1. Age:Ingroup: Teenagers might feel that other teens understand their experiences
and challenges best.Outgroup: They might see adults, especially older adults, as
an outgroup.

2. Musical Preference:Ingroup: Fans of heavy metal music might identify with

fellow metalheads.

 Outgroup: Fans of pop, country, or classical music might be perceived as

outgroups.
 SCAPEGOAT THEORY

Summary

 Scapegoating is an analysis of violence and aggression in which people who have

undergone or who are undergoing negative experiences — such as failure or abuse
by others — blame an innocent individual or group for the experience.

 Although the term scapegoat is biblical, Emile Durkheim was the first to talk about
it in a sociological context. Durkheim believed that the practice of scapegoating is
fundamental to the structures of societies and that every event that generates
negative emotions must have a scapegoat.

 Scapegoating can take place between individuals, between an individual and a

group, between a group and an individual, and between groups. Sociology is most
concerned with the last of these conditions.

 Scapegoating has been explained in terms of Freud’s theory of displaced

aggression. Other researchers have identified factors that make certain groups more
likely to be scapegoated than others.

 Scapegoating has occurred throughout history to numerous groups, often triggered

by a distressing event and as a means to justify discrimination or mass murder.

Scapegoating can lead to prejudice, discrimination, and even violence against

innocent people who are unfairly blamed for problems they did not cause.

What Is Scapegoating?

Scapegoating is the act of blaming an out-group when the frustration of the in-
group experience is blocked from obtaining a goal (Allport, 1954).
Scapegoating is a way to analyze negative experiences in terms of blaming an
innocent individual or group for the event. The one doing the scapegoating can then
use the mistreatment of the scapegoat as an outlet for their own frustrations and
hostilities.
 Subsequently, the group can mistreat the scapegoat as an outlet for their frustrations
and hostilities.

The word scapegoat is a compound of the archaic verb scape, meaning escape, and
goat, a misreading of the Hebrew ʽazāzēl. Historians believe that the term
scapegoat was first coined in the 16th century to describe the ritual animals that
those in Jewish communities placed their sins onto in preparation for Yom Kippur
by the Protestant scholar William Tyndale in his translation of the Hebrew Bible.

The Book of Leviticus, part of the Hebrew Bible, describes the sacrifice of goats
during the holiday by throwing goats off of rocky headlands — the Azazel — who
have symbolically had the sins of the community placed upon them.

Celebrants believed that this slaughter would bring atonement to their communities.

IMPLICIT PERSONALITY THEORY

Key Takeaways

 Implicit personality theories describe how individuals think of individual traits as

relating to and occurring with each other. For example, someone may associate
sternness with coldness or humor with intelligence.

 There are two main branches in implicit personality theory research: the first is
concerned with the role that bias plays in how people perceive others on the macro
level, and the second is with individual differences in how people perceive others.

 Psychologists have debated methods for measuring implicit personality theories and
have devised various ways of finding similarities between the implicit personality
theories of large groups of individuals.

 Psychologists have structured implicit personality theories around concepts such as

centrality, additivity, and complexity.

 Some psychologists have argued that implicit personality theories have a linguistic
basis.

 Implicit personality theories play an important role in making judgments

concerning how much we trust others in social relationships as well as in our
stereotyping of broad groups.
 Implicit personality theories refer to individuals’ notions about what personality
characteristics tend to co-occur in people. For instance, someone may want to
correlate warmth with generosity, or a sense of humor with intelligence.
These implicit personality theories guide inferences that social perceivers make
about other people. For example, if someone sees someone present an academic
talk energetically and presumes that energy is linked to intelligence, the perceiver
will likely infer that the other person is intelligent (Dunning, 1995).

Techniques To Reduce Prejudice

Prejudices are common in real life and it is widespread in most societies. No

society is free from it. But it can be reduced. These are some of the ways and
techniques for reducing prejudice:

On Learning Not To Hate

Prejudices are not inborn characteristics, they are learned or acquired later in
different life situations. Parents, teachers, and media, are the prime sources. It
involves,

 Training to discourage prejudice: Biased parents/persons should be alerted about their prejudice
because they may promote their views to children/others. As parents want the well-being of their
children, they should not teach prejudiced views to their children.
 Teaching tolerance: Prejudice harms both parties, those who are holding it or the victims.
Prejudices generate the person to worry, hatred, health risks, reduced enjoyment, etc. controlling
negative ideas can help them to gain a better life.
Direct-Inter Group Contact

In recent times, people have had less contact with each other. One of the aspects
to reduce conflict or racial prejudice is to increase the degree of contact between
different groups. This has been known as the contact hypothesis. The effort of
developing contacts favorably may succeed in reducing prejudice. The
neighborhood or groups can engage in some social work, recreation activity, etc.
There are different benefits of doing so.

 Increased contact between groups or persons can lead to a growing recognition of similarities
between them. This may increase mutual attraction and cooperation that the out-groups are not so
anti as believed.
 The more sufficient information inconsistent with them is encountered, the more the individual has
the chance to clear up the stereotypes.
 Knowledge of such friendship can indicate that contact with out-group members is acceptable.
 Such friendships can generate increased empathy and understanding between groups.
Re-Categorization

Redrawing the boundary between “us” and “them” can reduce prejudice. The
theory of recategorization or the common in-group identity model was proposed
by Gaertner and his colleagues (1989,1993). It explains that a group or
individuals in a group “us” shift the boundary to view the other group as in-
group.

For example, in a match between A and B, A is in-group, and B is out-group in

a community. If B loses the match, A goes to play with the other community.
Now A becomes an in-group for B because A is representing their community.
This common in-group identity model suggests that individuals belonging to
different social groups come to view themselves as a member of a single social
entity. Their attitude toward each other becomes more positive when individuals
belonging to initially distinct groups work together towards shared goals, and
they come to perceive themselves as a single social entity. Then the unfriendly
attitude toward the group seems to weaken away.

Cognitive Interventions:

Saying “no” to stereotypes is another way to reduce them.

 Stereotypes can be reduced by motivating others to be non-prejudiced. By making them aware of

egalitarian norms and standards that all should receive fair treatment. For example, encouraging
thinking “everybody is equal” and that human being has only two casts male and female.
 As stereotypes are the result of saying or thinking negative traits like “poor”, “hostile” or
“dangerous” to a racial or ethnic group, if individuals actively break this stereotype habit by saying
“no” to stereotype traits associated with a specific group then it might reduce prejudice. Saying good
words and showing favorable traits to minority groups enhances positive thinking.
 Prejudices are learned through social learning factors and experiences, thus an attempt should be
made that their views are more biased or prejudiced than those of others might be an effective way
to reduce prejudice.

Functions of Groups

The organizational functions of groups help to realize an organization’s goals.

Such functions include the following:
  Working on a complex and independent task that is too complex for an
individual to perform and that cannot be easily broken down into independent
tasks.
 Generating new ideas or creative solutions to solve problems that require inputs
from several people.
 Serving liaison or coordinating functions among several workgroups whose
work is to some extent independent.
 Facilitating the implementation of complex decisions. A group composed of
representatives from various working groups can coordinate the activities of
these interrelated groups.
 Serving as a vehicle for training new employees, groups teach new members
methods of operations and group norms.
 The list is not comprehensive. The importance of groups in organizations cannot
be overemphasized because most of the organizational activities are carried out
by groups.

Since jobs in organizations are becoming more complex and interdependent, the use
of groups in performing task functions will become increasingly important.
One of the most common findings from the research on groups in organizations
is that most groups turn out to have both formal and informal functions; they
serve the needs of both organizational and individual members.
Psychological groups, therefore, may well be the key unit for facilitating the
integration of organizational goals and personal needs.
For example, a formal workgroup in an industrial establishment often evolves into a
psychological group that meets a variety of its members’ psychological needs.
If this process occurs, the group often becomes the source of much higher levels of
loyalty, commitment, and energy in the service of organizational goals that would be
possible if the members psychological needs had to be met elsewhere.
1. Trait Theory:
The trait theory says that there are certain identifiable qualities or characteristics
that are unique to leaders and those good leaders possess such qualities.

The trait theorists have identified a list of qualities that are as follows:
(1) Intelligence:
A leader should be intelligent enough of understanding the context and contents
of his position and function. He should be able to grasp the dynamics of
environmental variables, both internal as well as external, which affect the
activities of the enterprise. He should also have technical competence and sound
general knowledge.

(2) Personality:
The term personality here means not only physical appearance but also inner-
personality qualities. Such qualities include emotional stability and maturity,
self-confidence, decisiveness, strong drive, extrovertness, achievement
orientation, purposefulness, discipline, skill in getting along with others,
integrity in character and a tendency to be co-operative.

(3) Other qualities:

In addition to the above said qualities, a good business leader should possess
qualities such as open mindedness, scientific spirit, social sensitivity, ability to
communicate, objectivity and a sense of realism.

In olden days, it was believed that leaders in general and great leaders in
particular are born, not made. Born leaders inherit several favourable traits or
qualities which separate them from non-leaders or the mass of humanity.
However, it is not always so.

The trait theory is the modification of the above said view and it argues that
leadership qualities or traits can be acquired. They need not always be inborn.
Leadership qualities may be in-born or acquired through training and practice.

The trait theory of leadership is criticised mainly on account of the

following inadequacies:
1. It is not based on any research or systematic development of concepts and
principles.

2. It fails to emphasise the intensity and the extent to which each of the agreed
traits should be present in an individual.

3. Leaders must display different leadership characteristics at different times

and under different situations.

4. Researchers have shown that leadership should be looked beyond personal

qualifications and traits of the individual.

5. The theory does not offer scale to measure the degree of these traits.
Therefore, measuring a trait is not an easy task.

6. Skills are sometimes mistaken for traits.

2. Situation Theory:
The situation approach does not deny the importance of individual traits in
leadership. But it goes further and asserts that leadership pattern is the product
of a situation in a particular group and that leadership will be different in
different situations.

It was discovered in a research study conducted by Bavelas and Barrett that no

individual emerges as leader when all the participants have equal access to the
information and that the individual commanding maximum information will
sooner or later emerge as a leader.

Thus it is obvious that a leader can so structure the organisation that a

favourable situation is created for the subordinates to emerge as a leader. Fred
E. Fiedler has developed a contingency model of leadership effectiveness. This
approach was the result of the most extensive programme of research about
leadership styles and effective group performance carried out by Fred E.
Fiedler.

The situational variables considered by this research are:

(1) Leader-member relations:
Leader – member relations are good or bad depending upon leader being liked
or not liked by the group being supervised.

(2) Task structure:

Task structure is said to be high or low depending upon the extent to which
work to be done and goals to be achieved, are defined clearly and
unambiguously.

(3) Power position:

Power position is strong or weak depends upon the amount of reward and
coercive and legitimate power possessed. Only the above three factors are
considered by this theory. However, there are other situational factors (such as
group performance) that also have a bearing upon the pattern of leadership
style. Finally, he concluded that production oriented leadership is most efficient
either in highly favourable or un-favourable situations from the point of view of
the leader.

A task oriented leader is needed when difficult situation is en-counted, things

are not clear, work to be carried out and goals to be attained are ambiguous and
have to be defined by the leader. In the intermediate situations, a manager who
is people- oriented is likely to do better.

The Trait Theory:

This approach represents the earliest notions of leadership and until up to three
decades ago this approach was very popular. According to this theory, there are
certain personal qualities and traits which are essential to be a successful leader.
The advocates of this theory are of the opinion that persons who are leaders are
psychologically better adjusted to display better judgment and to engage
themselves in social activities.

They seek more information, give more information and take lead in
interpreting or summing up a situation. Most of the Trait Theories believe that
leadership traits are inherited or in-born or are acquired by learning.

Many researchers have given their views on the type of qualities that are
considered essential for effective leadership.

Some of the traits for a leader are as follows:

(i) Physical and mental energy;

(ii) A sense of purpose and direction;

(iii) Enthusiasm;

(iv) Friendliness and affection;

(v) Integrity;

(vi) Technical mastery;

(vii) Decisiveness;

(viii) Intelligence;

(ix) Teaching skill; and

(x) Faith.

In this theory it is assumed that a leader cannot behave other than what his
personal traits are. He may either inherently possess these traits or may have
acquired them through learning, training and experiences.

Criticism – But the trait theory has many shortcomings and has been
generally criticised on the following grounds:

1. Various studies prove that the trait theory cannot hold good for all sets of
circumstances.

2. The list of traits is not uniform and different authors have given lists of
different traits.
3. It fails to take into account the influence of other factors on leadership.

4. The theory fails to indicate the comparative importance of different traits.

5. There are many persons who have been outstanding leaders in business
although they have been humorless, narrow-minded, unjust and authoritarian. In
the same manner, there have been many persons who were not good leaders
although they had traits as specified for leaders.

The Situational Theory:

The situational theories emphasise not on personal qualities or traits of a leader,

but upon the situation in which he operates. The advocates of this approach
believe that leadership is greatly affected by a situation and maintain that
leadership pattern is the product of situation at a particular time. A good leader
is one who moulds himself according to the needs of a given situation.

Criticism:

The situational theory of leadership suffers from the drawback that it fails to
consider the fact that in the complex process of leadership, individual qualities
and traits of the leader also play an important role.

The main thrust of this approach is that the leadership style may be effective
under one situation but ineffective under the other. A leader adopting same style
at different situations is likely to fail. For example, Winston Churchill, the
Prime Minister of U.K., was most successful during Second World War, but he
failed later when the situation changed.

COMMUNICATION MODELS
 What are the 8 Models of Communication?
 Linear Models of Communication
o 1. Aristotle’s Model of Communication
o 2. Lasswell’s Model of Communication
o 3. The Shannon-Weaver Model of Communication
o 4. Berlo’s S-M-C-R Model of Communication
 Interactive Models of Communication
o 5. The Osgood-Schramm Model
o 6. The Westley and Maclean Model
 Transactional Models of Communication
o 7. Barnlund’s Transactional Model
o 8. Dance’s Helical Model
 Learning from Communication Models
What are the 8 Models of Communication?

Models of communication are essential frameworks which define how people

interact to achieve specific goals. Communication is more complex than most
people realize. It can involve various forms of information (from written text to
diagrams), as well as multiple people with different communication styles. Over
the years, linguists and scientists have defined 8 models of communication
commonly present in the modern world.
Each of these models are divided into 3 categories:
 Linear models: One-way communication methods
 Interactive models: Two-way communication methods
 Transactional models: Two-way conversations wherein the message
becomes more complex as the event (discussion) progresses.
In any organization, the success of the business depends on the strength of
communication between the people in it, and those they interact with (clients or
customers). Understanding communication models means individuals can make
better decisions about which strategies to use when sending messages to
colleagues, friends and customers.
Once you understand the communication models in your business, you can
leverage tools like Brosix to unify and empower your team. The Brosix
encrypted messaging app combines convenient group-focused chat capabilities
with voice, video, and even productivity tools like whiteboarding.
With this easy to use too, every member of your team can stay connected, no
matter what style of communication they prefer.

Linear Models of Communication

Linear communication models refer to communication that happens in a single

direction.
For instance, the broadcasts you send to your entire team through
your encrypted messaging apps are a form of linear communication. They may
elicit a response, but two-way discussions aren’t always necessary. In a linear
communication model, there are three core components: the sender, the channel
and the receiver.
The sender transmits communication via a channel, such as a messaging
application. The channel dictates the medium of the message (voice, visual,
text, etc). The receiver is the person who gets the message, and takes meaning
from it.
Linear forms of communication are most commonly used for business
announcements, such as broadcasts, press release statements and marketing
campaigns. The most common linear models are:

1. Aristotle’s Model of Communication

Aristotle’s model of communication is perhaps the oldest communication model

most people are familiar with. Dating back to 300 BC, the model examines how
people present messages in a persuasive, impactful manner. Aristotle said in
order to communicate effectively, we need to consider these 5 elements within
any communication event:
 The Speaker: The person delivering the message
 The Speech: The information and how it’s portrayed
 The Occasion: The context surrounding the communication
 The Target audience: Who will be receiving the message
 The Effect: The goal of the communication
He also defined three core elements which improve communication. Ethos, or
the credibility of the speaker and the authority they have in their space, is the
first element. Pathos, which connects the speaker to the audience through
different emotions is the second. Finally, Logos, which signifies logic is
important to ensure the message is decoded correctly.

2. Lasswell’s Model of Communication

Lasswell’s model of communication, like Aristotle’s model, revolves around 5

key elements. However, these elements are presented as questions the speaker
needs to ask. The core components of the Lasswell model include:
 Who: Who was responsible for sending the message?
 What: What information needs to be portrayed in the message?
 Which channel: Which method does the speaker use for communication?
 To Whom: Who is receiving the message?
 What Effect: What impact is the message intended to have?
The model suggests that every aspect of the communication process can impact
the resulting “effect”. For instance, a broadcast about productivity sent through
a productivity app by a business leader is likely to have more of an impact than
the same message mentioned in passing by a colleague. Similar to Aristotle,
Lasswell also believed each speaker should always consider their audience
before they begin communicating, to tailor the message to their needs.

3. The Shannon-Weaver Model of Communication

One of the most popular models of communication in the modern world, the
Shannon-Weaver model was one of the first to address the influence of “noise”
in communication, which can disrupt a message. Shannon and Weaver
developed their work during the second world war, aiming to find out which
channels were most effective for communication.
The model, like many linear communication methods, looks at five key parts
within an instance of communication: the sender, encoder, channel, decoder
and receiver. This model emphasizes the importance of encoding a message, by
turning it into written words, voice, video or visuals. It also highlights the
importance of a recipient being able to make sense of the message through
decoding.
Shannon and Weaver suggest that common issues, such as noise or static on a
radio broadcast, misspelling in an email and other problems can significantly
influence the quality of communication. A newer version of the Shannon-
Weaver model adds “feedback” as the sixth component of the framework,
which makes the model more collaborative, rather than simply linear.

4. Berlo’s S-M-C-R Model of Communication

Berlo’s model of communication is a little more detailed than some of the other
linear frameworks we’ve looked at so far. This approach breaks communication
down into four steps, with core components included in each of them:
 S: Source: The communication skills, attitudes, knowledge, societal
system and culture of the person sending the message.
 M: Message: The structure, elements, content, and management of the
message, as well as any code, jargon or specific language that may be
used.
 C: Channel: How the message is transmitted, and how it affects the
senses of sight, hearing, touch, smell and taste.
  R: Receiver: Who encounters the message, their attitude, knowledge,
communication skills, societal system and culture.
According to Berlo’s model, the source and the receiver need to have some
commonalities in order for communication to be effective. For instance, both
the person sending the message and the person receiving it should have similar
knowledge and speak the same language. The message needs to be constructed
correctly to suit both the receiver, and the channel it will be transmitted through.

Interactive Models of Communication

As you may imagine, interactive models of communication are far more

collaborative than the linear frameworks. Rather than focusing on one person
sending a message, interactive models look at the connection between different
people, sharing a communication event.
In interactive models, feedback and responses are considered, as well as what a
leader or individual says during their initial message. Interactive models of
communication are used most commonly in a business environment for
collaborative work, team discussions and two-way conversations with clients.
Let’s take a closer look at the core models of interactive communication.

5. The Osgood-Schramm Model

Introduced by Osgood and Schramm, this model details a circular model of

communication, where everyone involved in an interaction is treated equally.
The sender and receiver in this model aren’t differentiated, instead, they’re
simply defined as two parts of a valuable conversation.
The Osgood-Schramm model is usually used to
describe synchronous, interpersonal communication. The principles of the
model include:
 Communication in circular: Individuals in the communication process are
constantly switching between roles of “encoder” and “decoder”.
 Communication should be equal and reciprocal: Every party involved in
the discussion is equally engaged and able to share their voice.
 Interpretation is crucial: Messages need to be presented in a way that is
easy to interpret for both sides of the party to be understood.
The Osgood-Schramm model also suggests that real-time communication can
reduce the amount of noise which can disrupt communications. Additionally, it
believes ongoing clarification and active listening are crucial for positive
conversations.

6. The Westley and Maclean Model

Typically used when describing mass communication between groups, the

Westley and Maclean model introduces various additional factors to
discussions, such as environmental and cultural elements. According to this
model, the communication process begins with environmental factors, rather
than a sender or source producing information.
As one of the most complex communication models, this framework consists of
nine elements, including the environment, sensory experience, source or sender,
object or orientation of the source, receiver, the orientation of the receiver,
feedback, gatekeepers and opinion leaders.
The Westley and Maclean model argues that how we communicate and the
things we say are directly influenced by our perspective, background and who
we are. The model also takes into account the culture, background and beliefs of
the person sending and receiving each message.
According to this model, “gatekeepers” and sensory experiences can also be
important in depicting how a message is portrayed. The way we receive
messages can influence how we feel about future interactions with a person. For
instance, if someone sends a relatively streamlined message to us through a chat
tool, we’re likely to consume the information quickly and respond
appropriately.

Transactional Models of Communication

Transactional models are among the most dynamic modes of communication.

They involve decoding and encoding elements, similar to interactive models, as
well as a consideration of communicators, messages, channels and potential
noise or disruptors.
What makes transactional models of communication interesting is that they
view each discussion or interaction as a “transaction”. In other words,
communication is a cooperative process whereby two people are responsible for
influencing the outcome of the conversation.
Transactional models also highlight that we don’t just share information through
communication, but also form bonds, unlock value and create relationships. The
core transactional models of communication include:
7. Barnlund’s Transactional Model

Barnlund’s model of transactional communication explores immediate-feedback

(real-time) communication between people. The multi-layered approach
suggests various aspects are crucial to determining how effective a conversation
is. For instance, cues, such as private cues (a person’s background) , public cues
(environmental context) and so on can influence how we speak.
In the Barnlund transactional model, both the receiver and sender of the
message are responsible for ensuring the conversation leads to the right
outcome. Additionally, this model suggests noise, such as external disruptions
and channel issues can cause differences in how we perceive things.
Barnlund’s transactional model can be extremely useful for companies
using messaging tools, where cues like cultural or environmental factors can
alter the meaning of a message. For instance, in a global workplace, someone
asking for the “upcoming holiday” off, could be asking for a variety of different
dates, depending on where they’re located.

8. Dance’s Helical Model

The Dance Helical model suggests that communication is a circular process,

wherein conversations become more complex as we dive deeper into the
interaction. It’s often represented visually by a helical spiral. The model
indicates that we gradually improve how we communicate over time, by
responding to the feedback provided by the people we communicate with.
As we communicate with each person in our team, for instance, we learn more
about the situation in question, and the person we’re connected with. This
allows us to expand our circle, and build on the information we’re sending, to
achieve specific goals.
Dance’s Helical model also suggests that communication is constantly evolving.
As we learn and develop alongside our team members, our understanding of
them and the world in which we’re operating continues to evolve, allowing us to
achieve goals more effectively.

Learning from Communication Models

As the world around us evolves, the methods we use to communicate are

constantly transforming. However, even as we branch into new landscapes
like instant messaging and video conferencing, it’s important to pay attention to
the basic communication models we use every day.
Communication models help us to understand the common steps involved in
communication, and how different aspects can influence the outcome of each
message we send. While none of the models above fully represent
communication as it stands today, being aware of them can help us to avoid
potential problems with conversations, and improve our communication skills.
No matter which communication models your business relies on, Brosix can
help you to nurture a culture of collaboration and cooperation in your company.
The all-in-one communication app makes it easy to connect employees from
across different landscapes, with encrypted messaging, video, voice, and instant
business-wide notifications.
What’s more, Brosix comes packaged with a host of productivity tools to help
you transform your employees conversations into action, such as screensharing
tools and whiteboarding features.

the Basics of Prosocial Behavior

Table of Contents
 Benefits
 Types
 Why We Help Others
 Bystander Effect
 Other Influences
 How to Take Action
Prosocial behaviors are those intended to help other people. These actions are characterized
by a concern for the rights, feelings, and welfare of other people. Behaviors that can be
described as prosocial include feeling empathy and concern for others.

Prosocial behavior includes a wide range of actions such as helping, sharing, comforting, and
cooperating. The term itself originated during the 1970s and was introduced by social
scientists as an antonym for the term antisocial behavior.

Benefits of Prosocial Behavior

In addition to the obvious good that prosocial actions do for their recipients, these behaviors
can have a range of beneficial effects for the "helper":

 Mood-boosting effects: Research has also shown that people who engage in prosocial
behaviors are more likely to experience better moods.1 Not only that, people who help others
tend to experience negative moods less frequently.
 Social support benefits: Having social support can be crucial for getting through difficult
times. Research has shown that social support can have a powerful impact on many aspects of
wellness, including reducing the risk of loneliness, alcohol use, and depression. 2
  Stress-reducing effects: Research has also found that engaging in prosocial behaviors helps
mitigate the negative emotional effects of stress.1 Helping others may actually be a great way
to reduce the impact of stress in your life.

Types
While prosocial behavior is often presented as a single, uniform dimension, some research
suggests that there are different types. These types are distinguished based on why they are
produced and include:

 Proactive: These are prosocial actions that serve self-benefitting purposes.

 Reactive: These are actions that are performed in response to individual needs.
 Altruistic: These include actions that are meant to help others without any expectations of
personal gain.

Researchers also suggest that these different types of prosocial behaviors are often likely to
be motivated by differing forces. For example, proactive prosocial actions were found to
often be motivated by status-linked goals and popularity within a group. Altruistic prosocial
behaviors, on the other hand, were more closely linked to being liked by peers and achieving
shared goals.

Other researchers have proposed that prosocial behaviors can be divided into helping,
sharing, or comforting subtypes.3
Prosocial Behavior vs. Altruism
Altruism is often seen as a form of prosocial behavior, but some experts suggest that they
represent different concepts. While prosocial behavior is seen as a type of helping behavior
that ultimately confers some benefits to the self, altruism is viewed as a form of helping
motivated purely out of concern for the individual in need.

Others argue, however, that reciprocity actually does underlie many examples of altruism or
that people engage in such seemingly selfless behaviors for selfish reasons. For example, a
person might engage in altruism to gain the acclaim of others or to feel good about
themselves.

Why We Help Others

Prosocial behavior has long posed a challenge to social scientists. Researchers seek to
understand why people engage in helping behaviors that are beneficial to others, but costly to
the individual performing the action.

In some cases, including acts of heroism, people will even put their own lives at risk in order
to help other people, even those who are complete strangers. Why would people do
something that benefits someone else but offers no immediate benefit to the doer?

Psychologists suggest that there are a number of reasons why people engage in prosocial
behavior.
  Evolutionary influences: Evolutionary psychologists often explain prosocial behaviors in
terms of the principles of natural selection. While putting your own safety in danger makes it
less likely that you will survive to pass on your own genes, kin selection suggests that helping
members of your own genetic family makes it more likely that your kin will survive and pass
on genes to future generations. Researchers have been able to produce some evidence that
people are often more likely to help those to whom they are closely related. 4
 Personal benefits: Prosocial behaviors are often seen as being compelled by a number of
factors including egoistic reasons (doing things to improve one's self-image), reciprocal
benefits (doing something nice for someone so that they may one day return the favor), and
more altruistic reasons (performing actions purely out of empathy for another individual).
 Reciprocal behavior: The norm of reciprocity suggests that when people do something
helpful for someone else, that person feels compelled to help out in return. This norm
developed, evolutionary psychologists suggest, because people who understood that helping
others might lead to reciprocal kindness were more likely to survive and reproduce.
 Socialization: In many cases, such behaviors are fostered during childhood and adolescence
as adults encourage children to share, act kindly, and help others.5

The Bystander Effect

Characteristics of the situation can also have a powerful impact on whether or not people
engage in prosocial actions. The bystander effect is one of the most notable examples of how
the situation can impact helping behaviors.
The bystander effect refers to the tendency for people to become less likely to assist a person
in distress when there are a number of other people also present.

For example, if you drop your purse and several items fall out on the ground, the likelihood
that someone will stop and help you decreases if there are many other people present. This
same sort of thing can happen in cases where someone is in serious danger, such as a car
accident. Witnesses might assume that since there are so many other people present, someone
else will have already called for help.

The 1964 murder of a young woman named Kitty Genovese spurred much of the interest and
research on the bystander effect. She was attacked late at night near her apartment, but no one
contacted authorities during the attack.

Later research demonstrated that many of the neighbors may not have had a clear view of
what was happening, which explained why no tried to intervene or contact the police.
However, the crime still spurred an abundance of research on the bystander effect and
prosocial behavior.

Other Influences on Prosocial

Behavior
Research on the bystander effect resulted in a better understanding of why people help in
some situations but not in others. Experts have discovered a number of different situational
variables that contribute to (and sometimes interfere with) prosocial behaviors.
  Fear of judgment or embarrassment: People sometimes fear leaping to assistance only to
discover that their help was unwanted or unwarranted. In order to avoid being judged by other
bystanders, people simply take no action.
 How other people respond: People also tend to look to others for how to respond in such
situations, particularly if the event contains some level of ambiguity. If no one else seems to
be reacting, then individuals become less likely to respond as well.
 The number of people present: The more people who are around, the less personal
responsibility people feel in a situation. This is known as the diffusion of responsibility.

How to Take Action

Researchers have also have suggested that five key things must happen in order for a person
to take action. An individual must:

1. Notice what is happening

2. Interpret the event as an emergency
3. Experience feelings of responsibility
4. Believe that they have the skills to help
5. Make a conscious choice to offer assistance

Other factors that can help people overcome the bystander effect include having a personal
relationship with the individual in need, having the skills and knowledge to provide
assistance, and having empathy for those in need.

Prosocial behavior can be a beneficial force for individuals, communities, and societies.
While there are many factors that contribute to helping actions, there are things that you can
do to improve prosocial actions in yourself and in others:

 Develop your skills: One reason why people fail to help is that they feel like they don't really
have the necessary skills to be of assistance. You can overcome this by doing things like
learning the basics of first aid or CPR, so that you'll feel better prepared if you do find
yourself in an emergency situation.
 Model prosocial actions: If you are a parent, provide a good example for your children by
letting them see you engage in helpful actions. Even if you don't have kids, prosocial
behaviors can help inspire others to take action. Volunteer in your community or look for
other ways that you can help people.
 Praise acts of kindness: When you see kids (or even adults) doing kind things for others, let
them know you appreciate it.

A Word From Verywell

Prosocial behavior can have a number of benefits. It ensures that people who need help get
the assistance they need, but it can also help those performing prosocial actions feel better
about themselves. While there are obstacles that sometimes prevent such actions, research
suggests that acts of kindness and other prosocial behaviors are contagious.

Seeing other people do good things encourages and inspires others to take action to help
others.6