While scrolling through channels on the TV one evening this week, I stumbled across one of my favorite shows, Survivor. As I settled into watch, I realized how perfectly Survivor illustrates many of the concepts of teams and organizations. We can see how the producers manipulate the group development process, how the fundamental attribution error influences players, and how group decision-making concepts effect how the game plays out.
I think one of the things that makes Survivor so interesting and drama-filled is the fact that, especially in the beginning, they force the tribes, or teams as I will call them here, to stay in the forming and storming stages of Tuckman’s developmental stages of groups. According to Pennsylvania State University (2017), these are the stages where the teams get together and get to know one another politely and then begin to attempt to sort out their roles with much intragroup conflict, respectively. As soon as the teams begin to enter the “norming” stage, where roles are figured out and groups are beginning to operate more efficiently, the producers of the show randomly switch up the groups and force the contestants to start all over. I think the prevention of moving onward into the performing stage of Tuckman’s stages is part of what makes Survivor so interesting. As viewers, we never get to see teams work seamlessly together, but we do get to see the repeated formation and conflicts that come with the initial stages of team development. While not ideal for creating effective teams, this makes for wonderfully drama-filled team dynamics for us as viewers.
We also see a lot of examples of the fundamental attribution error in Survivor. As the contestants on the show get to know one another and figure out who they want to form alliances with or work against, there are many instances where constants will attribute another person’s actions or attitudes to that person’s personal disposition. Later, we viewers often see interviews with that person, who will explain their actions or attitudes as responses to a situation. We often hear comments along the lines of “I’ve never been outside of my city before, so this is really different” or “I just lashed out because I’m so tired/hungry/stressed”. As Schneider, Gruman, and Coutts (2012) note, the fundamental attribution error involves people attributing another’s behavior or attitudes to their personal demeanor, rather than taking situational factors into account. As we see in the case of Survivor, these fundamental attribution errors play a major role in how contestants view one another and select alliance members. If contestants attributed behaviors appropriately, it is possible that alliances could be different and the entire game could proceed in an entirely new way.
Finally, viewers can definitely see both normative and informational influences at play in decision making in Survivor. For example, alliances are an important part of the game of Survivor, with members of groups banding together to ensure their “survival” in the game. Often, a majority of a group will decide to work against a certain individual and, even if others disagree, they do not want to go against this majority group and make themselves a future enemy. This, according to Schneider et al. (2012), is an example of the pressure to conform influencing decision making, or the normative influence. On the other hand, situations in Survivor often occur where an individual is certain they will vote a certain way but then discover information from other group members that changes their perception of the situation, often leading to a change in their vote. This is a perfect example of informational influence, where information from others provides a person more information about a social situation (Schneider et al., 2012). The work of both of these group decision-making factors makes for interesting dynamics in this game, as we watch contestants grapple with both informational and normative pressures.
It is fascinating to me to see how so many aspects of group and organizational social psychology can be seen in something as mindless as a reality TV gameshow. After realizing this about Survivor, there are so many more identifiable layers to the game. I thought I enjoyed watching it before, but after having a more complete understanding of social psychology, it makes watching it even more interesting!
References
Pennsylvania State University. (2017). Organizational Life AND Teams. [Online Lecture]. Retrieved from http://cms.psu.edu.
Schneider, F. W., Gruman, J. A., & Coutts, L. M. (2012). Applied Social Psychology: Understand and Addressing Social and Practical Problems (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Tags: Applied social psychology, decision making, forming, fundamental attribution error, Group development stages, groups, informational influence, normative influence, norming, organizations, performing, psych 424, storming, Survivor
Great post! I find very interesting that you linked the course concepts to a TV show. I’m sure you see the show now from a different perspective which will probably make it even more enjoyable for you. I have experienced this myself, with TV shows, movies or even life situations where concepts from class provide me with a different and interesting perspective.
I have never watched Survivor, but I’m familiar with the reality plot. I agree with you, is definitely part of the show to keep the contestants from reaching ‘peak efficiency’ as part of Tuckman’s final stage of performing (Lesson 7, PSU). The idea is for them to have to achieve certain things or overcome certain situations in a short period of time. Perhaps the idea is also to put to test the ability to work under pressure, work fast, work around conflict, etc. I’m sure some people stand out more than others. The environment really brings out every contestant’s characteristics. To see this, they have to remain within conflict and stress, therefore like you explain, contestants reach two steps of Tuckman’s developmental stages of groups and is over.
Now I wonder, is this just a lucky guess? Is it possible that to produce such a TV show, psychology professionals are involved? I have asked myself this same question with other TV series. For instance, lawyers for Suits, doctors for Grey’s Anatomy, police and science professionals for CSI, etc. Perhaps in these cases, it is more evident. So, good job applying psychology to Survivor!
I went online searching for an answer to my question and I found it. According to CBS News, the production of the TV show does involve a psychologist. Dr. Gene Ondrusek, chief psychologist for the Center for Executive Health at Scripps Hospital in La Jolla, California. According to the article, the psychologist not only interacts with contestants, analyze the dynamics between them but also helped choose them in the first place! (Survivor Psychologist, 2002). Although this article is from the year 2002, I’m sure psychology is still involved in the production of the show. I also found a book that might be of your interest. It is called, The Psychology of Survivor: Leading Psychologists Take an Unauthorized Look at the Most Elaborate Psychological Experiment Ever Conducted… Survivor! By Richard J. Gerrig. Apparently, the author joins psychologists and fans to explain why the show is so famous and psychological issues in the show, among other things.
I really enjoyed your post, good job!
References:
Pennsylvania State University. (2017). Organizational Life AND Teams. [Online Lecture]. Retrieved from http://cms.psu.edu.
Staff, C. S. (2002, January 31). Survivor Psychologist. Retrieved October 07, 2017, from https://www.cbsnews.com/news/survivor-psychologist/
https://www.amazon.com/Psychology-Survivor-Psychologists-Unauthorized-Psychological/dp/1933771054
Great post! I find very interesting that you linked the course concepts to a TV show. I’m sure you see the show now from a different perspective which will probably make it even more enjoyable for you. I have experienced this myself, with TV shows, movies or even life situations where concepts from class provide me with a different and interesting perspective.
I have never watched Survivor, but I’m familiar with the reality plot. I agree with you, is definitely part of the show to keep the contestants from reaching ‘peak efficiency’ as part of Tuckman’s final stage of performing (Lesson 7, PSU). The idea is for them to have to achieve certain things or overcome certain situations in a short period of time. Perhaps the idea is also to put to test the ability to work under pressure, work fast, work around conflict, etc. I’m sure some people stand out more than others. The environment really brings out every contestant’s characteristics. To see this, they have to remain within conflict and stress, therefore like you explain, contestants reach two steps of Tuckman’s developmental stages of groups and is over.
Now I wonder, is this just a lucky guess? Is it possible that to produce such a TV show, psychology professionals are involved? I have asked myself this same question with other TV series. For instance, lawyers for Suits, doctors for Grey’s Anatomy, police and science professionals for CSI, etc. Perhaps in these cases, it is more evident. So, good job applying psychology to Survivor!
I went online searching for an answer to my question and I found it. According to CBS News, the production of the TV show does involve a psychologist; Dr. Gene Ondrusek, chief psychologist for the Center for Executive Health at Scripps Hospital in La Jolla, California. According to the article, the psychologist not only interacts with contestants, analyze the dynamics between them but also helped choose them in the first place! (Survivor Psychologist, 2002). Although this article is from the year 2002, I’m sure psychology is still involved in the production of the show. I also found a book that might be of your interest. It is called, The Psychology of Survivor: Leading Psychologists Take an Unauthorized Look at the Most Elaborate Psychological Experiment Ever Conducted… Survivor! By Richard J. Gerrig. Apparently, the author joins psychologists and fans to explain why the show is so famous and psychological issues in the show, among other things.
I really enjoyed your post, good job!
References:
Pennsylvania State University. (2017). Organizational Life AND Teams. [Online Lecture]. Retrieved from http://cms.psu.edu.
Staff, C. S. (2002, January 31). Survivor Psychologist. Retrieved October 07, 2017, from https://www.cbsnews.com/news/survivor-psychologist/
https://www.amazon.com/Psychology-Survivor-Psychologists-Unauthorized-Psychological/dp/1933771054