- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
While I agree with most of Sustein’s positions, his study which is outlined provides is merely a replication of the effect that has been studied since Stoner’s original study in 1961 in which he identified what he labeled the risky shift. In the early studies the focus was on how group discussion often resulted in riskier choices than the individuals had endorsed prior to the discussion. As the research continued it was recognized that the effect applied to a much wider range of behaviors than risk taking and was renamed group polarization. Essentially, after discussion a group of individuals become more polarized in their positions. This is especially true if the original position of the members of the group is already not diverse. Thus, conservatives become more conservative and liberals more liberal. The research on this topic is wide spread and has firmly grounded theoretical explanations tied to social comparison and social cognition. We need to go to that literature to fully understand the processes and means for reducing the impact.
