This paper utilizes the groupthink framework (Janis, 1983) to analyze the jury deliberations in the trial of U.S. v. John DeLorean. Based on this analysis, an enhanced groupthink framework is presented that attempts to highlight a major factor that accounts for why defective decision-making does not occur in situations in which groupthink antecedent conditions are present that is, the presence of methodical decision-making procedures.
BARON, R., & KENNY, D.The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1986, 51, 1173-1182.
2.
BRILL, S.Trial by jury. New York: Simon & Shuster, 1989.
3.
CALLAWAY, M., & ESSER, J.Groupthink: Effects of cohesiveness and problem-solving procedures on group decision making. Social Behavior and Personality, 1984, 12, 157-164.
4.
FESTINGER, L.A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 1954, 7, 117-140.
5.
HENSLEY, T., & GRIFFIN, G.Victims of groupthink: The Kent State University board of trustees and the 1977 gymnasium controversy. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 1986, 30, 497-531.
6.
JANIS, I. L.Victims of groupthink. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1972.
7.
JANIS, I. L.GroupthinkBoston: Houghton Mifflin, 1983.
8.
MANZ, C. C., & SIMS, H. P., Jr.The potential for groupthink in autonomous work groups. Human Relations, 1982, 35, 773-784.
9.
MOORHEAD, G., & MONTANARI, J.An empirical investigation of the groupthink phenomenon. Human Relations, 1986, 39, 399-410.
10.
MOORHEAD, G., FERENCE, R., & NECK, C. P.Group decision fiascoes continue: Space shuttle Challenger and a revised groupthink framework. Human Relations, 1991, 44, 539-550.
11.
SMITH, S.Groupthink and the hostage rescue mission. British Journal of Political Science, 1984, 15, 117-123.
