Twelve Angry Men - Movie Review Example

The story of Twelve Angry Men depicts one of the dynamics studied in social psychology.  The aim of the study is to explore the plot and analyze the meaning based on the said field of study.

1. Type of Decision

            The twelve angry men are the members of the jury bound to make a decision about a homicide case of a young man being charged with murdering his own father.  The decision of the jury should be consensus or unanimous.

2. The Group’s Dynamics

 Due to the fact that the group composed of the 12 men needed to agree on a single point of view or decision, there is usually a battle of thoughts and opinions prior to the point of consensus.  Each member of the group represents a point in the range of perspectives based on culture, values, priorities, and norms.  The decision-making process of such a group then is expected to be full of conflicting ideas specifically in coming up with a decision or choice regarding such a serious matter.  It is then important to have a leader or a mediator in the group to be able to reach a proper and unbiased decorum.

3. Effects of Bias and Prejudices on Group Dynamics

The group dynamics are generally complicated as it is.  If biases and prejudices are then added, the group dynamics will then be more complicated and conflicting.  It is then important for the group to have a workable conflict management strategy in terms of the decision-making process.  One technique is imposed mechanics in the process of arriving at a decision.  Strict voting techniques are also important.  Positive contribution and cooperation of the group members are essential factors for a successful interaction and group dynamics which can ultimately lead to an unbiased decision.

4. The Method Used by the Foremen

The leader of the group tries to entertain issues that can create conflict based on the belief that each member of the jury should overcome any form of doubt in their decision to be able to arrive at a decision that cannot be wavered.  After doing so, the jury can arrive at a unified decision.  It is important though that at the end of the session everyone agrees with the decision or else a mistrial can happen, which is the failure of a unanimous decision.

5. What the Foremen Should Have Done

Basically, there are different methods that can be applied to be able to have a successful decision-making process.  It is important for the leader to logically plot the points presented by each juror to arrive at a clear and unanimous decision.  This can trace doubts in the most basic state and not in a complicated perspective.  The said method can also lessen the subjectivity of each vote of the jurors.

6. Influential Character in the Decision-Making Process

            All the 11 men believed the suspected murderer to be guilty except for juror 8, Davis.  He was considered influential due to the final verdict.  Because of the fact that the personal backgrounds of each juror were not known, the only basis of influence within the group is the capability to present a solid perspective and clear argument.

7. Constructive Response to Conflict

            One of the constructive responses to conflict observed was conciliation since the different jurors came from different social backgrounds of conflicting views.

8. Destructive Response to Conflict

Close-mindedness and inability to accept opposing views are included in the destructive responses to conflict that can result in the escalation of the negative issues.

9. Behaviors that Escalate Conflict

The negative reactions and inability to accept the views and perspectives of other members of the jury and the failure to understand where each of them is coming from can result in the escalation of conflict specifically when disagreements are expressed in angry tones.

10. Behaviors that De-escalate Conflict

The behaviors that can de-escalate conflict among the members of the group include acceptance of the importance of each other's opinions.

11. Actions to Overcome Stalemate

To be able to overcome situations that approach stalemate, members of the group always try to approach the case through a new and fresh perspective.