Reading Comprehension

PT125 · S1 · P4 · Q27 Groupthink

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one
Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step
81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

In principle, a cohesive group—one whose members generally agree with one another and support one another's judgments—can do a much better job at decision making than it could if it were noncohesive.

Topic

The effects of group cohesiveness on decision-making, specifically the risks and dynamics of "groupthink."

Framework

Problem / Solution

Main Point

While group cohesiveness can foster open and honest discussion, it can also lead to a problematic phenomenon called "groupthink," where the desire for consensus overrides critical thinking and sound judgment. The Most Valuable Sentence: Appears at the end of Paragraph 2 —

P1: Benefits of Group Cohesion

Groups that are cohesive tend to work together better because members feel comfortable sharing their true opinions. This openness leads to more honest, less censored discussions, because everyone trusts they'll still be valued even if they disagree with the group.

P2: Pitfalls of Too Much Cohesion—Groupthink

However, too much groupiness has a big downside: people might stop critically evaluating ideas in their pursuit of agreement. Instead of questioning group choices, members just go with the flow, leading to "groupthink"—a situation where critical thinking gets tossed aside for harmony.

P3: Symptoms and Conditions for Groupthink

Looking at real-world disasters in diplomacy and military decisions, researchers have spotted patterns of groupthink, like an overinflated sense of group power, ignoring warnings, and failing to consider alternatives. Cohesiveness is necessary but not enough by itself to cause groupthink—other factors are at play, and it's important to figure out what causes a cohesive group to become either effective or dysfunctional.

27.

Based on the passage, it can be inferred that the author would be most likely to agree with which one of the following?

Highly cohesive groups are more
Out of Scope: negotiating with adversaries
Negotiating with adversaries is not discussed in the passage. This answer can go at the back of the line, or in the trash.
18% picked this
Correct
It is difficult for a
Why this is right
We can use the "if-not" translation of unless and read this back ourselves as, "If a group doesn't have a fairly high degree of cohesiveness, then it'll be difficult to critically examine all relevant options." The trigger would definitely apply to our discussion of lower cohesion groups. Did we say anything in that first paragraph that makes it sound like it'll be hard for them to critically examine all relevant options? We heard that there will be a strong urge to comply with the group, out of fear of otherwise being scorned. Meanwhile, we heard that in groups with fairly high cohesion, members feel more emboldened to say what they really think and pushback against the group's deliberations. Does this connect to whether or not we're critically examining all relevant options"? Sure, it's pretty reasonable to think that low cohesion groups, where there is less debate / less pushback, will find it hard to examine all relevant options. It might be more likely to reach a premature consensus, because group members are keeping their objections to themselves. If group members are staying silent instead of airing their objections, then we're not critically examining the option under consideration.
Skill tested: Author Opinion · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.
38% picked this
A group with varied viewpoints
Unsupported Comparison
This answer might seem attractive at first because of the first line of the passage: "In principle, a cohesive group - one whose members generally agree with one another and support one another's judgments - can do a much better job at decision making than it could if it were noncohesive." The problem is, "a group with varied viewpoints on a given issue" isn't necessarily noncohesive. We're told a cohesive group is one that has two qualities: general agreement and mutual support. We can infer from this that a noncohesive group is one that lacks one or both qualities: they don't generally agree, and/or they don't support one another's judgments. "A group with varied viewpoints on a given issue" doesn't necessarily lack either of those qualities. They might generally agree and support one another, but just vary on this one particular issue. What does the passage have to say about particular issues of disagreement? The third sentence tells us that "participants in group deliberations need to be confident that they are members in good standing and that the others will continue to value their role in the group, whether or not they agree about a particular issue under discussion." This affirms that members of a cohesive group can hold various opinions about a particular issue, and therefore that having various opinions on an issue doesn't imply a group is noncohesive. Since the two things compared in this answer choice don't perfectly match "cohesive vs. non cohesive," this answer is an Unsupported Comparison.
20% picked this
Intense stress and high expectations
Out of Scope
Intense stress is not discussed in the passage.
6% picked this
Noncohesive groups can, under certain
Contradiction
The last line in the passage states that group cohesion is an essential condition of groupthink.
18% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free