Group Dynamics Analysis in the Film '12 Angry Men' - Psychology

This essay offers a critical analysis of the group dynamics presented in the 1957 film '12 Angry Men.' The essay examines the characteristics of the small group, including its culture, and the roles of the jurors, distinguishing between task, maintenance, and dysfunctional roles. It explores effective and ineffective group members, conflict styles, and leadership theories, as well as the group's problem-solving methods. The analysis delves into the characteristics of successful and unsuccessful groups within the context of the film, highlighting how the group's interaction could be improved. The essay uses the film to illustrate concepts of group dynamics, drawing on relevant literature to support its claims and demonstrating the complex interplay of personalities, biases, and decision-making processes within the jury room. The essay concludes by summarizing the key dynamics observed in the film, providing a detailed overview of the content, and assessing the effectiveness of the group's decision-making process.

Running head: GROUP DYNAMICS IN 12 ANGRY MEN
GROUP DYNAMICS IN 12 ANGRY MEN
Name of the student
Name of the university
Author note

1
GROUP DYNAMICS IN 12 ANGRY MEN
Introduction
The essay aims to provide an analysis on the group dynamics as presented in Henry
Fonda’s 1957 classic 12 Angry Men ("12 Angry Men (1957) - IMDb", 2019). The movie is about
the 12 jurors who have been given the task to decide the fate of a young boy accused of murder
of his own father. The main thesis of the essay is that the movie brings forth several features of
group dynamics include the dysfunctional feature.
Discussion
The type of group as demonstrated in the movie is a small group with only 12 members
in it. Group dynamics refers to the functioning and structure of the group including the various
roles and responsibilities of each individual present in the group (Van Mechelen et al. 2014). A
successful or effective group has the capability to set aside the personal prejudices and decide for
the betterment of the entire group. The role of the leader also becomes important in ensuring the
success of a group (Channon et al. 2017). An ineffective or unsuccessful group on the other
hand, is filled with chaos with each member imposing her or his own personal ideology and tries
to benefit personally.
The group in 12 Angry Men comprises people from different economic and social
background. Similar to a group discussion, the 12 jurors debate and argue about the innocence of
the boy. The 12 men are put in a room where they first choose a leader to lead the discussion and
manage the proceedings ("12 Angry Men (1957) - IMDb", 2019). The men are not allowed to
leave the room until they come up with their final decision on the case. At first, the supervisor, or
juror number 1 is made the appointed leader by the group. The supervisor decides on the
sequence from which each member should vote his or her support or opposition on the case. In

2
GROUP DYNAMICS IN 12 ANGRY MEN
the beginning, 11 of the 12 members vote in favor of guilty while only one member votes
otherwise. The one member, that is, juror number 8 (Henry Fonda), justifies his decision stating
that there must be some discussion before deciding the fate of the boy. The rest of the members
especially juror number 10 resists but ultimately everyone agree to the decision.
Juror number 2 is probably the most ineffective of the group members, a quiet man who
has no conviction in his own decision. The third juror is quite clear about his position that the
boy is guilty. It is the third juror that has a great impact on the entire group. However, in terms of
group dynamics, this one juror is ineffective because he holds personal prejudice against the boy
since his own son has seemed to betray him (Brock et al. 2017). Juror number 9, although
ineffective by his looks, an old man with no power to influence the views of others, has an
important role in the group, as he is the only one who defends juror number 8. He advocates for
the defendant and puts forth strong evidences along with juror number 8. Apart from juror
number 2, juror number 7 also has little effectiveness in the group, as he is more concerned about
the ball game that he would be attending after the jury is dismissed.
As the movie progresses, the once “done and dusted” case with 11 jurors voting guilty,
turns around dramatically. By the climax, 11 jurors change their votes to ‘not guilty’ with only
juror number 2 being left to convince. The method of conflict resolution applied by juror number
8 is quite effective because he does not use any verbal aggression or force his ideology on other
group members (Vivona, 2014). The juror calmly asks each member as to why do they think the
boy is guilty. This makes the other members think over their decision again. It also allows for a
strong discussion on the evidences and witnesses found in the case that lead to the boy’s guilt or
innocence. In the end, all the 12 jurors vote not guilty and leave the room.

3
GROUP DYNAMICS IN 12 ANGRY MEN
Conclusion
As found in the analysis, the movie 12 Angry Men brings forth several group dynamics.
Initially, it seemed that the group is very ineffective and hence is unsuccessful because of the
varying ideologies and disinterest of the members. However, as the discussion progresses, it is
seen that the group becomes much stronger in its conviction. Although some members of the
group fail to put aside their personal and racial prejudices, a strong leadership skill demonstrated
by juror number 8 compels them to look for the bigger picture and not take a rash decision that
could end an innocent life. The only suggestion that could be given to improve the group’s
interaction is to have a strong leadership from the very beginning.

4
GROUP DYNAMICS IN 12 ANGRY MEN
References:
12 Angry Men (1957) - IMDb. (2019). Retrieved from https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050083/
Brock, S. E., McAliney, P. J., Ma, C. H., & Sen, A. (2017). Toward more practical measurement
of teamwork skills. Journal of Workplace Learning, 29(2), 124-133.
Channon, S. B., Davis, R. C., Goode, N. T., & May, S. A. (2017). What makes a ‘good group’?
Exploring the characteristics and performance of undergraduate student groups. Advances
in Health Sciences Education, 22(1), 17-41.
Van Mechelen, M., Gielen, M., Laenen, A., & Zaman, B. (2014, June). Exploring challenging
group dynamics in participatory design with children. In Proceedings of the 2014
conference on Interaction design and children (pp. 269-272). ACM.
Vivona, B. D. (2014). Humor functions within crime scene investigations: Group dynamics,
stress, and the negotiation of emotions. Police Quarterly, 17(2), 127-149.