Exploring Social Facilitation Theory Through the Film 'Bring It On'

This essay examines social facilitation theory through the lens of the film 'Bring it On'. It begins by defining social facilitation, originally postulated by Normal Triplett, as the enhancement of individual performance in the presence of an audience or others engaged in a similar task. The essay references observations by Pessin, noting potential performance degradation in complex tasks due to audience presence, and discusses alternative theories like evaluation-apprehension and distraction-conflict. The analysis focuses on a specific scene in 'Bring it On' where a character, Missy Pantone, excels during a cheerleader audition despite jeering, contrasting experimental research findings by Feinberg and Aielloe, which highlight the potential for evaluation and distraction to impair performance. The essay concludes that while 'Bring it On' effectively illustrates key aspects of social facilitation, it also presents scenarios that deviate from established theoretical nuances, particularly regarding the impact of evaluation and distraction on performance.

Running head: SOCIAL FACILITATION
SOCIAL FACILITATION
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author note:

1SOCIAL FACILITATION
Individual Performance Improvement in the presence of an Audience: Social Facilitation Theory
in ‘Bring it On’.
Fiction and media projection not only serves as a source of entertainment but also provide
the opportunity to identify and gain insights on various theoretical principles of social
psychology. ‘Bring it On’ – is a Hollywood film focusing on a cheerleading team’s journey of
success with help of their female team lead. While this film focuses on valuable life skills such
as leadership, unity, team cohesion and communication, Social Facilitation Theory (SFT) is
exhibited widely in several scenarios (Bring It On, 2000).
SFT, as postulated first by Normal Triplett in 1898, implies a significant enhancement in
the performance of individuals in the presence of an audience or others who are engaged in a
similar task (Miller, 2016). The predictive factor of audience effect implies that an individual
performs significantly better in the presence of spectators as compared to being alone. However,
observations by Pessin in 1933 argued that performance of complex tasks may degrade in the
presence of an audience noting the delay in learning of non-sense words by individuals in
spectators’ presence (Steinmetz & Pfattheicher, 2017). Performance improvement may also be
predicted by co-action, or performance of the same task by other simultaneously, as noted in
Triplett’s observations. Hence, social facilitation is most likely to occur in the presence of an
audience due to elevated arousal and increased alertness prior to perceiving an audience’s
presence as threatening (Yu & Wu, 2015). However, complex task performance may degrade in
front of an audience due to a highly stimulated cardiovascular response or in the presence of
distractions or being told that individuals will be evaluated, and can be improved by. Hence,
these alternative evaluation-apprehension and distraction-conflict theories may hinder social
facilitation (Herman, 2015).

2SOCIAL FACILITATION
SFT is observed in ‘Bring it On’, during a cheerleader audition where the contestant in
question, Missy Pantone, performs exceptionally well, in front of the audience consisting of the
team leader, Torrance Shipman and the supporting members. Despite the constant jeering
directed at Pantone in an attempt to threaten and disrupt her abilities, Pantone reverts back with
an even improved performance (Bring It On, 2000).
Feinberg and Aielloe (2006) in their experimental research, aimed to evaluate social
facilitation in the presence of evaluation-apprehension and distraction-conflict theories which
have been proven to disrupt individual performance in front of an audience. 166 university
students, (102 female, 64 male) were randomly distributed across a control and 6 experimental
teams. Participants were made to perform a simple as well as complex word pair association
task. Participants were instructed differentially by being told to perform alone, perform in front
of university instructor (social facilitator), that the task will predict their intelligence (evaluation-
apprehension), that they will have to also perform a less important number comparison task
(distraction conflict) and they will be both evaluated as well as required to perform the number
task. The authors reported that individual performance was affected in groups receiving only
evaluation, only distraction and also receiving combined evaluation and distraction. The authors
also noted that audience presence was unnecessary in social facilitation, since students showed
improvement in simple task performance alone and impairment in complex task performance
alone in presence of evaluation-distraction.
However, it was observed that the selected movie scenario differed significantly in
certain aspects of established theories as well in the above research findings. In the scenario,
Missy Pantone performs exceptionally well in front of an audience, showing compliance to
postulated theories but differing from results highlighting unimportance of physical presence

3SOCIAL FACILITATION
noted in the research findings. The movie clip also fails to support evaluation-distraction effects
on social facilitation, since Missy Pantone shows even improved performance knowing that she
is being evaluated for cheerleader selection as well as in the presence of distracting jeering by the
supporting team leaders (Bring It On, 2000).
Hence to conclude, ‘Bring it On’ in addition to a gripping and exciting storyline outlines
key theoretical aspects of social facilitation.

4SOCIAL FACILITATION
References
Bring It On. (2000). Bring It On Cheerleading tryouts. Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtFBqz-
4VyQ&list=PLGGd6wL1FevId4vmiNuWZwFzjc_Fxr-vU
Feinberg, J. M., & Aiello, J. R. (2006). Social Facilitation: A Test of Competing Theories
1. Journal of applied social psychology, 36(5), 1087-1109. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0021-9029.2006.00032.x.
Herman, C. P. (2015). The social facilitation of eating. A review. Appetite, 86, 61-73. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2014.09.016.
Miller, R. L. (2016). The early history of social psychology. Psychological Specialties in
Historical Context, 83. Retrieved from:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Dena_Abbott/publication/328343573_Toward_a_H
uman_Rights_Agenda_Social_Issues_That_Have_Shaped_Psychology_in_the_United_St
ates/links/5bc76186a6fdcc03c789abe1/Toward-a-Human-Rights-Agenda-Social-Issues-
That-Have-Shaped-Psychology-in-the-United-States.pdf#page=85.
Steinmetz, J., & Pfattheicher, S. (2017). Beyond social facilitation: A review of the far-reaching
effects of social attention. Social Cognition, 35(5), 585-599. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2017.35.5.585.
Yu, R. F., & Wu, X. (2015). Working alone or in the presence of others: exploring social
facilitation in baggage X-ray security screening tasks. Ergonomics, 58(6), 857-865. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2014.993429.