12 Angry Men Essay The movie, “Twelve Angry Men” can enlighten us on the topic of small group communication, giving an understanding both good and bad, about the structure and makeup of a group. As the story unfolds, it becomes evident that the jury must reach a decision of guilty or not guilty judgement in a capital murder case. The man on trial is a Latino teenager, accused of murdering his abusive father. If the young man is found guilty, he will be sentenced to death. While examining the jury, there are several differences of opinions, or bias that affect the way each individual will vote. Analyzing the group dynamics, gives the reader insight into each character’s personality as well as how the ways of thinking may influence each person’s
…show more content…
The defendant can’t remember all of the details of his alibi the night of the incident, several witnesses testified that they heard screaming, and another said she had seen the boy stabbed his father with her own two eyes, and flee the scene of the crime. Looking at the men responsible for deciding the fate of this young man, you can immediately identify profound personality traits of each juror, by the way that they vote. Originally tension was established within the group due to people thinking that others were operating within their individual role, expressing doubts and opinions between each other to satisfy their individual interest in the decision making process. The individual role is defined as “Roles that focus more on individuals own interests and needs, than on those of the group (Dunn and Goodnight). As the story unfolds you begin to see the jurors enter their group role. Group Role is defined as “The shared expectations group members have regarding each individual’s communication behavior in the group” (Dunn and …show more content…
As the group begins to listen to each other they begin to respect one another’s opinions. By never declaring why he decided to vote not guilty, Henry Fonda, was perceived as to be looking for a solution to the problem of analyzing the facts. By maintaining a positive attitude, Henry Fonda, sets the tone for cooperation and peace between group members, despite personal opinions like these, “We don’t owe him nothing, he got a fair trial didn’t he?” (Twelve Angry Men). It should be easy with statements like the last one, to see the major challenges that were overcome during the
The defendant can’t remember all of the details of his alibi the night of the incident, several witnesses testified that they heard screaming, and another said she had seen the boy stabbed his father with her own two eyes, and flee the scene of the crime. Looking at the men responsible for deciding the fate of this young man, you can immediately identify profound personality traits of each juror, by the way that they vote. Originally tension was established within the group due to people thinking that others were operating within their individual role, expressing doubts and opinions between each other to satisfy their individual interest in the decision making process. The individual role is defined as “Roles that focus more on individuals own interests and needs, than on those of the group (Dunn and Goodnight). As the story unfolds you begin to see the jurors enter their group role. Group Role is defined as “The shared expectations group members have regarding each individual’s communication behavior in the group” (Dunn and …show more content…
As the group begins to listen to each other they begin to respect one another’s opinions. By never declaring why he decided to vote not guilty, Henry Fonda, was perceived as to be looking for a solution to the problem of analyzing the facts. By maintaining a positive attitude, Henry Fonda, sets the tone for cooperation and peace between group members, despite personal opinions like these, “We don’t owe him nothing, he got a fair trial didn’t he?” (Twelve Angry Men). It should be easy with statements like the last one, to see the major challenges that were overcome during the