The personality of the juror is very simply which is he appears agreeable and conscientious. He functions as a head or foreman where we can see at the first, he would like to get started on the conversation another 5 minutes more. Besides that, the guy can take care of everything in the area. An example, he listened all thoughts from jurors carefully. It is make he has other personality is agreeable. He's listened and then he tried out gave his own opinion without any arguments.
The value that we can easily see in the 1st jury was collectivism. It could be proven when he asked every juror to entail the discussion and don't be by itself without say anything. Frame of mind and emotion that we can see on he is cool which is he's very stable feeling during the dialogue. He didn't upset or too emotion if he's disagree something with them. He advised little by little and makes all understand about the problem before end of the discourse. For instance, when first voted got only one jury voted for not liable, even he voted for guilty but he just keep it as task and solve it well. He also controls the situation well. But he's too feeling where he do not need to be foreman and he asked 10th juror to replace his place.
Personality, frame of mind and beliefs of someone can effect the decision making. How all these can afflicted, we can easily see in this situation when 1st juror manages all the situations correctly even sometimes it is not. He attempted to be good and his attitude makes by the end of the decision making became easily and consistency. Secure feeling makes he chosen slowly rather than too follow irritated mood. He is attempted be the best frame of mind during the dialogue and ii considered as success because he can controls 11angry men at onetime.
Barriers can also damaged decision making when emotions, frame of mind and personality can't managed consistent. An example when 1st juror be mad to 10th juror and situation automatically the whole room became disruption. It is not good behaviour for foremen in prepared all the jurors. It can be role to be foremen or handle something big.
Juror #2: Ossie Davis
This juror is more silent and easily persuaded by the opinion of others. We can see when majority of jurors raise their hands for guilty, he also voted for guilty because of majority. However when 1st jury asked him to clarify why he thought like that, he didn't learn how to make clear it. He just said that. 'it is the weakness of the man'. He had no explanation to defend his statement flawlessly.
From the beginning until the finishing of the conversation, the juror #2 didn't give too many opinions and simply heard from the others. We are able to say that the emotion of the jury is unaggressive and sometimes he looks blur where do not really know what actually they are talking about. An example, when 7th juror had a knife, situation became disruption and he appears not really interested. Among the reasons why this juror became passive is because of he never be considered a juror ever before his life. So, this is the first time experience which is makes he noticed dread also he similar to to listen everything compare to speak active.
All these factors can influenced decision making since it related with our thinking. When we are thinking, automatically it'll be afflicted our action that goes to our frame of mind and moods. Therefore, when the juror became passive, he decision making would be accompanied by others. Your choice making is dependant on most voted. So haven't any quality on making decision. It can be proven when the first voted, he looks didn't know everything but he just voted predicated on majority. we can also notice that he can't explain properly why he voted that, its proved he is uncertain what he performed. So, personality, frame of mind and sentiment are the main to make decision.
This juror has more barriers compare to 1st juror. This is because the he has more bad things likened the positive things. Your choice also not rough enough due to case is approximately murder rather than talking about the easy circumstance. Therefore, this juror can't make his own decision which is can be big blunder when he just voted for the wrong one.
Juror #3: George C. Scott
Emotions and feelings are also shown clearly visible and important to the film. Each juror is a somewhat bad mood because of the heat and lack of air-con in the room. This increases the conflicts. At various occasions in the film, the juror appears to emote their feelings when someone says something they don't agree with.
George C. Scott has a terrible emotion and he also in high negative effect of emotional stage. His anger we find the fact his boy, who he feels is a coward. He also mourned the distance that has grown between him and his kid. Scott thinks that his child should respect him the same manner he honors his dad, and brought up with an iron first. He never questioned that maybe so should see the relationship with his child from another perspective.
In many ways, he's the antagonist to the constantly peaceful Juror #8. Juror #3 is immediately vocal about the supposed ease of the circumstance, and the apparent guilt of the accused. He is quick to lose his temper, and frequently infuriated when Juror #8 and other customers disagree along with his opinions. He feels that the defendant is absolutely guilty, until the very end of the play. During Act Three, Juror #3's mental baggage is unveiled. His poor romance along with his own child may have biased his views.
George C. Scott is very emotional and that sentiment affected his decision making. The painful memory space of his own inspires his decision and consequently he voted for guilty. His anger expands as the play progresses and several times he makes reference to his own boy. Perhaps it is for this very reason that Scott is so motivated to vote not liable no subject how convincing facts were. He continued to be stubborn to the end until 8th jury reminded him that the defendant was not his son. By the past experience avoided him from making reasonable decision.
Other hurdle that will influence your choice making process by Scott figure is selfish, over confident and feel that he is always at the right way. Due to his frame of mind, other cannot communicate efficiently with him.
Juror #4: Armin Mueller-Stahl
A stockbroker; he is very eloquent and talks about the situation more coherently than the other jurors through facts and not bias. It seems that this role is a figure that attention getter. He is steadfast in the fact that based on the fact that the defendant is "guilty", but he didn't try to persuade others to improve their intellects forcibly. On the other hand, when given the chance he has indicated his opinion Mueller-Stahl's personality will replicate information already known intellectually. He'll take a little longer to offer facts right time and reports to show that he is a specialist.
The ability to stay independent proves to be the most important character characteristic 4th jury. Throughout the film characters Mueller-Stahl can think independently, rather than let personal bias or peer-pressure affect his decision-making. If the 4th jury finally modified his vote not guilty, this alone is enough to place the mind at ease about the other person their own indecisiveness. He is mostly of the characters in the storyplot that will not take factors, make alliances, or look for endorsement right off the bat. It is clear that he was there to seek the reality, and everybody will listen double to make sure he has done just that. However, to think individually and without prejudice is not the one property Mueller-Stahl.
He is a entrepreneur who is logical and reasonable, that allows him to look the case with an available head. Unlike 3th jury, George C. Scott, Mueller-Stahl is able to converse the ideas and thinking he was such a professional and do so within an sorted out fashion. He analyzed every little bit of information carefully and uses logic to steer his vote. It's important to notice that he was the second last jury to change their vote never to guilty. He attempted his better to make a great decision making and finally he choose to vote not guilty for accused.
The barrier that will influence the 5th jury decision making process is the environment at the jury room and he must deal with the other jury's frame of mind before make a good decision. It is not easy to stay the situation because everyone has a different view and various personality.
Juror #5: Dorian Horewood
Health care staff member (possibly an EMT); he is from the Harlem slums; he attaches with the person at trial and is also disgusted at the bigotry of Juror Ten. Initiating Horewood's character was a follower of the group. He voted "guilty" during the first vote, and then demonstrated reluctance to discuss the truth. He added to group by demonstrating how to use the blade during a deal with, and spoke up to Mykelti Williamson and George C. Scott personas.
This essential information juror provided concerning the use of an blade which helped the jurors to better understand the concept of the way the fatal wound was inflicted. Horewood's identity used his own encounters as a guide to find a connection with this issue accessible for the jurors. He seemed to compare the situation to his own life encounters, giving everyone another type of point of view.
Dorian Horewood experience makes him doubtful slum boy's guiltiness. His upbringing in the slums aided him in considering the other jurors of the innocent accused. It is for this reason that he was able to explain how in order to a switchblade blade. Perhaps with the data he had gathered by residing in a slum provides upper hands throughout much jury because he can relate to it. In a natural way background jury five assists him to make a smart decision.
Experience will make good decision making. But, not absolutely all of the knowledge can apply in the dependant case. This is the barrier was occurring to this personality. He must find other information and take others view as edge to produce a right decision.
Juror #6: James Gandolfini
A house painter, a respectful person who sometimes display well professionalism and reliability and patient work.
Personality- He's showing a well balanced emotional stableness which sometimes he is able to control his emotion in dealing with numerous and different behavior inside the jury room. At the start of the story he among the list of smaller contributor (less participate) to the group decision making process. He gives a quit good discussion by looking at "motive understanding" but this truth has been argued as weakened motive.
At first he voted guilty. However when asked for clarification, he simply responded to his evaluation is dependant on the purpose that he holds since the beginning of the discussion. He made the decision based on his feeling and intuition. What I found is he's making confirmation bias, where every decision should be considered to all relevant and reliable factors and not confirmed factor by itself, which exactly came from testimonies.
He exhibited inconsistency to make decision where finally towards the finish of the movie he turned his verdict to not guilty. It happened after he listened up for some useful and acceptable facts brought up by all related jurors. The uncertainty avoidance is so high where environmental factors such as peer pressure really effect in his decision making.
Juror #7: Tony Danza
A salesman. He less concerned and less determined in this premeditated homicide circumstance. His participation is only to say his stands and how his personal judgments toward the deliberation process. He is mostly worried of his football seat tickets and sometimes ignores what is happening. Instead of yelling nonsense and unreliable facts merely to communicate his stands, he's frequently argued to anyone who tries to give point of view. He always rising up irrelevant and non-concrete arguments and sometimes his thoughts of anger and disgust, impact his decision making. His personalities display his actual tendencies, thus influences his decision making. For example, he's impatient, hot tempered, some extend of irrationality, rude especially to prospects jurors older than him.
Next, he commonly used shortcuts in judging the situation. For example, from halo result, he did talk about the kid experienced bad history because the kid was small and a child had devoted some serious conditions before murdered case. It is indeed part of mistake to make decision where he supposes to consider other factor as well. His mental ability means just how he is fixing any issue develops not demonstrating a jury moral and professionalism at all. For example, he cannot accepts any thoughts plus he simply leaved the couch while juror 9 presenting an arguments. It got shown how selfishness he was. Through the end of the movie, after a concrete and satisfactory arguments supplied by 'non-guilty' juror, he is finally changing his verdict towards to not- guilty.
Now, his assumption is determined by his establishment where I really believe it's scheduled to a lesser number of 'non-guilty' voters. Furthermore, it shows inconsistency (dissonance) and overconfidence bias as part of his verdict. These capabilities has contributed to an extremely fundamental decision making of him.
.
Juror #8: Jack Lemmon
An architect: He's indeed the key protagonist of the film. At the beginning minute and level of the movie, he's the only juror who voted not liable. He always outfitted himself with strong views (when interacting with different quarrels) and retains his concrete beliefs to be positive and protagonist. He exhibited his seriousness to deliberate thoughtfully and seriously. For example when he says "I simply don't think it is easy to improve side and send a son to prison for life". He is always being attacked with "dangerous bullets" from those jurors who voted in another way, but has shown an moral and acceptable opinions. His emotional brains has successfully shut down the barrier of differentiation. Such perseverance (non-guilty decision) has brought to an issue of re-deliberation of the case.
At the middle of the film, his character is preparing to acquiesce and will only switch his verdict, if other jurors believe guilty would be the best decision to be imposed. The existence of juror 9 just make the movie became more interesting where he abruptly change his brain to vote not guilty. This show the energy of influence contributes to change in understanding and patterns of individual. He found realistic doubt about the situation and they have astonished juror no 8 who obviously thankful with your choice. Then, It will keep the argument alive till the end.
He has proactive personality where he always recognizes opportunities, show initiatives, do something and preserve until important change occurs until significant change occurs, in comparison to most jurors who passively respond to situations. For example, he tries to show the real action (probably the time of murdered) in a jury room. Though it appears cynical, but it gives a biggest wakeup call ever before ever sold or case deliberation process. Other than that, he succeeded to raise reasonable doubt to the cases and have the ability to answer those jurors' quarrels accordingly to the principal of regulation and logical- thinking based wisdom. He has good emotional steadiness, where even though he has been accused to provide sanctimonious have a discussion, not behaving like reasonable man, wants to make up wild stories. He feels, he needs to become more persuasive, logical decision making to ensure that right decision is usually to be executed.
Jury's #9: Hume Cronyn
Mc Ardle was acted by Hume Cronyn is the real name for his character. He is a smart old man who firstly decides that the kid was guilty. But later on when he read some logical thinking justification from jury's number 8 8, his sides turn into not guilty. Lastly he becoming friends with jury's no. 8 8, that he think might be a good and wise guy. In such a movie, the personality that people can easily see in Jury's # 9 9 is he such an openness person, he have kindness personality as a grandfather who's the older in the jury's meeting; he also wondering to learn more about the case. For instance we can easily see when he abruptly change is brain into not liable as he wish to know.
He also offers an agreeableness personality which he state his sympathize to the old man who attend as a witness for that case. We also can say that he's conscientiousness as he always compensates focus on all the depth. He saw how the dress up of that old man and he found the grades of spectacles in the girl eyes. The worthiness for jury's # 9 9 which it shows is the integrity in giving opinion and professionalism to be a 12 jury's. As a personality and value that is show, the jury's number 9 9 behaviour and behavior is mostly based on his personality. He continually be a professional, by chatting and react in manner. He attempted to explain in good manner without harming everyone with a smooth voice.
Jury's number 9 9 also show his feeling which is anger by boosting his tone when one of the jury's ignore and leave the conference because he fed-up along with his opinion. We can say the majority of the time he had a low negative effect mood which is relaxed, tranquil in this getting together with. All the personality, values, behaviour, emotions and ambiance, which is show by this jury's, is the fact that it does not give the bad impact in decision making. But it might smooth the process of decision making. Because all the personality, values, attitude, emotions
and mood that being point out is positive. The jury's help solving the situation, he gives the idea and he also offers all the explanation for each and every situation at length. Other barriers that could be influenced in decision making is, dread to be failure. Everyone have fear, because sometime people commence to rejecting a good notion just because it implies that the result might be 100% inability, although its only come from their thought, but because of fear to taking the chance, they have a tendency to avoid the idea that might bring into successful. A lot of the reason that they make an effort to reject risk is basically because they cannot manage when someone's telling them "I advised you so, don't do this, don't do this. "
Jury's #10: Mykelti Williamson
Ultimately shunned by others, because of his loudmouth, narrow-minded bigot, extremely rude and often interrupt people. Someone who feels that there will be no good result, this is a kind of man he is. Finally he was bought by jury's 4 to "sit back" and also to "not open up his loudmouth again. " He's jury's quantity 10 who owns carwash shop acted by Mykelti Williamson.
Most of the personality within jury's 10 is reversed, first he rating low on openness to see. He don't have a good in creativity, that he cannot envision and cannot understand easily what others think, he have a tendency to think that he's the only one who are right, he cannot except his mistake and have a tendency to stick with his answers.
Other than that, he also report low in agreeableness when always insulting others and disrespect the elders. He tends to show that he not interested with others people problem and also with a filthy mouth he speak recklessly about everything. For example he says that child should be destroying because they always give trouble to other folks and that is why he sticks to state guilty.
He also a neurotics' type that annoyed person and always get stressed easily, we can see every time everyone changes their vote. In value perspective, jury's amount 10 is unprofessionalism; he will not learn how to control his feeling. Most of the behaviour that he shows is negative, he have a rude frame of mind, which does not have manner when speaking with someone and also disrespect to someone over the age of him. In case of feelings, it is evident that he such an anger person. He always boosting his tone of voice and scold everyone when his view is declined. He always has a anxious mood that can provide high negative affect into the atmosphere.
In term of the influenced decision making, yes it really influences the decision making. This will cause unsmooth in your choice making process. Because it's difficult to find the solution when a person cannot listen and acknowledge others thoughts and opinions and always feel that he the only person who is right. It might also lead to a attack or unspoken with the other person for this reason behavior. For example in this movie, we can see everyone hate jury's 10 because of his bad in all the worth, personality, behaviour and disposition.
Bad idea, this is also one of the factors that create the barriers into decision making. We are able to see that some of the people cannot generate a good notion at the certain time; they might get their idea when they are watching tv, or listening to the music. That's the reason there is always bad idea atlanta divorce attorneys decision making, because their head is not there. They not even supporting when they try to produce the idea that people know it are not logical, but because they want to look idea company, they have a tendency to keep producing bad idea, when you can find way too many answer in the decision making, it is hard for market leaders to consider.
Jury's #11: Edward James Olmos
Jury's quantity 11 acted by Edward Wayne Olmos, who work as watch maker almost all of the time is doing an observant in this movie; He's an immigrant predicated on his substance, possibly from Europe country. He imagine and hope that America can give a justice and he want to see how it done. We can see for Jury's 11 that jury's 11 have conscientiousness personality, he always pay purpose in every detail, for example when he requesting the question 'why that child go home after 3 o'clock' it implies that he listened very well from jury's 8 opinion and theories. Furthermore he also introverts person because most of the time in the reaching, he just being noiseless. He is not an integrity person, which he cannot decide where he stands with, weather with guilty or not liable side; this is the answer for his value.
For attitudes, we can say that jury's 11 is not self confidence in what he do, we can easily see when he looks hesitate to give his judgment, because most of enough time he do the observation, but last but not least he also make an effort to give his judgment and present a question for everybody to believe. He will not really shows his feeling in this movie, but only a exhaustion disposition that is low positive have an impact on.
How this factor impact decision making? It also impact the smoothness of producing idea, because almost all of the time, the person cannot generate a good notion that can support the decision making. In addition, it does not help because not take part in the procedure of decision making, as it look that person aren't there.
Not enough in information is actually happen in decision making, decision cannot be make when there is absolutely no information towards the thing. For example we can not compare to buy Ferrari car rather than BMW, because we insufficient information, we doesn't know which is way better that can give high satisfaction to us. Decision making is often with full information; we tend to buy Ferrari whenever we know that the features aspect in that car is preferable to BWM car.
Juror #12: William Pettersen
This is the one juror that didn't really interesting about the case. It is because he just active about his own life compared to joined discussion on the table. He's marketing agency and so arrogant. His personality would be narcissisms where is he like to makes people taking a look at him not for the grade of the job. A good example when he spoken to 11th juror, he informed that he's marketing organization and looking for anything that related to it. This personality always thinking that he is very good compared to others. He attempted to tell everyone about himself but not about the situation. He also didn't concentrate at all through the discussion because he is not necessarily interesting. He just want reunite his profession and interpersonal life.
When we know about his personality, we already mentioned early that this person arrogant. This attitude makes his spirits in the conversation distracted from the case. It can be demonstrated that his frame of mind is not good and like selfish because just think about him but not think about the case that really heavy to make decision.
When the personality and attitudes are bad, so the mood in the area also your choice making from him can be affected badly. It is mean he decision is haven't any quality. He decided from what he observed from the other jurors not tried out to determine what the circumstance about. He always occupied with his profession without value the situation. When he arrived there, he just gave his logic opinions to ensure he participated but actually he just came up to fulfill the condition. When his attitude like this, his decision making didn't quality and persons didn't respect his decision.
Barrier can also be afflicted decision making. An example for this juror when he has poor attitude, the decision that his made the decision not regarded as professional decision. It is just makes the problem is perfect. This can make innocent person get abuse to something that he or she do not do.
Conclusion.
Film 12 Angry Men viewed strong, clear example of an organization that formed to meet up with the responsibilities / purposes and succeeding issues involved in completing confirmed task. 12 members of the jury experience through the process of being created, attack, norm, undertaking and postpone. Although temporary, cohesiveness takes a number of different aspects. First, it is shown by 11 associates at first voted guilty. Then, the intensifying group dynamics change throughout the film as the jury began to question their original decision of guilt and, one by one, began to agree with those voting not guilty.
As a member of the group communication, strengthen cohesion as the whole of the opinion the jury. Furthermore, associates of the jury have concentrated more on the task-oriented tendencies of social action, which might have obstructed a lot of arguments. This group was made for a particular purpose, a period, to build and fortify the relationship is not really a priority for the dissolution occurs when the problem decision. Although challenged by the dynamics of the group itself, it was finally able to perform confirmed process and postpone.
However, despite the short life of this group, we see an excellent example of the procedure of the formation of groups and group dynamics. Each one of the 12 jurors performs different but important tasks throughout the film. We start to see the power of casual leadership, the pattern of the changing role of leadership, and great work it takes to change a random collection of individuals into a winning team.
We think about this to be always a successful group because the task has been completed, sociable human relationships have been developed to maintain the group and help them interact, and we see evidence that the individual jurors find gratifying personal experience. At the end of the film, we assume that each member reflects on developments because the first vote and leave the judge with a new vision and a feeling of satisfaction that premiered a good decision
