Social Psychology in the Film 12 Angry Men

The film 12 Angry Men is a story about a jury attempting to come to a verdict on a murder case. The case requires a young boy who has been accused of murdering his father. Initially, all the jurors agree that the boy is guilty, however 1 of them is unsure. All through the film, this a single man brings up enough affordable doubt for the complete jury to 1 by one particular change their vote to not guilty so that at some point the young boy is acquitted. There are a lot of elements of social psychology seen in this film, especially observed with faulty eyewitness testimony, similar juror characteristics, and prejudice via subtyping.
In the book Intro to Social Psychology by David Myers, it is clear that all through time social psychologists have come to show that eyewitness testimony cannot constantly be a trustworthy supply of details. Even so, the study shows that juries are most likely to believe the eyewitness a lot more probably than not, even right after they have been discredited. This is observed in the film 12 Angry Guys multiple occasions. At first, when the jurors every go about the table and say why they consider the boy is guilty, most of them bring up the eyewitnesses testimonies. There are two eyewitness testimonies that are the topic of discussion, one particular from the old man who lived under the murder and a single from the lady who lived across the street. After the males who are voting not guilty show some severe holes in the old man’s testimony, there are only a few jurors left who believe the boy is guilty. When they are asked why, they go to the woman’s testimony, exactly where she said she say the boy and you can't just throw that out. Even though there has been so much evidence to this point to show that the boy probably did not kill his father, these eyewitness testimonies were robust sufficient to have the males ignore other evidence and rely purely on the words of someone else to throw a man into jail.
An additional aspect of social psychology noticed in the film is juror qualities. These twelve men are all quite various from each and every other, and every of their variations leads them to view the case in a distinct light. In David Myer’s book, we discover that jurors are much more likely to be on the side of the defendant if the defendant is comparable to the juror. This is correct in other aspects of social psychology as properly, such as liking, prejudice, and conformity. In the film this is seen right after 1 juror makes a prejudiced remark of how the boy grew up in the slums. The man is saying that of course the kid did it since of his upbringing. This truly upsets an additional juror who really did develop up in the slums. This juror who grew up in the slums stands up for the boy saying that just since he grew up in the slums does not mean he is a murderer. Shortly following this, he modifications his vote to not guilty, considering that he sees his own struggles in the boy at this point.
Yet another aspect of social psychology observed with this specific scene is subtyping. Following the man who grew up in the slums is offended by the man who is stereotyping little ones from the slums, the offending man says that of course he need to not take it that way, simply because this man on the jury is naturally distinct from the defendant. This is an example of subtyping, which is when someone does not match the stereotype someone has in their thoughts, so they just inform themselves that that particular person is an exception to the rule. This is a form of prejudice, where the particular person refuses to accept that their stereotype is wrong, but alternatively just see this one particular person as an odd instance. This is definitely noticed in the film, simply because even right after this offensive occasion, the truth that this boy grew up in the slums is nonetheless a point held against him.
All round, the film 12 Angry Males shows a lot of distinct elements of social psychology in the course of its plot line. Specifically, it shows diverse faults that can take place in a courtroom that can be very easily overlooked. If that one particular man chose to conform and vote guilty with the rest of the guys on the initial vote, then the boy would have gone to jail when he was in fact innocent. The importance of truly analyzing an eyewitness testimony is exemplified quite properly as each of the testimonies this jury heard seems to be faulty. The strength of juror similarities to the defendant is noticed as 1 man completely adjustments his vote when he realizes how significantly he has in common with the defendant. Lastly, the aspect of subtyping in prejudice is portrayed very properly in the film as the men nevertheless judge the boy for his upbringing, but do not believe any diverse of the man in the jury who was brought up the identical way. General, 12 Angry Men is a fantastic portrayal of aspects of social psychology and could be studied significantly far more with a lot of other social processes.