Final answer:
Cory views groups as more effective than individuals in generating creativity, supported by the benefits of diversity and synergy in small groups despite the risk of groupthink. Evidence from social studies suggests less severe collective action problems in small groups due to better monitoring, enforcement, and peer pressure.
Step-by-step explanation:
Cory believes that when it comes to generating new and creative ideas, a group setting is superior. In terms of creativity, he views groups as more effective than individuals. This perspective aligns with certain social psychology concepts which suggest that collaboration in small groups can foster creativity due to several factors: the diversity of ideas, shared energy, and synergistic effects. However, it's also important to consider groupthink, where the desire for harmony or conformity in the group can result in an irrational or dysfunctional decision-making outcome. Small groups can also face certain challenges such as achieving large goals or being heard in the context of larger societal structures.
Collective action problems tend to be less severe in small groups because of factors like better monitoring of individual behavior, reduced possibility to free ride, and stronger peer pressure. Moreover, the smaller scale facilitates monitoring and enforcement, which can prevent negative outcomes such as the tragedy of the commons or prisoner's dilemmas.
Discussing these theories and dynamics in Collaborative Group Activities can often lead to vital understanding of the interplay between individual actions and group dynamics. Ultimately, in a well-functioning small group, these elements combine to enable more creative and effective outcomes than individuals might achieve alone.