Q1:- Why did so many of Jones’ followers do what he told them to do?
Q2:- Why did so many people obey the experimenter in the Milgram study?
Q3:-How do you typically influence other people? Do you prefer to use rational methods; irrational ones? Please refer to Table 8.1 (page 244) in your text in chapter 8 and identify some of your favorites and least favorites.
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. WCN 02-200-203
Fit your coursework
into your hectic life.
Make the most of your time by learning
your way. Access the resources you need to
succeed wherever, whenever.
et more from your time online with an easy-to-follow
• Gfive-step
learning path.
tay focused with an all-in-one-place, integrated
• Spresentation
of course content.
et the free MindTap Mobile App and learn
• Gwherever
you are.
Break limitations. Create your
own potential, and be unstoppable
with MindTap.
MINDTAP. POWERED BY YOU.
cengage.com/mindtap
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
GROUP
DYNAMICS
SEVENTH EDITION
Donelson R.
FORSYTH
University of Richmond
Australia • Brazil • Mexico • Singapore • United Kingdom • United States
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
This is an electronic version of the print textbook. Due to electronic rights restrictions,
some third party content may be suppressed. Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed
content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. The publisher reserves the right
to remove content from this title at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. For
valuable information on pricing, previous editions, changes to current editions, and alternate
formats, please visit www.cengage.com/highered to search by ISBN#, author, title, or keyword for
materials in your areas of interest.
Important Notice: Media content referenced within the product description or the product
text may not be available in the eBook version.
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. WCN 02-200-203
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
Group Dynamics, Seventh Edition
Donelson R. Forsyth
© 2019, 2014 Cengage Learning, Inc.
Product Director: Marta Lee-Perriard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this work covered by the copyright
herein may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means,
except as permitted by U.S. copyright law, without the prior written
permission of the copyright owner.
Product Manager: Star Burruto/Nedah Rose
Project Manager: Seth Schwartz
Content Developer: Kendra Brown, LD
Product Assistant: Leah Jenson
Marketing Manager: Heather Thompson
Digital Content Specialist: Allison Marion
Digital Project Manager: Jayne Stein
Manufacturing Planner: Karen Hunt
Sr. Art Director: Vernon Boes
Cover Image Credit: ju.grozyan/Shutterstock
.com
Production Management, and Composition:
Lumina Datamatics, Inc.
Intellectual Property
Analyst: Deanna Ettinger
Project Manager: Betsy Hathaway
Unless otherwise noted, all content is © Cengage.
For product information and technology assistance, contact us at
Cengage Learning Customer & Sales Support, 1-800-354-9706.
For permission to use material from this text or product,
submit all requests online at www.cengage.com/permissions.
Further permissions questions can be e-mailed to
permissionrequest@cengage.com.
Library of Congress Control Number: 2017952406
ISBN: 978-1-337-40885-1
Cengage
20 Channel Center Street
Boston, MA 02210
USA
Cengage is a leading provider of customized learning solutions with
employees residing in nearly 40 different countries and sales in more
than 125 countries around the world. Find your local representative at
www.cengage.com.
Cengage products are represented in Canada by Nelson Education, Ltd.
To learn more about Cengage platforms and services, visit www.cengage
.com. To register or access your online learning solution or purchase
materials for your course, visit www.cengagebrain.com.
Printed in the United States of America
Print Number: 01
Print Year: 2017
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
to Claire Llewellyn
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
Brief Contents
PREFACE
xv
1
Introduction to Group Dynamics
2
Studying Groups
3
Inclusion and Identity
4
Formation
5
Cohesion and Development
6
Structure
156
7
Influence
192
8
Power
9
Leadership
1
30
62
93
126
230
264
10
Performance
301
11
Teams 338
12
Decision Making
13
Conflict
14
Intergroup Relations
15
Groups in Context
16
Growth and Change
17
Crowds and Collectives
372
409
444
479
514
545
REFERENCES 5 7 9
AUTHOR INDEX 6 6 7
SUBJECT INDEX
684
iv
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
Contents
PREFACE
xv
1 Introduction to Group Dynamics 1
1-1 What Are Groups? 2
Defining Groups 3
Varieties of Groups 5
Characteristics of Groups 8
1-2 What Are Group Dynamics? 17
Dynamic Group Processes 17
Process and Progress over Time 19
1-3 Why Study Groups? 21
Understanding People 22
Understanding the Social World 25
Applications to Practical Problems 25
1-4 The Value of Groups 25
Chapter Review 27
Resources 29
2 Studying Groups 30
2-1 The Scientific Study of Groups 32
The Individual and the Group 32
The Multilevel Perspective 35
2-2 Measurement 37
Observation 37
Self-Report 43
2-3 Research Methods in Group Dynamics 46
Case Studies 46
Correlational Studies 47
Experimental Studies 50
Studying Groups: Issues and Implications 51
v
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
vi
CONTENTS
2-4 Theoretical Perspectives 53
Motivational Perspectives 53
Behavioral Perspectives 54
Systems Perspectives 55
Cognitive Perspectives 56
Biological Perspectives 57
Selecting a Theoretical Perspective
Chapter Review 58
Resources 60
57
3 Inclusion and Identity 62
3-1 From Isolation to Inclusion 63
The Need to Belong 64
Inclusion and Exclusion 66
Inclusion and Human Nature 72
3-2 From Individualism to Collectivism 75
Creating Cooperation 76
The Social Self 79
3-3 From Personal Identity to Social Identity
Social Identity Theory: The Basics 83
Motivation and Social Identity 86
Chapter Review 90
Resources 92
4 Formation 93
4-1 Joining Groups 94
Personality Traits 95
Anxiety and Attachment 98
Social Motivation 100
Men, Women, and Groups 102
Attitudes, Experiences, and Expectations
4-2 Affiliation 105
Social Comparison 106
Stress and Affiliation 108
Social Comparison and the Self 111
4-3 Attraction 114
Principles of Attraction 114
The Economics of Membership 120
Chapter Review 122
Resources 124
83
103
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
CONTENTS
vii
5 Cohesion and Development 126
5-1 Sources of Cohesion 127
Social Cohesion 128
Task Cohesion 130
Collective Cohesion 131
Emotional Cohesion 132
Structural Cohesion 134
Assumptions and Assessments 136
5-2 Developing Cohesion 137
Theories of Group Development 137
Five Stages of Development 137
Cycles of Development 142
5-3 Consequences of Cohesion 144
Member Satisfaction and Adjustment 144
Group Dynamics and Influence 145
Group Productivity 146
5-4 Application: Explaining Initiations 148
Cohesion and Initiations 149
Hazing 151
Chapter Review 153
Resources 155
6 Structure 156
6-1 Norms 158
The Nature of Social Norms 158
The Development of Norms 159
The Transmission of Norms 161
Application: Norms and Health 162
6-2 Roles 164
The Nature of Social Roles 164
Role Theories 166
Bale’s SYMLOG Model 170
Group Socialization 172
Role Stress 175
6-3 Intermember Relations 178
Status Relations 178
Attraction Relations 180
Communication Relations 182
6-4 Application: Social Network Analysis
Mapping Social Networks 185
185
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
viii
CONTENTS
Applying Social Network Analysis
Chapter Review 188
Resources 190
187
7 Influence 192
7-1 Majority Influence: The Power of the Many 194
Conformity and Independence 194
Conformity or Independence 196
Conformity across Contexts 197
Who Will Conform? 202
7-2 Minority Influence: The Power of the Few 205
Conversion Theory of Minority Influence 205
Predicting Minority Influence 206
Dynamic Social Impact Theory 208
7-3 Sources of Group Influence 210
Implicit Influence 211
Informational Influence 212
Normative Influence 213
Interpersonal Influence 215
When Influence Inhibits: The Bystander Effect 218
7-4 Application: Understanding Juries 220
Jury Dynamics 220
How Effective Are Juries? 223
Improving Juries 224
Chapter Review 226
Resources 228
8 Power 230
8-1 Obedience to Authority 231
The Milgram Experiments 231
Milgram’s Findings 233
The Power in the Milgram Situation 236
8-2 Social Power in Groups 238
Bases of Power 238
Bases and Obedience 243
Power Tactics 243
8-3 Social Status in Groups 246
Claiming Status 247
Achieving Status 249
Status Hierarchies and Stability 251
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
CONTENTS
8-4 The Metamorphic Effects of Power
Changes in the Powerholder 253
Reactions to the Use of Power 257
Who Is Responsible? 260
Chapter Review 261
Resources 263
ix
253
9 Leadership 264
9-1 Leading Groups 265
Leadership Defined 266
What Do Leaders Do? 268
Leadership Emergence 270
The Leader’s Traits 271
Intellectual and Practical Skills 274
The Leader’s Look 276
9-2 Theories of Leadership Emergence 278
Implicit Leadership Theory 278
Social Identity Theory 282
Social Role Theory 282
Terror Management Theory 283
Evolutionary Theory 284
9-3 Leader Effectiveness 285
Styles and Situations 285
Leader–Member Exchange Theory 289
Participation Theories 291
Transformational Leadership 294
The Future of Leadership 295
Chapter Review 297
Resources 299
10 Performance 301
10-1 Social Facilitation 303
Performance in the Presence of Others 303
Why Does Social Facilitation Occur? 306
Conclusions and Applications 310
10-2 Social Loafing 313
The Ringelmann Effect 313
Causes of and Cures for Social Loafing 315
The Collective Effort Model 318
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
x
CONTENTS
10-3 Working in Groups 320
The Process Model of Group Performance
Additive Tasks 322
Compensatory Tasks 322
Disjunctive Tasks 324
Conjunctive Tasks 326
Discretionary Tasks 328
Process Gains in Groups 328
10-4 Group Creativity 330
Brainstorming 330
Improving Brainstorming 332
Alternatives to Brainstorming 333
Chapter Review 335
Resources 337
320
11 Teams 338
11-1 Working Together in Teams 339
What Is a Team? 340
When to Work in Teams 340
Varieties of Teams 342
A Systems Model of Teams 346
11-2 Input: Building the Team 347
The Team Player 348
Knowledge, Skill, and Ability (KSA) 350
Diversity 352
Men, Women, and Teams 354
11-3 Process: Working in Teams 356
Interlocking Interdependence 357
Coordinated Interaction 358
Compelling Purpose 360
Adaptive Structures 360
Cohesive Alliance 361
11-4 Output: Team Performance 364
Evaluating Teams 364
Suggestions for Using Teams 366
Chapter Review 368
Resources 370
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
CONTENTS
xi
12 Decision Making 372
12-1 The Decision-Making Process 373
Orientation 375
Discussion 377
The Difficulty of Discussion 380
Making the Decision 382
Implementation 384
12-2 Decisional Biases 387
Judgmental Biases 387
The Shared Information Bias 390
Group Polarization 392
12-3 Victims of Groupthink 395
Symptoms of Groupthink 396
Defective Decision Making 399
Causes of Groupthink 399
The Emergence of Groupthink 400
Alternative Models 402
Preventing Groupthink 403
Chapter Review 405
Resources 408
13 Conflict 409
13-1 The Roots of Conflict 411
Winning: Conflict and Competition 411
Sharing: Conflict over Resources 417
Controlling: Conflict over Power 421
Working: Task and Process Conflict 422
Liking and Disliking: Relationship Conflict
13-2 Confrontation and Escalation 424
Uncertainty ! Commitment 425
Perception ! Misperception 426
Soft Tactics ! Hard Tactics 426
Reciprocity ! Retaliation 429
Irritation ! Anger 429
Few ! Many 430
13-3 Conflict Resolution 431
Commitment ! Negotiation 431
Misperception ! Understanding 433
423
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
xii
CONTENTS
Hard Tactics ! Cooperative Tactics 434
Retaliation ! Forgiveness 436
Anger ! Composure 437
Many ! Few 437
The Value of Conflict: Redux 438
Chapter Review 440
Resources 442
14 Intergroup Relations 444
14-1 Intergroup Conflict: Us versus Them 447
Competition and Conflict 447
Power and Domination 450
Intergroup Aggression 452
Norms and Conflict 454
Evolutionary Perspectives 455
14-2 Intergroup Bias: Perceiving Us and Them 457
Conflict and Categorization 457
The Ingroup–Outgroup Bias 458
Cognitive Biases 459
Stereotype Content Model 461
Exclusion and Dehumanization 462
Categorization and Identity 465
14-3 Intergroup Conflict Resolution: Uniting Us and Them 466
Intergroup Contact 466
Cognitive Cures for Conflict 470
Learning to Cooperate 473
Resolving Conflict: Conclusions 475
Chapter Review 475
Resources 477
15 Groups in Context 479
15-1 Places 481
A Sense of Place 482
Stressful Places 485
Dangerous Places 488
15-2 Spaces 489
Personal Space 489
Reactions to Spatial Invasion
Seating Arrangements 495
492
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
CONTENTS
xiii
15-3 Locations 497
Types of Territoriality 498
Group Territories 499
Territoriality in Groups 502
15-4 Workspaces 506
The Person–Place Fit 506
Fitting Form to Function 508
Chapter Review 510
Resources 512
16 Growth and Change 514
16-1 Growth and Change in Groups 515
Therapeutic Groups 516
Interpersonal Learning Groups 521
Support Groups 525
16-2 Sources of Support and Change 527
Universality and Hope 527
Social Learning 530
Group Cohesion 532
Disclosure and Catharsis 534
Altruism 535
Insight 535
16-3 The Effectiveness of Groups 536
Empirical Support for Group Treatments 536
Using Groups to Cure: Cautions 539
The Value of Groups 541
Chapter Review 541
Resources 544
17 Crowds and Collectives 545
17-1 Collectives: Forms and Features
What Are Collectives? 547
Gatherings 550
Crowds 552
Mobs 554
Panics 555
Collective Movements 558
Social Movements 560
547
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
xiv
CONTENTS
17-2 Collective Dynamics 563
Contagion 563
Convergence 565
Deindividuation 566
Emergent Norms 570
Social Identity 571
17-3 Collectives Are Groups 572
The Myth of the Madding Crowd 573
Studying Groups and Collectives 575
Chapter Review 576
Resources 578
REFERENCES 579
AUTHOR INDEX 667
SUBJECT INDEX
684
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
Preface
W
elcome to the study of groups and their dynamics. The theories, research
findings, definitions, case studies, examples, tables, and figures that fill this
book’s pages have just one purpose: to describe and explain all things related to
people and their groups. Why do we join groups? What holds a group together?
Do our groups change over time? How do groups influence us and how do we
influence them? When does a group become a team? Why do some groups get
so little done? What causes conflict in and between groups? What are groups,
and what are their essential qualities? These are just a few of the questions
asked, explored, and answered in Group Dynamics.
Understanding people—why they think, feel, and act the way they do—
requires understanding their groups. Human behavior is so often group behavior
that people must be studied in context—embedded in their families, friendship
cliques, teams, organizations, and so on—rather than in isolation. Understanding
the social world—its politics, institutions, cultures, and conflicts—also requires
understanding the intersecting and continually interacting groups that form society. Understanding yourself—why you think, feel, and act the way you do in any
given situation—also requires understanding groups. In groups you define and
confirm your values and beliefs and take on or refine your identity. When you
face uncertain situations, you gain reassuring information about your problems
and security in companionship in groups. You are most who you are when
you are with others in groups.
Understanding groups is also eminently practical. Much of the world’s work is
done by groups and teams, so efficiency, achievement, and progress—success itself—
depend on understanding the strengths and weaknesses of groups. Productivity in
the workplace, problem-solving in the boardroom, learning in the classroom, and
even therapeutic change—all depend on group-level processes. Groups, too, hold
the key to solving such societal problems as racism, sexism, and international conflict.
Any attempt to change society will succeed only if the groups within that society
change.
FEATURES
This book is about groups, but it is not based on experts’ opinions or commonsense assumptions. It offers, instead, a scientific analysis that draws on theory and
research from any and all disciplines that study groups. The book reviews
xv
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
xvi
PREFACE
hundreds of theories and thousands of empirical studies that test those theories,
all in an attempt to better understand what makes groups tick.
■
Organization: The chapters progress from basic issues and processes to the
analysis of more specialized topics. The first two chapters consider questions
of definition, history, and methods, and they are followed by chapters
dealing with group formation, cohesion, development, and structure. The
book then turns to issues of influence and productivity in groups and
teams, before examining groups in specific contexts. The order of chapters,
however, is somewhat arbitrary, and many may prefer a different sequence.
■
Cases: Each chapter begins with a description of one specific group and its
processes. These cases are not just mentioned at the start of the chapter and
then forgotten, but are used throughout the chapter to illustrate theoretical
concepts, define terms, and explore empirical implications. All the cases are
or were real groups rather than hypothetical ones, and the incidents
described are documented events that occurred within the group (although
some literary license was taken for the case used to illustrate the dynamics of
juries).
■
Citations and names: This analysis is based on the work of thousands of
researchers, scholars, and students who have explored intriguing but unexplained aspects of groups and their dynamics. Their influence is acknowledged
by citations that include their names and the date of the publication of the
research report or book. In some cases, too, the researcher or theorist is
identified in the text itself, and those citations identify his or her discipline,
first name, and last name.
■
Terms, outlines, summaries, and readings: The text is reader-friendly and
includes a number of pedagogical features, including a running glossary,
chapter outline, detailed chapter summary, and suggested readings. The
approximately 500 key concepts, when first introduced, are set in boldface
type and defined at the bottom of the page. The first page of each chapter
asks several questions examined in that chapter and also outlines the chapter’s contents. Each chapter uses three levels of headings, and ends with an
outline summary and a list of sources to consult for more information.
CHANGES FROM THE SIXTH EDITION
This book follows in the footsteps of such classic works as Marvin Shaw’s Group
Dynamics: The Psychology of Groups (1978), Paul Hare’s Handbook of Small Group
Research (1976), and Dorwin Cartwright and Alvin Zander’s Group Dynamics
(1968). But when those books were written, nearly all of the research on groups
was conducted by psychologists and sociologists who mostly studied ad hoc
groups working in laboratory settings. Now, nearly every science has something
to say about groups, teams, and their dynamics. And not just anthropology, communication, education, management and organizational behavior, and political
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
PREFACE
xvii
science, but also legal studies, biology, and even physics offer insights into issues
of group formation, process, and function. As the study of groups continues to
thrive intellectually and scientifically, new findings are emerging to explain cohesion, conformity, development, identity, networks, justice, leadership, online
groups, multicultural groups, negotiation, power, social comparison, hierarchy,
and teams. This edition strives to summarize the current state of scientific
research in the field.
Changes to this edition include the following:
■
Updating and clarification of the content: The book remains a research-oriented
examination of group-level processes, within the psychological and sociological traditions. Topics such as influence, leadership, and cohesion are
examined in detail, but so are emerging areas of interest, such as multilevel
analyses, group composition and diversity, multiteam systems, social networks, neural mechanisms, and new interpretations of classic studies (e.g.,
the Milgram experiments).
■
Depth of coverage and engagement: To increase readability and engagement,
each chapter has been revised to reduce its length, to improve the flow, and
to increase clarity. High-interest material is presented in focus boxes, and
each chapter includes self-assessment exercises that ask readers to apply
chapter concepts to themselves and their groups.
■
Increased focus on interdisciplinary work in the study of groups: Since many disciplines study groups and their processes, the text continues to expand its
coverage to draw on all fields that investigate groups and teams (e.g., team
science, behavioral economics, and social network analysis), but grounds
newer findings in foundational theories and methods.
■
Both theory and application are amplified: Research findings are examined in
detail, but when possible these findings are organized by more general
theoretical principles. Given the use of groups in organizational, political,
military, and industrial settings, the text examines such applied topics as
team performance, productivity, leadership, and conflict.
MINDTAP
■
MindTap®, a digital teaching and learning solution, helps students be more
successful and confident in the course—and in their work with clients.
MindTap guides students through the course by combining the complete
textbook with interactive multimedia, activities, assessments, and learning
tools. Readings and activities engage students in learning core concepts,
practicing needed skills, reflecting on their attitudes and opinions, and
applying what they learn. Instructors can rearrange and add content to personalize their MindTap course, and easily track students’ progress with realtime analytics. And, MindTap integrates seamlessly with any learning management system.
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
xviii
PREFACE
INSTRUCTOR SUPPLEMENTS
The instructor companion website (www.cengage.com/login) contains everything
you need for your course in one place.
■
■
Download chapter PowerPoint® presentations and the instructor’s
manual.
Access Cengage Learning Testing, powered by Cognero®, a flexible,
online system that allows you to import, edit, and manipulate content
from the text’s test bank or elsewhere—including your own favorite test
questions—and create multiple test versions in an instant.
For more information about these supplements, contact your Learning
Consultant.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Most things in this world are accomplished by groups rather than by single individuals working alone. This book is no exception. Although I am personally
responsible for the ideas presented in this book, one group after another helped
me along the way. The scientists who study groups deserve much of the credit,
for this book summarizes the results of their intellectual work. Within that
group, too, a subgroup of experts provided specific comments and suggestions,
including Kevin Cruz, University of Richmond; Verlin Hinsz, North Dakota
State University; Steve Karau, Southern Illinois University; Norb Kerr, Michigan
State University; Glenn Littlepage, Middle Tennessee State University; Cheri
Marmarosh, George Washington University; Scott Tindale, Loyola University;
Chris von Rueden, University of Richmond; and Gwen Wittenbaum, Michigan
State University. My colleagues and students at the University of Richmond also
helped me fine tune my analyses of groups. The members of the production
teams at Cengage and at Lumina Datamatics also deserve special thanks for
their capable efforts. Kendra J. Brown, in particular, provided continual guidance
as the manuscript was transformed into a published book.
I have been lucky to have been part of many wonderful groups in my
lifetime. But one group—that small coterie of Claire, David, Rachel, and
Don—deserves far more than just acknowledgment. So, thanks as always to the
best of all groups, my family, for their love and support.
—Donelson R. Forsyth, Midlothian, Virginia
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
Introduction
to Group
Dynamics
C H A PTER
CHAPTER OVERVIEW
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Groups come in all shapes and sizes and their purposes are many and varied, but their influence is
universal. The tendency to join with others in
groups is perhaps the single most important characteristic of humans, and the processes that unfold
within these groups leave an indelible imprint on
their members and on society. Yet, groups remain
something of a mystery: unstudied at best, misunderstood at worst. This investigation into the
nature of groups begins by answering two fundamental questions: What is a group and what are
group dynamics?
1-1 What Are Groups?
■
■
■
■
■
1
1-1a Defining Groups
1-1b Varieties of Groups
1-1c Characteristics of Groups
1-2 What Are Group Dynamics?
1-2a Dynamic Group Processes
1-2b Process and Progress over Time
1-3 Why Study Groups?
1-3a Understanding People
1-3b Understanding the Social World
What are groups?
What are the four basic types of groups?
What distinguishes one group from another?
What are group dynamics?
Why study groups and their dynamics?
1-3c Applications to Practical Problems
1-4 The Value of Groups
Chapter Review
Resources
1
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
2
CHAPTER
1
The Adventure Expedition: Groups and Their Dynamics
On May 10, 1996, just after midnight, the members
of the Adventure Consultants Guided Expedition
crawled from tents pitched high on Mt. Everest to
begin the final leg of their journey to the top of the
world. The group included ten clients who had paid
hefty sums to join the expedition; guides who set the
climbing lines, carried provisions, and helped climbers
along the way; and Rob Hall, the team’s leader. Hall
was one of the most experienced high-altitude climbers in the world; he had scaled Everest four times
before.
The climb to the summit of Mt. Everest is a carefully orchestrated undertaking. Teams begin the
ascent in the middle of the night to reach the peak
and return in a single day. But if their progress up the
mountain is too slow, even a midnight departure is not
early enough to get them up to the top and back
down safely. So groups typically establish and adhere
to the turnaround rule: If you have not reached the
summit by 2 PM—at the very latest—your group must
turn back.
Groups are and always will be essential to human
life. Across all cultures and eras we have lived,
worked, thrived, and died in our families, tribes,
communes, communities, and clans. Our ancestors
protected themselves from dangers and disasters by
joining together in groups. Early civilizations—the
Aztecs, Persians, Greeks, and Romans—organized
their societies by forming legions, assemblies, publics, legislative bodies, and trade associations. For
time immemorial, people have gathered for civic
and religious purposes, including worship, celebrations, and festivals.
So why study these groups? The answer is not
complicated: Groups hold the secret to the
universe—the human universe, at any rate. The
rare individual—the prisoner in solitary confinement, the recluse, the castaway—is isolated from
all groups, but most of us belong to all manner of
groups: from our small, close-knit groups such as
families or very close friends to larger groups of
associates and colleagues at school or where we
The Adventure Expedition broke that rule. The
most experienced climbers reached the summit by early
afternoon, but other group members continued their
dogged ascent well after caution demanded they turn
around. Many of them suffered from oxygen deprivation, for the atmosphere above 24,000 feet is so thin
that most hikers breathe from tanks of compressed air.
Even these supplements cannot counteract the exhaustion that comes of climbing treacherous, ice-coated
terrain, and many suffered from confused thinking,
nausea, and dizziness. Yet, they may still have managed
to climb to safety had it not been for the storm—a
rogue blizzard with 60-knot winds that cut the climbers
off from camp and any hope of rescue. When the storm
lifted the next day, four members of the Adventure
Expedition were dead. The victims included two clients
(Douglas Hansen and Yasuko Nanba), a guide (Andrew
Harris), and the group’s leader (Rob Hall). Hall guaranteed his clients that they would reach the top of the
mountain and return safely; he could not keep that
promise (Krakauer, 1997).
work, to the very large groups of people with
whom we share an important quality that creates
a psychological bond between us all. Given we
spend our entire lives getting into, getting out of,
and taking part in groups, it’s best to not ignore
them. Even better, it’s best to understand them:
to recognize their key features, to study the psychological and interpersonal processes that continually
shape and reshape them, and to learn ways to help
them function effectively.
1-1 WHAT ARE GROUPS?
Fish swimming in synchronized unison are called a
school. A gathering of kangaroos is a mob. A threesome of crows cawing from their perch on a telephone wire is a murder. A gam is a group of whales.
A flock of larks in flight is an exaltation (Lipton,
1991). But what is a collection of human beings
called? A group.
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
INTRODUCTION TO GROUP DYNAMICS
3
What Groups Do You Belong To?
Some may bemoan the growing alienation of
individuals from the small social groups that once
linked them securely to society-at-large, but the single man or woman who has no connection to other
men and women is an extraordinarily rare human
being.
Instructions: Most people belong to dozens of
groups, but we can become so accustomed to them
that their influence on us goes unnoticed. Before
reading further, make a list (written or mental) of all
the groups to which you belong.
1-1a Defining Groups
The Adventure Expedition was, in many respects, a
unique collection of people facing an enormous
challenge. Rob Hall, its leader, deliberately created
the group by recruiting its 26 members: climbers,
guides, cooks, medical staff, and so on. Its members
were united in their pursuit of a shared goal, as is so
often the case with groups, but some of the members
put their own personal needs above those of the
group. The members not only interacted with each
other face-to-face in a physical space, but they also
used technology to communicate with one another
and with people who were not part of the team. But
Adventure Expedition, although unique in many
ways, was nonetheless a group: two or more individuals
who are connected by and within social relationships.
Two or More Individuals Groups come in a staggering assortment of shapes and sizes, from dyads (two
members) and triads (three members) to huge crowds,
mobs, and assemblies (Simmel, 1902). Sociologist
John James was so intrigued by the variation in the
size of groups that he took to the streets of Eugene
and Portland, Oregon, to record the size of the 9,129
groups he encountered there. He defined a group to
be two or more people in “face-to-face interaction as
group Two or more individuals who are connected by
and within social relationships.
Interpretation: Did you include your family?
The people you work or study with? How about
your roommates, housemates, or classmates? All of
the people you have friended on Facebook? How
about people of your sex, race, and citizenship
and those who share your political beliefs? Are
African American men, Canadians, and Republicans
groups? Are you in a romantic relationship?
Did you include you and your partner on your list
of groups? Some people’s lists are longer than
others, but a list of 40 or more groups would not
be unusual.
evidenced by the criteria of gesticulation, laughter,
smiles, talk, play or work” (James, 1951, p. 475).
He recorded pedestrians walking down the city
streets, people shopping, children on playgrounds,
public gatherings at sports events and festivals, patrons
during the intermissions at plays and entering movie
theaters, and various types of work crews and teams.
Most of these groups were small, usually with only
two or three members, but groups that had been
deliberately created for some specific purpose, such
as the leadership team of a company, tended to be
larger. His findings, and the results of studies conducted in other settings (e.g., cafeterias, businesses),
suggest that groups tend to “gravitate to the smallest
size, two” (Hare, 1976, p. 215; Jorgenson & Dukes,
1976; Ruef, Aldrich, & Carter, 2003).
Who Are Connected Definitions of the word
group are as varied as groups themselves, but a commonality shared by many of these definitions is an
emphasis on social relations that link members to one
another. Three persons working on math problems
in separate rooms can hardly be considered a group;
they are not connected to each other in any way. If,
however, we create relationships between them—
for example, we let them send notes to each other
or we pick one person to distribute the problems to
the others—then these three individuals can be considered a rudimentary group. Neither would we call
people who share some superficial similarity, such as
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
4
CHAPTER
1
eye color, a favorite football team, or birth date,
group members for we expect them to be connected
to each other in socially meaningful ways. A family is
a group because the members are connected, not just
by blood but also by social and emotional relationships. Adventure Expedition was a group because
the members were linked by the tasks that they
completed collectively and by friendships, alliances,
responsibilities, and inevitable antagonisms.
By and Within Social Relations The relations
that link the members of groups are not of one
type. In families, for example, the relationships are
based on kinship, but in the workplace, they are
based on task-related interdependencies. In some
groups, members are friends, but in others, the
members are linked by common interests or experiences. Nor are the relationships linking members
equally strong or enduring. Some relationships,
like the links between members of a family or a
clique of close friends, are tenacious, for they have
developed over time and are based on a long history
of mutual influence and exchange. In others, the
ties between members may be so fragile that they
are easily severed. Every individual member of the
group does not need to be linked to every other
person in the group. In the Adventure Expedition
group, for example, some people were liked by all
What Is a Group?
No one definition can capture the many nuances of the
word group. Some definers stress the importance of
communication or mutual dependence. Still others suggest that a shared purpose or goal is what turns a mere
aggregate of individuals into a bona fide group. Even the
minimal number of members needed for a true group is
debated, with some definitions requiring three members
but others only two (Moreland, 2010; Williams, 2010).
■
Categorization: “Two or more individuals …
[who] perceive themselves to be members of the
same social category” (Turner, 1982, p. 15).
■
Communication: “Three or more people … who (a)
think of themselves as a group, (b) are interdependent (e.g., with regard to shared goals or behaviors
that affect one another), and (c) communicate
(interact) with one another (via face-to-face or technological means)” (Frey & Konieczka, 2010, p. 317).
■
Influence: “Two or more persons who are interacting with one another in such a manner that
each person influences and is influenced by each
other person” (Shaw, 1981, p. 454).
■
Interdependence: “A dynamic whole based on
interdependence rather than similarity” (Lewin,
1948, p. 184).
■
Interrelations: “An aggregation of two or more
people who are to some degree in dynamic interrelation with one another” (McGrath, 1984, p. 8).
■
Psychological significance: “A psychological group
is any number of people who interact with each
other, are psychologically aware of each other,
and perceive themselves to be in a group” (Pennington, 2002, p. 3).
■
Relations: “Individuals who stand in certain relations to each other, for example, as sharing a
common purpose or having a common intentionality, or acting together, or at least having a
common interest” (Gould, 2004, p. 119).
■
Shared identity: “Two or more people possessing
a common social identification and whose existence as a group is recognized by a third party”
(Brown, 2000, p. 19).
■
Shared tasks and goals: “Three or more people
who work together interdependently on an
agreed-upon activity or goal” (Keyton, 2002, p. 5).
■
Size: “Two or more people” (Williams, 2010, p. 269).
■
Social unit: “Persons who recognize that they
constitute a meaningful social unit, interact on
that basis, and are committed to that social unity”
(Fine, 2012, p. 21; Kerr & Tindale, 2014).
■
Structure: “A social unit which consists of a number
of individuals who stand in (more or less) definite
status and role relationships to one another and
which possesses a set of values or norms of its own
regulating the behavior of individual members, at
least in matters of consequence to the group”
(Sherif & Sherif, 1956, p. 144).
■
Systems: “An intact social system, complete with
boundaries, interdependence for some shared
purpose, and differentiated member roles”
(Hackman & Katz, 2010, p. 1210).
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
INTRODUCTION TO GROUP DYNAMICS
5
Groups
Primary groups
Families, close
friends, small
combat squads
(fireteams),
etc.
F I G U R E 1.1
Social groups
Coworkers,
teams, crews,
study groups,
task forces, etc.
Collectives
Audiences,
queues, mobs,
crowds, social
movements, etc.
Categories
Men, Asian
Americans,
New Yorkers,
doctors,
Britons, etc.
A fourfold taxonomy of groups and examples of each type.
the other group members, but others had only a
few friends in the group. In some cases, such as
groups based on ethnicity, race, or gender, the
connection linking members may be more psychological than interpersonal. But no matter what the
nature of the relations, a group exists when some
type of bond links the members to one another and
to the group itself (Bosse & Coughlan, 2016).
1-1b Varieties of Groups
No one knows for certain how many groups exist at
this moment, but given the number of people on the
planet and their groupish proclivities, 30 billion is a
conservative estimate. Groups are so numerous that
the differences among them are as noteworthy as
their similarities. Figure 1.1 brings some order to this
challenging miscellany by distinguishing between four
types of groups: primary groups, social groups, collectives, and categories.
Primary Groups Sociologist Charles Horton
Cooley (1909) labeled the small, intimate clusters
of close associates, such as families, good friends,
or cliques of peers, primary groups. These
primary group A small, long-term group characterized
by frequent interaction, solidarity, and high levels of interdependence among members that substantially influences
the attitudes, values, and social outcomes of its members.
groups profoundly influence the behavior, feelings, and judgments of their members, for members spend much of their time interacting with
one another, usually in face-to-face settings with
many of the other members present. Even when
the group is dispersed, members nonetheless feel
they are still “in” the group, and they consider
the group to be a very important part of their
lives.
In many cases, individuals become part of primary
groups involuntarily: Every member of Adventure
Expedition was born into a family that provided
for their well-being until they could venture out
to join other groups. Other primary groups form
when people interact in significant, meaningful
ways for a prolonged period of time. For example, and unlike Adventure Expedition, some
climbing teams have summited so many mountains on so many expeditions that these groups
are more like families than expeditions. They
“continue, with more or less the same people in
them, for a very long time” (McGrath, 1984,
p. 43), and affect the members’ lives in significant
and enduring ways. They are broad rather than
limited in their scope.
Cooley (1909) considered such groups to be
primary because they transform individuals into
social beings. Primary groups protect members
from harm, care for them when they are ill,
and provide them with shelter and sustenance,
but as Cooley explained, they also create the
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
6
CHAPTER
1
connection between the individual and society
at large:
They are primary in several senses, but chiefly
in that they are fundamental in forming
the social nature and ideals of the individual.
The result of intimate association, psychologically, is a certain fusion of individualities
in a common whole, so that one’s very
self, for many purposes at least, is the
common life and purpose of the group.
Perhaps the simplest way of describing this
wholeness is by saying that it is a “we.”
(Cooley, 1909, p. 23)
Social (Secondary) Groups In earlier eras, people lived most of their lives in primary groups that
were clustered together in relatively small tribes or
communities. But, as societies became more complex, so did our groups. We began to associate with
a wider range of people in less intimate, more public settings, and social groups emerged to structure
these interactions. Social groups are larger and more
formally organized than primary groups, and
memberships tend to be shorter in duration and
less emotionally involving. Their boundaries are
also more permeable, so members can leave old
groups behind and join new ones, for they do
not demand the level of commitment that primary
groups do. People usually belong to a very small
number of primary groups, but they can enjoy
membership in a variety of social groups. Various
terms have been used to describe this category of
groups, such as secondary groups (Cooley, 1909), associations (MacIver & Page, 1937), task groups (Lickel,
Hamilton, & Sherman, 2001), and Gesellschaften
(Toennies, 1887/1963).
Social groups, such as the Adventure Expedition, military squads, governing boards, construction workers, teams, crews, fraternities, sororities,
dance troupes, orchestras, bands, ensembles, classes,
social group A relatively small number of individuals
who interact with one another over an extended period
of time, such as work groups, clubs, and congregations.
clubs, secretarial pools, congregations, study groups,
guilds, task forces, committees, and meetings, are
extremely common (Schofer & Longhofer, 2011).
When surveyed, 35.7% of Americans reported they
belonged to some type of religious group (e.g., a
congregation) and 20.0% said they belonged to a
sports team or club. The majority, ranging from
50% to 80%, reported doing things in groups, such
as attending a sports event together, visiting one
another for the evening, sharing a meal together,
or going out as a group to see a movie (Putnam,
2000). People could dine, watch movies, and travel
singly, but most do not: They prefer to perform
these activities in social groups. Americans are
above average in their involvement in voluntary associations, but some countries’ citizens—the Dutch,
Canadians, Scandinavians—are groupier still (Curtis,
Baer, & Grabb, 2001).
Collectives Some groups come into existence
when people are drawn together by something—
an event, an activity, or even danger—but then the
group dissolves when the experience ends.
Any gathering of individuals can be considered a
collective, but most theorists reserve the term for
larger, less intricately interconnected associations
among people (Blumer, 1951). A list of examples
of collectives would include crowds watching a
building burn, audiences seated in a movie theater,
line (queues) of people waiting to purchase tickets,
gatherings of college students protesting a government policy, and panicked mobs fleeing from danger. But the list would also include social movements
of individuals who, though dispersed over a wide
area, display common shifts in opinion or actions.
The members of collectives are joined by their common interest or shared actions, but they often owe
little allegiance to the group. In many cases, such
groups are created by happenstance, convenience,
collective A relatively large aggregation or group of individuals who display similarities in actions and outlook. A
street crowd, a line of people (a queue), and a panicked
group escaping a fire are examples of collectives, as are
more widely dispersed groups (e.g., listeners who respond
similarly to a public service announcement).
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
INTRODUCTION TO GROUP DYNAMICS
7
Are People Bowling Alone?
The numbers tell the tale. In 1975, people reported
playing card games together, like poker and bridge,
about 14 times a year. By 2000, that number had been
halved. In the 1970s, 50% of the people surveyed agreed
that their family usually eats dinner together. By the end
of the century, only about 33% reported regular family
meals and the family vacation was also becoming rarer.
Today fewer people report visiting with neighbors frequently and they are less likely to join social clubs, such
as the Kiwanis and garden clubs. As the political scientist
Robert Putnam (2000) wrote in his book Bowling Alone,
in the 1960s 8% of all adult American men belonged to
a bowling league, as did nearly 5% of all adult women.
However, even though the total number of bowlers in
America continues to increase over time, fewer and
fewer belong to bowling leagues.
Putnam concluded that Americans’ withdrawal
from groups and associations signals an overall decline
in social capital. Like financial or economic capital,
social capital describes how rich you are, but in interpersonal terms rather than monetary or commercial
or a short-lived experience, and so the relations joining the members are so transitory that they dissolve
as soon as the members separate.
Categories A social category is a collection of
individuals who are similar to one another in some
way. For example, citizens of Ireland are Irish,
Americans whose ancestors were from Africa are
African Americans, and men who are sexually attracted
to other men are gay. If a category has no social implications, then it only describes individuals who share
a feature in common. If, however, these categories
set in motion personal or interpersonal processes—if
social capital The degree to which individuals, groups,
or larger aggregates of people are linked in social relationships that yield positive, productive benefits; analogous to
economic capital (fiscal prosperity), but determined by
extensiveness of social connectedness.
social category A perceptual grouping of people who are
assumed to be similar to one another in some ways but different in one or more ways, such as all women, the elderly,
college students, or all the citizens of a specific country.
terms. A person with considerable social capital is well
connected to other people across a wide variety of
contexts, and these connections provide the means for
him or her to accomplish both personal and collective
outcomes.
Putnam’s findings suggest that the types of
groups people join are changing. People are not as
interested in joining traditional types of community
groups, such as garden clubs, fraternal and professional
organizations, or even church-based groups. But some
types of groups, such as book groups, support groups,
teams at work, and category-based associations (e.g.,
the American Association of Retired Persons), are
increasing in size rather than decreasing. Individuals
are also more involved in online associations, interactions, and networks, such as Facebook. These social
groups are the ubiquitous “dark matter” of social capital, for they knit people together in social relations but
are often overlooked in tallies that track the number
and variety of more formal and official groups (Smith,
Stebbins, et al., 2016).
someone celebrates St. Patrick’s Day because of his
Irish heritage, if people respond to a woman differently
when they see she is an African American, or if a gay
man identifies with other LGBTQ persons—then a
category may be transformed into a highly influential
group (Abrams, 2013).
As social psychologist Henri Tajfel (1974)
explained, members of the same social category
often share a common identity with one another.
They know who is in their category, who is not,
and what qualities are typical of insiders and outsiders. This perception of themselves as members of
the same group or social category—this social
identity—is “that part of an individual’s selfconcept which derives from his knowledge of his
membership of a social group (or groups) together
social identity An individual’s sense of self derived from
relationships and memberships in groups; also, those
aspects of the self that are assumed to be common to
most or all of the members of the same group or social
category.
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
8
CHAPTER
1
with the emotional significance attached to that
membership” (Tajfel, 1974, p. 69).
But social categories can also influence the perceptions of people who are not part of the category.
When perceivers decide a person they encounter is
one of “those people,” they will likely rely on any
stereotypes they have about the members of that
social category to formulate an impression of the
person. Social categories tend to create divisions
between people, and those divisions can result in
a sense of we and us versus they and them.
1-1c Characteristics of Groups
Each one of the billions of groups that exist at this
moment is a unique configuration of individuals,
processes, and relationships. The Adventure Expedition mountaineering group, for example, differed in
a hundred ways from the other teams of climbers on
Mt. Everest that season. But all groups, despite their
uniqueness, share some common features. Some of
these features, such as the size of the group and the
tasks they are attempting, are relatively obvious ones.
Other qualities, such as the group’s cohesiveness or
the permeability of the group’s boundaries, must be
uncovered, for they are often overlooked, even by
the group members themselves.
Composition: Who Belongs to the Group? To
understand a group, we must know something about
the group’s composition: the qualities of the individuals who are members of the group. The Adventure Expedition team, for example, differed from the
other teams on Mt. Everest that year because each
member of that group was a unique individual with
specific talents, weaknesses, attitudes, values, and personality traits. Hall, the group’s leader, was a worldclass high-altitude climber. Andy Harris, a guide, was
outgoing, physically fit, and passionate about climbing, but he had never been to Mt. Everest before.
Beck Weathers, Frank Fischbeck, and Lou Kasischke
stereotype A socially shared set of qualities, characteristics, and behavioral expectations ascribed to a particular
group or category of people.
composition The individuals who constitute a group.
were all clients: Weathers was “garrulous,” Fischbeck
was “dapper” and “genteel,” and Kasischke was tall
and athletic (Krakauer, 1997, p. 37).
Groups may be more than the sum of their parts
but each part defines the whole (Moreland, 2013). A
group with a member who is naturally boisterous,
mean-spirited, hard-working, chill, or close-minded
will be different from the group with a member who
is domineering, self-sacrificing, lazy, anxious, or creative. A group with many members who have only
just joined will differ from one with mostly longterm, veteran members. A group whose members
differ from each other in terms of race, sex, economic background, and country of origin will differ
from a group with far less diversity. Were we to
assign 100 people to twenty 5-person groups, each
group would differ from every other group because
it joins together 5 unique individuals.
Boundaries: Who Does NOT Belong? The
relationships that link members to one another
define who is in the group and who is not.
A group is boundaried in a psychological sense;
those who are included in the group are recognized
as members and those who are not part of the
group are excluded outsiders. In some cases, these
boundaries are publicly acknowledged: Both members and nonmembers know who belongs to an
honor society, a rock band, or a baseball team.
But in other cases, the boundaries may be indistinct
or known only to the group members themselves.
A secret society, for example, may not reveal its existence or its membership list to outsiders. A group’s
boundary may also be relatively permeable. In open
groups, for example, membership is fluid; members
may voluntarily come and go as they please with no
consequences (and they often do), or the group may
frequently vote members out of the group or invite
new ones to join. In closed groups, in contrast, the membership roster changes more slowly, if at all. But,
regardless of the reasons for membership fluctuations,
open groups are especially unlikely to reach a state of
equilibrium since members recognize that they may
lose or relinquish their place within the group at any
time. Members of such groups, especially those in
which membership is dependent on voting or meeting
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
INTRODUCTION TO GROUP DYNAMICS
9
Are Social Networks Groups?
Social networks are in most respects very group-like.
Their members are linked to each other by social
relationships, which can vary from the inconsequential and ephemeral to the deeply meaningful and
long-enduring. Networks, however, lack clear
boundaries that define who is in the network and
who is not. To become part of a social network, an
individual need only establish a relationship of some
sort with a person who is already part of the network. In most social networking sites, for example,
a particular standard, are more likely to monitor the
actions of others. In contrast, closed groups are
often more cohesive as competition for membership is irrelevant and group members anticipate
future collaborations. Thus, in closed groups, individuals are more likely to focus on the collective
nature of the group and to identify with the
group (Ziller, 1965).
Size: How Large Is the Group? Jon Krakauer
(1997), who chronicled the experiences of Adventure Expedition as it attempted its climb of Mt.
Everest, admitted he was unsettled by the size of
the group: “I’d never climbed as a member of such
a large group … all my previous expeditions had
been undertaken with one or two trusted friends,
or alone” (p. 37).
A group’s size influences many of its other features,
for a small group will likely have different structures,
processes, and patterns of interaction than a larger one.
A two-person group is so small that it ceases to exist
when one member leaves, and it can never be broken
down into subgroups. The members of dyads (e.g.,
best friends, lovers) are sometimes linked by strong
emotional bonds that make their dynamics so intense
that they belong in a category all their own (Levine &
Moreland, 2012). Larger groups can also have unique
qualities, for the members are rarely connected directly
social network A set of interpersonally interconnected
individuals or groups.
the only requirement to join a network is the acceptance of a link request from someone already linked
to others in the network. If Helen and Rob are
already linked, then Pemba can join their network by
establishing a relationship with Helen or Rob. In
consequence, social networks tend to be more fluid
in terms of membership than groups with clearly
identified boundaries, but they can also attract
more diverse members to their ranks (Svensson,
Neumayer, Banfield-Mumb, & Schossböck, 2015).
to all other members, subgroups are very likely to
form, and one or more leaders may be needed to organize and guide the group.
A group’s size also determines how many social
ties—links, relationships, connections, edges—are
needed to join members to each other and to the
group. The maximum number of ties within a
group in which everyone is linked to everyone
else is given by the equation n(n – 1)/2, where n
is the number of people in the group. Only one
relationship is needed to create a dyad, but as
Figure 1.2 illustrates, the number of ties needed to
connect all members grows as the group gets larger.
Three relationships would be needed to join each
member of a three-person group, but six, ten, and
fifteen relationships are needed to link the members
of four-, five-, and six-person groups. Even larger
groups require even more ties. For example, a
group the size of the Adventure Expedition (26
members) would require 325 ties to completely
link each member to every other member.
Because of the limits of most people’s capacity
to keep track of so many social relationships, once
the group surpasses about 150 individuals, members
usually cannot connect with each and every member of the group (Dunbar, 2008). In consequence,
in larger groups, members are connected to one
another indirectly rather than directly. Beck
Weathers might, for example, be linked to guide
Mike Groom, and Groom might establish a bond
with Jon Krakauer, but Weathers may not get to
know Krakauer. In even larger groups, members
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
10
CHAPTER
1
Two
members
Three
members
Four
members
Five
members
Six
members
F I G U R E 1.2 As groups increase in size, the number of relationships needed to link each member to every
other member increases. Only one relationship is needed to form a dyad (two members), but 3, 6, 10, and 15
relations are needed as groups increase in size from three to six members. In even larger groups, the number of
relations needed to link all members to each other becomes so great that some members are only linked indirectly to each other.
may only feel connected to the group as a whole,
or to subgroups within the larger group (Katz et al.,
2005). Larger groups are more schismatic than
smaller ones; they more easily break up into smaller
groups.
Interaction: What Do Members Do? Groups
are the setting for an infinite variety of interpersonal actions. If we were to watch a group for
even a few minutes, we would see people doing
all sorts of things: talking over issues, getting into
arguments, and making decisions. They would
upset each other, give each other help and support,
and take advantage of each other’s weaknesses.
They would likely work together to accomplish
difficult tasks, find ways to not do their work,
and even plot against the best interests of those
who are not a part of their group. Many of the
most interesting, influential, and entertaining
forms of human action are possible only when people join with others in a group.
Sociologist Robert Freed Bales (1950, 1999),
intrigued by the question “What do people do
when they are in groups?” spent years watching and
recording people in relatively small, face-to-face
groups. He recognized the diversity of group interaction, but eventually concluded that the countless
actions he had observed tend to be of two types:
those that focused on the task the group was dealing
with and those that sustained, strengthened, or weakened interpersonal relationships within the group.
Task interaction includes all group behavior that
is focused principally on the group’s work, projects,
plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations
so that the group can make a decision, generate a
product, or achieve a victory. When a jury reviews
each bit of testimony, a committee discusses the best
course of action to take, or the Adventure Expedition
plans the approach they will take to the summit, the
group’s interaction is task-focused.
But groups are not simply performance
engines, for much of what happens in a group is
relationship interaction (or socioemotional interaction). If group members falter and need support,
others will buoy them up with kind words, suggestions, and other forms of help. When group members disagree with others, they are often roundly
criticized and made to feel foolish. When a
coworker wears a new suit or outfit, others in his
or her work unit notice it and offer compliments or
criticisms. Such actions sustain or undermine the
task interaction The conjointly adjusted actions of
group members that pertain to the group’s projects,
tasks, and goals.
relationship interaction (socioemotional interaction)
The conjointly adjusted actions of group members that
relate to or influence the nature and strength of the emotional and interpersonal bonds within the group, including both sustaining (social support, consideration) and
undermining actions (criticism, conflict).
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
INTRODUCTION TO GROUP DYNAMICS
11
Why Do Humans Have Such Big Brains?
Humans have done well, evolutionarily speaking. Their
large, sophisticated brains provide them with the means
to store and share information, solve problems, and
plan for future contingencies. To account for the rapid
development of humans’ intellectual prowess, conventional explanations usually suggest big brains helped
early humans find food and shelter and survive environmental threats. But what if humans’ brains developed to deal with the mental demands of group life?
Anthropologist Robin Dunbar’s (2008) social brain
hypothesis assumes that group life is more psychologically demanding than a more isolated, independent
one. With groups come not only survival advantages,
but also substantial amounts of new information to
continually process. Individuals must be able to recognize other members of the group, track shifting patterns of alliances and coalitions, and remember who
can be trusted and who is likely to refuse to share.
To deal with the increasing complexity of their social
worlds, humans’ ancestors needed bigger brains
capable of processing more information.
Dunbar tested this hypothesis by studying a variety of group-living species. When he correlated the
emotional bonds linking the members to one
another and to the group. We will review the
method that Bales developed for objectively recording these types of interactions, Interaction Process
Analysis (IPA), in Chapter 2.
Interdependence: Do the Members Depend on
Each Other? The acrobat on the trapeze drops
to the net unless her teammate catches her outstretched arms. The assembly line worker is unable
to complete his work until he receives the unfinished product from a worker further up the line.
The business executive’s success and salary are determined by how well her staff complete their work; if
her staff fail, then she fails as well. In such situations,
members are obligated or responsible to other
group members, for they provide each other with
support and assistance. This interdependence
interdependence Mutual dependence, as when one’s
outcomes, actions, thoughts, feelings, and experiences
are influenced, to some degree, by other people.
size of the average group for a species with the brain
size of the species, he discovered that species with
bigger brains did tend to live in larger social groups.
Dunbar’s findings also suggest that, given the size of
the human neocortex, humans were designed by evolution to live in groups of 150 people or less; anything
more would overload humans’ information-processing
capacity. Dunbar sees evidence of this constraint in
his studies of the size of naturally occurring groups.
Although the size of traditional hunter-gatherer societies varies with habitat, in many cases, they range up
to—but not over—150 members. Until recently, small
communal villages and townships included about 150
people. Armies often organize soldiers into divisions of
about 150 soldiers. Some businesses and organizations,
too, have learned that productivity and solidarity suffer when too many people work in one place. If they
need to expand their operation, they do not add more
people to an existing plant; instead, they build an
additional plant next to the old one and fill it with
another 150 personnel. Dunbar’s recommendation:
To avoid taxing the processing capacity of members,
limit your groups to 150 members or fewer.
means that members depend on one another; their
outcomes, actions, thoughts, feelings, and experiences are partially determined by others in the
group.
Some groups create only the potential for
interdependence among members. The outcomes
of people standing in a queue at a store’s checkout
counter, audience members in a darkened theater,
or the congregation of a large mega-church are
hardly intertwined at all. The individuals within
these groups can reach their goals on their own
without making certain their actions mesh closely
with the actions of those who are nearby. Other
groups, such as gangs, families, sports teams, and
military squads, create far higher levels of interdependency since members reliably and substantially
influence one another’s outcomes over a long
period of time and in a variety of situations.
But even the interdependencies in these tightly
meshed groups are rarely invariant or undifferentiated. As Figure 1.3 suggests, in symmetric
groups with a flat, nonhierarchical structure, the
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
12
CHAPTER
1
A
A
B
C
B
(a) Symmetric
interdependence
with reciprocity
D
C
(b) Hierarchical
interdependence
without reciprocity
A
B
C
D
(c) Hierarchical
interdependence with
(unequal) reciprocity
F I G U R E 1.3
group members.
A
B
C
(d) Sequential
interdependence
without reciprocity
Examples of interdependence among
influence among members is equal and reciprocal
(Figure 1.3a). But more typically interdependencies are asymmetric, unequal, and hierarchical. In
a business, for example, the boss may determine
how employees spend their time, what kind of
rewards they experience, and even the duration
of their membership in the group (Figure 1.3b).
In other cases, the employees may be able to
influence their boss to a degree, but the boss influences them to a much greater extent (Figure 1.3c).
Interdependency can also be ordered sequentially,
as when C’s outcomes are determined by B’s
actions, but B’s actions are determined by A
(Figure 1.3d).
Structure: How Is the Group Organized?
Group members are not connected to one another
at random, but in organized and predictable patterns. In all but the most ephemeral groups, patterns
and regularities emerge that determine the kinds of
actions that are permitted or condemned: who talks
to whom, who likes whom and who dislikes
whom, who can be counted on to perform particular tasks, and whom others look to for guidance
and help. These regularities combine to generate
group structure—the complex of roles, norms,
and intermember relations that organizes the group.
Roles specify the general behaviors expected of people who occupy different positions within the group.
The roles of leader and follower are fundamental ones
in many groups, but other roles—information
seeker, information giver, and compromiser—may
emerge in any group (Benne & Sheats, 1948).
Group members’ actions and interactions are also
shaped by the group’s norms that describe what
behaviors should and should not be performed in
a given context.
Roles, norms, and other structural aspects of
groups, although unseen and often unnoticed, lie at
the heart of their most dynamic processes. When people join a group, they initially spend much of their time
trying to come to terms with the requirements of their
role. If they cannot meet the role’s demand, they might
not remain a member for long. Norms within a group
are defined and renegotiated over time, and conflicts
often emerge as members violate norms. In group
meetings, the opinions of members with higher status
carry more weight than those of the rank-and-file
members. When several members form a subgroup
within the larger group, they exert more influence
on the rest of the group than they would individually.
When people manage to place themselves at the hub of
the group’s information-exchange patterns, their influence over others also increases.
If you had to choose only one aspect of a group
to study, you would probably learn the most by
studying its structure. The Adventure Expedition’s
structure, for example, improved the group’s overall
efficiency, but at a cost. When researchers surveyed
group structure The organization of a group, including
the members, their interrelations, and their interactions.
role A socially shared set of behaviors, characteristics, and
responsibilities expected of people who occupy a particular position or type of position within a group; by
enacting roles, individuals establish regular patterns of
exchange with one another that increase predictability
and social coordination.
norm A consensual and often implicit standard that
describes what behaviors should and should not be performed in a given context.
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
INTRODUCTION TO GROUP DYNAMICS
expert mountain climbers asking them to evaluate the
wisdom of hiking in a team with a clear chainof-command versus one with a less leader-centered
culture, these experts favored a hierarchical structure
for its efficiency. However, they also warned that such
groups were not as safe as groups that were more
egalitarian, since members were less likely to share
information about threats and concerns. These
researchers then confirmed the experts’ prognosis by
examining the records of 5,104 group expeditions in
the Himalayas. Sure enough, more climbers reached
the top of the summit when they hiked in teams with
hierarchical cultures, but more climbers also died in
these groups during the expedition. The researchers
concluded: “Hierarchy, structurally and as a cultural
value, can both help and hurt team performance”
(Anicich, Swaab, & Galinsky, 2015, p. 1340).
Goals: What Is the Group’s Purpose? Humans,
as a species, seem to be genetically ready to set goals
for themselves—“what natural selection has built into
us is the capacity to strive, the capacity to seek, the
capacity to set up short-term goals in the service of
longer-term goals” (Dawkins, 1989, p. 142)—and
that tendency is only amplified in groups. A study
group wants to help members get better grades. A
jury makes a decision about guilt or innocence. The
members of a congregation seek religious and spiritual
experiences. The team Rob Hall created, the Adventure Expedition, pursued its goals relentlessly and, for
some members, fatally. The groups Bales (1999) studied spent the majority of their time (63%) dealing
with goal-related activities and tasks. The members
of groups pursue their own goals, but because their
goals are interdependent, groups promote the
pursuit of other members’ goals and group-level
goals (Fitzsimons, Finkel, & vanDellen, 2015).
The goals groups pursue are many and varied.
One approach to their classification suggests that a
broad distinction can be made between intellectual
and judgmental tasks (Laughlin, 1980). Another
emphasizes three different categories: production,
discussion, and problem-solving goals (Hackman
& Morris, 1975). A third model, proposed by social
psychologist Joseph E. McGrath (1984), distinguishes among four basic group goals: generating
13
ideas or plans, choosing a solution, negotiating a
solution to a conflict, or executing (performing) a
task. As Figure 1.4 indicates, each of these basic
categories can be further subdivided, yielding a
total of eight goal-related activities.
■
■
■
■
Generating: Groups concoct the strategies they
will use to accomplish their goals (Type 1:
planning tasks) or create altogether new ideas
and approaches to their problems (Type 2:
creativity tasks)
Choosing: Groups make decisions about issues
that have correct solutions (Type 3: intellective
tasks) or questions that can be answered in
many ways (Type 4: decision-making tasks)
Negotiating: Groups resolve differences of
opinion among members regarding their goals
or decisions (Type 5: cognitive conflict tasks) or
settle competitive disputes among members
(Type 6: mixed-motive tasks)
Executing: Groups do things, including taking
part in competitions (Type 7: contests/battles/
competitive tasks) or creating some product
or carrying out collective actions (Type 8:
performances/psychomotor tasks)
McGrath’s task circumplex model also distinguishes between conceptual–behavioral tasks and
cooperation–conflict tasks. Groups dealing with
conceptual tasks (Types 2–5) generally exhibit high
levels of information exchange, social influence, and
process-oriented activity. Groups dealing with behavioral tasks (Types 1, 6, 7, 8) are those that produce
things or perform services. Members of these groups
perform a series of motor tasks that range from the
simple and relatively individualistic through to the
complex and highly interdependent. Conflict tasks
(Types 4–7) pit individuals and groups against each
other, whereas cooperative tasks require collaboration
(Types 1–3, and 8). Some groups perform tasks from
nearly all of McGrath’s categories, whereas others
concentrate on only one subset of goals.
Origin: Founded or Formed? Groups tend to
fall naturally into two categories: planned groups,
which are deliberately formed by its members or
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
14
CHAPTER
1
Cooperation
Generating
ideas
Solving
problems
with
correct
answers
Quadrant I
Generate
Type 2:
Creativity
tasks
Generating
plans
Type 1:
Planning
tasks
Type 8:
Performances/
psychomotor tasks
Type 3:
Intellective tasks
Conflict
Quadrant II
Choose
Deciding
issues
with no
right
answer
Executing
performance
tasks
Quadrant IV
Execute
Type 7:
Contests/battles/
competitive
tasks
Type 4:
Decision-making
tasks
Type 5:
Congnitive
conflict tasks
Type 6:
Mixed-motive
tasks
Resolving
conflicts
of power
Resolving conflicts
Resolving conflicts
Quadrant III
of viewpoint
of interest
Negotiate
Behavioral
Conceptual
F I G U R E 1.4
McGrath’s circumplex model of group tasks.
SOURCE: McGrath, J. E., Groups: Interaction and Performance, 1st Edition, © 1984. Reprinted by permission of Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle
River, NJ.
an external authority for some purpose, and emergent groups which come into existence spontaneously when individuals join together in the same
physical location or gradually over time as individuals find themselves repeatedly interacting with
the same subset of individuals. People found groups
(planned), but they also find them (emergent).
Arbitration boards, civil rights groups, commissions committees, expeditions, juries, legislative bodies, military units, musical groups, research teams,
self-help groups, social agencies, sports teams, study
groups, task forces, therapy groups, trade associations, veterans organizations, work groups, and the
Adventure Expedition are all examples of planned
groups; they tend to be organized, task-focused,
and formal. Such groups generally define their
membership criteria clearly, and so at all times they
know who is and who is not in the group. They
often operate under a set of bylaws, contracts, or
similar regulations that describe the group’s acceptable procedures and practices. The group’s structure
may even be formalized in an organizational chart
that defines who has more authority than others,
who reports to whom, and how subgroups within
the overall group are connected. Such groups,
despite their overall level of organization and definition, may also lack emotional substance. They may
be characterized by considerable routines, ceremonies, and procedures, but they may also be devoid of
any warmth or emotional depth.
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
INTRODUCTION TO GROUP DYNAMICS
Emergent groups, such as audiences at events,
bystanders at a crime scene, crowds, customers at a
club, gangs, families, friendship networks in work
settings, mobs, people waiting to board an airplane,
and all manner of queues and lines, arise over time
and through repeated association of the eventual
members. These groups are not explicitly organized, but they often develop elements of structure
as members determine what kinds of behaviors are
expected of members, who is more or less liked,
who leads and who follows, and so on. Such groups
often have unclear boundaries, for they allow
members to come and go rather than requiring
them to join in a formal way. They have no written
rules, but they likely develop unwritten norms that
define what behaviors are appropriate and what
behaviors are inappropriate. Unlike planned groups,
membership in an emergent group is sought as a
means in and of itself: people don’t join to gain
some goal but because they find satisfaction in associating with the group members.
Social psychologists Holly Arrow, Joseph E.
McGrath, and Jennifer L. Berdahl (2000) extend this
distinction between planned and emergent groups by
asking a second question: Is the group created by
forces within the group (internal origins) or forces
outside of the group (external origins)? Arrow and
her colleagues combine both the planned-emergent
dimension and the internal-external dimension to
generate the following fourfold taxonomy of groups:
■
■
■
Concocted groups are planned by individuals or
authorities outside of the group. A team of
laborers digging a trench, a flight crew of an
airplane, and a military squad would all be
concocted groups, since those who created
them are not actually members of the group.
Founded groups are planned by one or more
individuals who remain within the group. A
small Internet start-up company, a study group,
a expeditionary team, or grassroots community
action group would all be founded groups.
Circumstantial groups are emergent, unplanned
groups that arise when external, situational
forces set the stage for people to join together,
often temporarily, in a unified group. A group
■
15
of travelers stranded together when their bus
breaks, a mob breaking shop windows and
setting parked cars on fire, and patrons at a
movie theater would be circumstantial groups.
Self-organizing groups emerge when interacting
individuals gradually align their activities in a
cooperative system of interdependence. Parties,
gatherings of surfers waiting for waves just offshore, drivers leaving a crowded parking lot
through a single exit, and a half dozen adolescents
who hang out together are all organized groups,
but their organization is generated by implicit
adjustments of each member to each other
member.
Unity: How Cohesive Is the Group? In physics,
the molecular integrity of matter is known as cohesiveness. When matter is cohesive, the particles that
constitute it bond together so tightly that they resist
any competing attractions. But when matter is not
cohesive, it tends to disintegrate over time as the
particles drift away or adhere to some other nearby
object. Similarly, group cohesion is the integrity,
solidarity, social integration, unity, and groupiness
of a group. All groups require a modicum of cohesiveness or else the group would disintegrate and
cease to exist as a group. Close-knit, cohesive
groups suffer little from turnover or intragroup
conflict. Cohesive groups hold on to their members
tightly, and members usually value their membership, and are quick to identify themselves as members. A group’s cohesiveness, however, is often
based on commitment to the group’s purposes,
rather than on social bonds between members.
Individuals may not like each other a great deal,
and yet, when they join together, they experience
powerful feelings of unity as they work collaboratively to achieve an important end (Dion, 2000).
group cohesion The solidarity or unity of a group
resulting from the development of strong and mutual
interpersonal bonds among members and group-level
forces that unify the group, such as shared commitment
to group goals and esprit de corps.
Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
16
CHAPTER
1
Entitativity: Does the Group Look Like a Group?
Observers back at basecamp who watched the
Adventure Expedition climb that day did not just
see single individuals scaling Everest through their
binoculars and telescopes: They saw an intact,
organized group making its way ever upward
(Viesturs, 1996).
Social psychologist Donald Campbell (1958a)
coined the term entitativity to describe the extent
to which a group seems to be a single, unified
entity—a real group. Campbell grounded his analysis of group entitativity in the principles of perception studied most closely by gestalt psychologists
(e.g., Köhler, 1959). The researchers identified
these principles in their studies of the cues people
rely on when perceptually organizing objects into
unified, well-organized wholes (gestalts). An automobile, for example, is not perceived to be four
wheels, doors, a trunk, a hood, a windshield, and
so on, but a single thing: a car. Similarly, a collection of individuals—say four young men walking
down the street—might be perceived to be four
unrelated individuals, but the observer may also
conclude the individuals are a group. Entitativity,
then, is the “groupiness” of a group, perceived
rather than actual group unity or cohesion.
Entitativity, according to Campbell, is substantially
influenced by similarity, proximity, and common fate,
as well as such perceptual cues as pragnanz (good form)
and permeability. Say, for example, you are walking
through a library and see a table occupied by four
women. Is this a group—four friends or classmates
studying together—or just four independent individuals? Campbell predicts that you would, intuitively,
notice if the four have certain physical features in common, such as age, skin color, or clothing. You would
also take note of the books they were reading, for if
they were studying the same subject, you would
assume they share a common goal—and hence are
more likely to be a true group (Brewer, Hong, & Li,
entitativity The apparent cohesiveness or unity of an
assemblage of individuals; the quality of being a single
entity rather than a set of independent, unrelated individuals (coined in Campbell, 1958a).
2004; Ip, Chiu, & Wan, 2006). Their emotional displays would also provide you with information about
their entitativity. If the women all seem to be happy or
sad, then you would be more likely to think the group
is responsible for their emotional state and that the
group itself is a unified one (Magee & Tiedens,
2006). Proximity is also a signal of entitativity, for the
smaller the distance separating individuals, the more
likely perceivers will assume they are seeing a group
rather than individuals who happen to be collocated
(Knowles & Bassett, 1976). The principle of common
fate also predicts perceived entitativity, for if all the
members begin to act in similar ways or move in a
relatively coordinated fashion, then your confidence
that this cluster is a unified group would be bolstered
(Lakens, 2010).
Social psychologist Brian Lickel and his colleagues (2000) investigated Campbell’s theory of entitativity, asking people to rate all sorts of human
aggregations in terms of their size, duration, permeability, amount of interaction among members,
importance to members, and so on. These analyses,
as they expected, yielded four natural groupings
that were very similar to the four categories listed
in Figure 1.1 (which they labeled intimacy groups,
task groups, loose associations, and social categories). Primary groups, such as professional sports
teams, families, and close friends, received the highest entitativity ratings, followed by social groups
(e.g., a jury, an airline crew, a team in the workplace), categories (e.g., women, doctors, classical
music listeners), and collectives (e.g., people waiting
for a bus, a queue in a bank). These findings suggest
that people are more likely to consider aggregations
marked by strong bonds and frequent interactions
among members to be groups, but that they are less
certain that such aggregations as crowds, waiting
lines, or categories qualify as groups (Lickel et al.,
2000, Study 3). They also suggest that social
categori…