Group Cohesion and Conformity - Essay Example

Psychology Social psychology is the scientific study that observes and understand how people feel and think, which influences their behaviour towardsothers; and how the behaviour of others influences an individuals thoughts, feeling and behaviour (Social psychology, n.d.). Social psychology is likewise viewed as the area between sociology and individual psychology, wherein the social behaviour and mental experience of people are studied within the social context (Argyle et al, 1995). Social psychology tries to understand the connection between minds, groups and behaviours in three general ways as follows (Social Psychology, 2005): Primarily, it perceives the thoughts, feelings and behaviours of people that are influenced by the actual, imagined or implied presence of others, which includes social perception, social interaction and many other types of influencing factors like trust and persuasion. Second, social psychology attempts to understand the influence that individual perceptions and behaviours have on a group. It involves viewing aspects like group productivity and group decision making. Third, it tries to understand groups as behavioural entities, along with the relationships and influences that one group may have on another. In relevance to the preceding paragraphs, the understanding of the following sociological social psychological processes is essential in order to realize the value of attitudes and behaviours in group settings (Social Psychology, 2005): 1. Group Cohesion and Conformity; 2) Consensus, Groups Structure, Work Performance and Decision Making; 3) Collective Behaviour Social Movements and Aggregate Behaviour; 4) Intergroup Behaviour; 5) Social Structure, Population Density and Personality; 6) Dissent, Deviance and Reactions to Deviance, and 7) Intergroup Conflict. 1. Group Cohesion and Conformity This social psychological process tackles the degree of change that members in the group will undergo regarding behaviours, views and attitudes in order to fit in with the view of the group. The group can influence its members by the exertion of overt social pressure on individuals and this is usually done through the three subtypes of conformity which are: a) compliance – where the member conforms only in public but asserts one own views in private; b) identification – conformity is done publicly and privately while the individual is a member of the group, but not after leaving the group; c) internalization – conforming to the groups view publicly and privately during and after group membership. Moreover, when a group of individuals make a combined decision, the risk or consequence of said decision is greater than when the decision is made by a sole individual. This is usually termed as “group polarization” or risky shift. 2. Consensus, Groups Structure, Work Performance and Decision Making This social psychological process assesses the impact of leadership styles, group size, group goals, communicative interaction, reward distribution and decision making on the stability of polarization of groups. The process of achieving consensus requires consideration of all members opinions and a collective trust that a follow-up action is expected at the members discretion or free will. Ideally, members who wish to take action want to hear the opinions of those who argues against it in order to improve agreement or consensus. Consensus often requires compromise with facilitation. True or genuine consensus involves focus on developing the relationships among stakeholders, so that the consensus is achieved on willing consent. Likewise, it involves decision making that demands a choice from multiple options. Typically, decisions made by a group ( group polarization/risky shift) possess a greater risk than when a decision is made by a sole individual (Argyle et al n.d.). Based on the above, leadership requires consensus and decision making, although studies show that certain leadership styles are more effective than others (Argyle et al, n.d.). Leadership styles varies according to circumstances, and since it is actually a form of relationship – the presence of social influence necessitates that leaders should “maintain successful relations” with their superiors, peers and subordinates. 3. Collective Behaviour, Social Movements and Aggregate Behaviour This social psychology process manifests the causes, meanings, functions, types and structure of societies. Collective behaviours are social processes and events that do not reflect existing social structures like laws, conventions and institutions. These types of behaviours emerges in a natural or impulsive condition and manner. Examples of collective behaviours are: religious revivals, panics in burning theatres, the sudden widespread interest in body piercing and a change in popular preferences for toothpaste brands. In general, collective behaviours are crowd behaviours or social movement activities there a single cohesive goal directs the action of the whole group, which acts as a single entity to achieve a common objective (examples: civil right movements, reform movement, conservation movement, labour movements, gay right movement, etc.). This group of social psychology process likewise involves the “bystander effect or bystander apathy, which is a psychological occurrence that influences of affects people not to intervene in an emergency situation when plenty of people are present. Those who are affected with this type of phenomenon are more likely to lend aid or intervene when they are alone or when observers are scarce. 4. Intergroup Behaviour Intergroup behaviour refers to attitudes and behaviours manifested or shown by group members collectively or individually (Sherif et al, 2008). The attitude or behaviour that is normally portrayed by individual members of the group represents relation to his or her affiliation with the group. The attitudes of groups towards one another is determined or limited to the functional relationship between the groups concerned. Said relations could either be symbiotic or competitive in nature that usually emanates in discriminatory, hostile or prejudice attitudes and actions. 5. Social Structure, Population Density and Personality This social psychology method carefully observes the co-influence of health alienation, status and values on ones position in various group structures. The social structure or social system is a system where people form the society in an organized pattern of relationships which depicts the idea that society is grouped according to functions, meanings or purposes. Family, religion, law, economy and class are examples of social structures that are formed or organized according to social stratification. Social stratification pertains to the classification of society members as to race, class and gender. In connection to the above, population density is integrated as part of this particular social psychology process because it measures the presence of people within a specified area that makes up the societys structures. Further the personality of an individual is generally and normally influenced or patterned according to the societal group an individual belongs and has been exposed to. 6. Dissent, Deviance and Reactions to Deviance This social psychology process considers the role of habitual mindsets and social functions on the existence of norms, as well as the effect of labelling and impact of social controls on deviance. Dissent in its simple meaning is the act of protesting which is often seen in an organized public rally to present a difference of opinion (Wordreference.com, 2008). In a democratic society, the principle of free dissent is of utmost importance. Individuals who opposed existing policies have the right to form groups and actively voice out their opinions in public together with those who support said policies. The absence of open dissent eliminates effective consent or agreement (CCLA, n.d.). However, the performance of the right to dissent does not mean disobedience to legally enacted laws of the state. It means being able to campaign for changes or reforms that would make the society a better place to live in. Thus, alternatives should be presented and considered when dissent is set in motion. Deviance on the other hand is a phenomenon which exist in societies governed by norms, like standard policies, typical criterion, etc. In normal circumstances, an individual has two alternatives, and that is to conform or go against established norms of the society. The following theories are associated with deviance (About Sociology, 2007): A. Anomie Theory – regards some deviance as the outcome of individuals trying to achieve a cultural goal but lacks the necessary means to do it. B. Strain Theory - this is a theory which illustrates that when legitimate means of achieving a culturally defined goals is limited or hindered by the structure of society, the result may either lead to crime or another form of deviance. C. Differential Association Theory – is a theory that comprehends deviance to happen when the definitions or meanings that validates the deviant acts are learned. D. Control Theory (Sociology) – justifies deviant behaviour as a cause by association with other people. E. J-Curve Theory – forecasts social revolutions to occur when there is an unacceptable difference between the peoples expected satisfaction of needs and their actual satisfaction of needs. F. Labelling Theory – accepts the reaction that for individuals have to rule violations, which can have a compelling effect on deviants and this could be done through the limitation of social shaming reaction on people and replacing moral indignation with tolerance. 7. Intergroup Conflict The intergroup conflict presents reasons and motives behind hostility between groups. It involves the realistic group conflict theory which relates group conflict as a conflict of goals where identified groups vie for a common goal or objective that causes friction and generates hostile acts in the process (Sherif et al, 2008). To reduce hostility between factions or groups, the individual members should be assessed as to their individual frustrations, failures, maladjustment or instability. A study made earlier regarding reasons behind group hostility showed that hostile attitudes could be minimized by having superordinate aims or goals with higher values that would encourage positive interaction between group members since they face common difficulties, which could not be solved by just one group. It likewise relates the intergroup contact hypothesis, which stresses the fact that constant contact between groups may minimize or defuse conflicts. References About Sociology.(04 January 2007) Social Psychology. 17 August 2008 . Argyle, Michael, Colman Andrew M. (1995) London and New York: Longman. Pp.xvi+10. ISBN 0-582-27804-X. 14 August 2008 Read More