The individual and the group

 

The individual and the group

Introduction

 

Welcome to lesson one which deals with how the individual interacts with others win a group. 

 

Objectives of the Lesson

By the end of this lesson, you should be able to:

1.  Define sociometry

2.  Understand network characteristics among members of different types of social groups.

 

Introductory activity

What factors are at play when individuals come together? What joins these different individuals together?

 

Explanation on the introductory question

When people come together in a group they are held together by many different considerations and interests. The level to which these individuals share common interests is key to continued existence as a group. However, tensions exist and failure to resolve these may result in group breakup.

The individual and the group

 

Talcott parsons has identified 4 features of social classroom interaction

1.      A n element of equalization of students. Teachers treat students as if they are all the same, regardless of background, age and so on.

2.      A n imposition of the common series of tasks. A number of tasks are forced on pupils like cognition, moralilty, and a notion of achievements.

3.      T he class teacher is the key figure who represents the adult world. He is the parent substitute, disciplinarian, judge and so on.

4.      S ystematic evaluation of work. The teacher monitors pupils’ progress.            

Sociometry

 

Sociometry refers to the study and measurement of social relationships, behavior and social structure of people.

Sociometric test . This is a test that is used to measure or study the pupils’ kinds of behavior and firm groups found in the classroom.

 

Group networks:  This shows linkages between people in groups.  There are several possibilities for relationships. They differ from a social group because it is not the basis for consistent social interaction and generates little sense of common identity or belonging. Social networks also have no clear boundaries, but expand outward from the individual like a vast web.

 

Social ties within some networks may be relatively primary, as among people who attended college together and have since maintained their friendships by mail and telephone. More commonly, network ties are extremely secondary relationships that involve little personal knowledge. A social network may also contain people we know of – or who know of us – but with whom we inter-act infrequently, if at all. 

 

Even though social ties within networks may not be strong, these relationships represent a valuable resource that can be used to personal advantage. Perhaps the most common example of the power of networks involves finding a job. Thus, even in the case of a person with extraordinary ability, who you know may still be just as important as what you know.

But although social networks may be widespread, they do not provide equal advantages to everyone. Networks tend to afford  the greatest advantages to men whose fathers have  important occupation positions. This reflects the fact that networks tend to contain people with similar social characteristics and social rank, thereby helping to perpetuate patterns of social inequality.

 

Women’s networks are of special importance in the work of world. This is because female workers of all kinds are often isolated in settings where men outnumber them and have more power than they do.

Network Characteristics

 

1.  Density: This refers to the number of contacts, which are direct in a network, for example, 

A    B     C. In this example the density is = 2. The density tells us the degree of closeness in a group and how large the group is.

 

2.                Range: This refers to the number of contacts each person within the network, for example, A  B    C. In this example the range of B is = 2. This tells us the individual’s degree of influence.

 

3.                Reachability: This refers to the number of steps in a network that it takes to reach someone else. In the example below the reachability from A to D is = 3

A    B   C   D

This tells us how easy it is, or how long it takes to approach somebody. It tells us about efficiency in a system.  A system with fast flow of information is efficient.  This occurs if reachability is low. 

 

4.  Reciprocity:  This is the extent to which communication flows both ways between two links. The reciprocity tells us whether our presence is being appreciated or not. Consider the following network: 

A     B

In the above network, A likes B and B likes A.  Love is reciprocated.  The reciprocity is = 2. This network represents a dyad which is a group of two members and is the smallest possible social group.  Having only two members in a social group makes it less stable than a social group with a large number of members. Since it is based on a single relationship, a dyad requires the active participation of both members; if one person withdraws their membership the group ceases to exist. Consequently, members of dyad are usually aware of the continual effort necessary to sustain the group’s vitality. Because marriage is a dyad of great importance to society, the personal bond between two spouses is reinforced with legal and often religious supports. In this special case, in other words, society provides extra support to maintain the dyadic group in the event that personal interest declines .A large group, in contrast, is inherently more stable. A volunteer fire company, for example, is based on the activity of many people, so the indifference of even several members would not cause the group to collapse.

 

Furthermore, in a dyad members experience the greatest intensity of social interaction. Since there is only one relationship, neither member shares the attention of the other with anyone else. For this, dyads are often the strongest social bonds that we experience in our lives. Two people can form an intimacy not found in larger groups, but the dyad also involves other elements of social exchange, such as rivalry, reciprocity and power (Marshall, 1998). Because marriage in our culture is dyadic, husbands and wives are, ideally united by powerful emotional ties. However, marriage in much of the world can involve more than two people. When it does, the attention of the spouse is divided among relationships, so that their marriage is typically less emotionally intense than a dyadic one.

5.  Content: This refers to the meaning that people attach to relationships in terms of whether they feel the relationship is important or not.

6.  Triad

A triad, or three-person group, is often the least stable of small groups, as there is a tendency for triads to divide into a dyad and an isolate. Two weaker members may form a coalition against the stronger third, or the weakest member may gain power by dividing the other two (Marshall, 1998).  A     B      C

In the above example, B holds the group together.

The group functions best if B is present.  If B is absent A and C may not be very free with each other.

7.  Self-sufficient

A

B       C

Three person groups are stable because there is a chance of arbitration and a chance to make alliance and coalitions between two people against the third. In this type of network each person is very concerned with maintaining group solidarity and will do everything possible to prevent the other two from being too friendly.

 

A triad as a social group is also unstable, although in a different manner. A triad contains three relations each uniting two members to the exclusion of the third. Thus any third member and usually get their way because they area majority of the group. More generally, any two members of a triad may intensify their relationship, transforming the triad into a dyad that excludes the third person. This often takes place, for example, among three roommates at collage. If a triad is to persist, care must be taken to include all three members in many routine activities. If romantic interest blossoms between two members of a triad, transformation to a dyad is likely, since two members have a powerful bond that neither shares with the third person. The structural instability of the triad is recognized in the common phrase two’s company, the three’s crowd.

 

A triad benefits from a source of stability not found in a dyad, however, if the relationship between any two of the group’s members becomes strained, the third member can serve as the mediator to restore the group’s vitality. In the same way, members of a dyad (such as a married couple) may temporarily seek to include a third person (a trust or counselor) in the in an effort to resolve tension between.

8.  A    B   C   D     E

A clique or chain of friendship. This has more than three members.

9.  A Star

This one person is the centre of attraction and centre of the group and is usually a partial leader of the group. He  may be charismatic and is chosen by almost everyone and is usually regarded as the best in the group.

10.  A

                                Z

        B  

In the above network, Z is a rejectee. He/she hates the others and is hated by the others. He/she is anti-social and is alienated from the group. He/she is usually a kind of divert.

 

 

11.               A

          B

        A           E

                     B  

In this type of network, E is an isolate or a neglectee. He/she isolates himself/herself from the others and is also isolated by the others.

The importance of group size

 

Size has important effects on the operation of social groups. The basis for this dynamic lies in the mathematical connection between the number of people in a social group and the number of relationships among them. Two people are joined in a single relationship; adding a third person results in the three relationships, a fourth person yields six. As additional people are added one at a time according to what mathematicians call an arithmetic increase, the number increases rapidly in what is called a geometric increase. By the time six people have joined one conversation, there are fifteen different relationships among them, which explains why the conversation usually divides by this point.

 

Social groups with more than three members tend to be more stable because the lack of interest on the part of one or even several members dose not directly threaten the group’s existence. Furthermore larger social groups tend to develop more formal social structure and roles which stabilize their operation. However, larger social groups inevitably lack the intense personal relationships that are possible in the smallest groups.

 

The size of a social group depends on the group‘s purpose. The dyad offers unsurpassed emotional intensity, while a group of several dozen people is likely to be more stable and also able to accomplish larger and more complex tasks. In general, however, research suggests that about five people is the size that generates the highest degree of satisfaction among group members. This is because smaller social groups require much more effort on the part of each person, while larger ones are typically much more impersonal. 

Group Dynamics

 

Sociologists describe the operation of social groups as group dynamics. As members of social groups, people are likely to interact according to a number of distinctive patterns.

Group Leadership

 

Social groups vary in the extent to which they designate one or more members as leaders, with responsibility to direct the activities of all members. Some friendship groups grant no one the clear status of leader, while others do. Within families, parents generally share leadership responsibilities, although husband and wife sometimes disagree about who is really in charge. In many secondary groups, such as a business office, leadership is likely to involve an established status with clearly defined roles.

 

There are several different ways in which a person may become recognized as the leader of a social group. In the family, traditional cultural patterns confer leader ship on the parents, though more often on the male as head of the household if two spouses are present. In other cases, such as friendship groups, one or more persons may gradually emerge as leaders, although there is no formal process of selection. In larger secondary groups, leaders are usually formally chosen through election or recruitment.

 

Although leaders are often thought to be people with unusual personal ability, decades of research have failed to produce consistent evidence that there is any category of ‘natural leaders.’ It seems that there is no set of personal qualities that all leaders have in common; rather, virtually any person may be recognized as a leader depending on the particular needs of the group.

 

Furthermore, although we commonly think of social groups as having a single leader, research suggests that there are typically two different leadership roles that are held by different individuals. Instrumental leadership is leadership that emphasizes the completion of tasks by a social group. Group members look to instrumental leaders to ‘get things done.’ Expressive leadership, on the other hand, is leadership that emphasizes the collective well-being of a social group’s members. Expressive leaders are less concerned with the overall goals of the group than with providing emotional support to group members and attempting to minimize tension and conflict among them. Group members expect expressive leaders to maintain stable relationships within the group and provide support to individual members. 

 

Instrumental leaders are likely to have a rather secondary relationship to other group members. They give orders and may discipline group members who inhibit attainment of the group’s goals. Expressive leaders cultivate a more personal or primary relationship to others in the group. They offer sympathy when someone experiences difficulties or is subjected to discipline, are quick to lighten a serious moment with humor, and try to re solve any problems that threaten to divide the group. As the differences in these two roles suggest, expressive leaders generally receive more personal affection from group members; instrumental leaders, if they are successful in promoting group goals, may enjoy a more distant respect.

 

This differentiation of leadership within a social group can be illustrated by the operation of the traditional American family. For generations, cultural norms have supported the instrumental leadership of fathers and husbands. According to this traditional pattern, men assume most responsibility for providing family income, making major family decisions, and dispensing discipline to children (and, as the dominant partner in the marriage, to wives as well). 

 

Group conformity

Apparently, many of us are prepared to compromise our own judgment in the interests of group conformity.

 

Practical Activity

Draw a diagram of a sociogram and identify the different networks involved.

 

Summary of Lesson

We have discussed in this lesson how different social groups have dofferent levels of intensity in terms of being held together. The different nature of leadership of these groups have also been discussed.