Exploring Group Dynamics: Norms, Roles, and Attitudes - Essay Sample

Introduction

When two or more human beings interact with each other, it is considered to be a sociological group. A group has human interaction, rules of acceptable behavior within the group, as well as the rewards and punishments are given when one breaks or upholds these rules, which are known as norms in sociological terms. Apart from the standards, there are roles assigned to the members of the groups as well as the attitudes which every member of the group has towards specific subjects. Therefore, group psychology is defined as the way a social group behaves and the attitudes they hold due to the norms, roles, and beliefs that the social group is based on (Freud, 1975). The dynamics of a social group and the group psychology has a positive influence on the behaviors and attitudes that the members of the said group, and it is for this reason that this paper will address the theories of group psychology, the implications of group psychology, as well as my personal experience on how group psychology has influenced my life.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Theories of Group Psychology

The Social Identity theory proposed by Henri Tajfel is the most discussed theory of group psychology. The theory states that an individual's view of themselves, their identity and purpose is based on their roles in the social groups that they belong to (McLeod, 2008). Therefore, the groups that people belong to are a source of self-esteem as well as pride when the individuals are performing well in the groups, and a cause of loss of self-esteem and shame whenever they are performing dismally in the groups. It is, therefore, this theory that has brought in the idea of `them' against `us,' whereby social groups want to triumph and subdue the other competing social groups, and the domination will provide joy and pride to the members of the group.

The second group of group psychology is the self-determination theory, which McLachlan and Colleagues (2011) define as a theory of human motivation, whereby the social groups that one belongs to are responsible for the provision of strength and motivation which are essential in the persistence of the individual performance of individuals within the group setting. Therefore, since groups are a source of identity for people and determine their attitudes, it is not surprising that groups undertake the role of creating constructs within itself whereby the members of the group can get motivation and training that will help them to become persistent in the activities and functions within the social groups that will contribute to the overall success of the group. The efficiency of the training within the group will determine the persistence or the desistence of the group members when they have to carry out their given roles within and without the group setting.

Finally, the social exchange theory analyzes the interactions of individuals within a social group from a cost/risk and benefits angle. This means that when individuals within a social group weigh the options of undertaking an action that will involve other parties in the social groups, the individuals may repeat the actions if the reactions from the parties that they interacted with were positive, that is, benefits, and they are likely to hold off from further interactions with the parties in future interactions should the reactions be adverse, that is, risky or non-beneficial. The theory also views interactions as ones that provide economic value, whereby if the interacting parties have goods that may be material or non-material, then the relationship is likely to continue for a more extended period. The social exchange theory applies to all relationships in society. Although there may be no financial or economic implications, the interactions will be based on how the financial and economic practices are carried out. This being so, the social groups are likely to have a membership to them when the members feel that the groups are adding value to them, and when the benefits experienced and achieved are no longer there, then the membership will reduce in number.

The Implications of Social Groups on Individual Behavior

First, there is social conformity, whereby the members or prospective members of a group have to fit their behaviors and attitudes to be in line with those held by the social group that they are members to or those that they wish to join (Sanna & Parks, 1997). Therefore, it is possible to predict the values and beliefs held by a group and vice versa, by viewing those held by one of the two. In conformity, individuals sacrifice their own beliefs and values and take up those held by the group with the expectation that the group's values are aimed at achieving `the greater good.' Conformity is beneficial when done in social groups that are constructive. When they are done in non-constructive settings, the group members are brain-washed and may undertake activities that are not socially acceptable, with the hope that their group knows best.

Secondly, the performance of individuals can be facilitated to thrive or inhibited due to the sacrificing of the individual values for the group ones when conformity takes place. When the social group is promoting its growth, then the group will set up measures that will help in personal growth and also act as a training ground for the individuals within it to learn all that they need to for them to perform well in their endeavors. Therefore, when the group accepts individual performance and growth, there is learning within the group, as well as the mentorship of the less experienced members by the more experienced ones (Sanna & Parks, 1997). On the other hand, a group can inhibit individual performance or growth when it requires that the members lay down their ambitions and experiences. They are confirmed through training to act as a piece of the conveyer belt, that is, the group and their skills and ability to perform as independent parties are reduced or abolished entirely to create room for group performance. An example of this would be the army training and mindset whereby the individuals are made to behave as members of a bigger picture, and their abilities are either inhibited or modified in ways that would allow for the thriving of the group.

How Group Psychology Has Shaped My Life

From childhood to where I am now, I have found myself being a member of a social group, either voluntarily, involuntarily, or out of circumstances. As a child, group psychology helped me to develop the life skills I needed through being a member of a family, which provided me with the love, care, and attention that I needed while being a member of a social group of pupils enabled me to achieve both individual and group requirements of getting an education. As I advanced in age, social groups shaped my attitudes. They most notably were when I was in my early adolescent years when there was a struggle for belonging, whereby everyone in my age setting was struggling to belong to a social group that was considered `cool' and therefore improving the chances of being popular, thus socially prosperous through getting fame and the treatment that those in higher ranks of the society enjoyed. There was also an `us' vs. `them' mindset, whereby rivalries were established based on whether one belonged to my social group or not. In adulthood, most of the social groups that I am involved in are mostly for specific purposes, I have social groups that provide comfort, love and acceptance, while there are those supposed to provide economic gain, like my work interactions and groups, as well as my family, which has continued to provide assurance, love, and comfort throughout my life.

References

Freud, S. (1975). Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego. WW Norton & Company.

McLachlan, S., Chan, D., Keatley, D., & Hagger, M. S. (2011). Social psychological theories and models. The Psychology of Strength and Conditioning, 38-63.

McLeod, S. (2008). Social identity theory. Simply Psychology.

Sanna, L. J., & Parks, C. D. (1997). Group research trends in social and organizational psychology: Whatever happened to intragroup research?. Psychological Science, 8(4), 261-267.