The psychological internalization of territorial and dominance experiences in conscious and unconscious memory are established through the formation of social identity, personal identity, body concept, or self concept. But these social behaviors and interactions between human individuals play a special role in the study of groups: they are necessarily prior to the formation of groups. Territorial and dominance behaviors in humans are so universal and commonplace that they are simply taken for granted (though sometimes admired, as in home ownership, or deplored, as in violence). Of course, while this is true, it is equally likely that the study of the social (group) behaviors of other animals might shed light on the evolutionary roots of social behavior in people. This disconnect may be the result of the belief that social behavior in humankind is radically different from the social behavior in animals because of the human capacity for language use and rationality. Indeed, vast literature on organization, property, law enforcement, ownership, religion, warfare, values, conflict resolution, authority, rights, and families have grown and evolved without any reference to any analogous social behaviors in animals. Also, they have been largely neglected by policy makers, sociologists and anthropologists. The relevant literature on animal social behaviors, such as work on territory and dominance, has been available since the 1950s. However, these studies and the continued interest have not improved the capacity to influence gang behavior or to reduce gang related violence. There remains in the popular media and urban law enforcement agencies an avid interest in gangs, reflected in daily headlines which emphasize the criminal aspects of gang behavior. The primary goal of gang members was to defend gang territory, and to define and maintain the dominance structure within the gang. Some of the earliest efforts to understand these social units have been the extensive descriptions of urban street gangs in the 1920s and 1930s, continuing through the 1950s, which understood them to be largely reactions to the established authority. Much less attention has been paid to the more ubiquitous and universal social behaviors that do not clearly demonstrate one or more of the five necessary elements described by Sherif. The attention of those who use, participate in, or study groups has focused on functioning groups, on larger organizations, or on the decisions made in these organizations. "How does one describe those social interactions that occur on the way to forming a group?".This definition succeeds in providing the researcher with the tools required to answer three important questions: Development of accepted sanctions (praise and punishment) if and when norms were respected or violated.Accepted norms and values with reference to matters relevant to the group.Established status ( social rank, dominance) relationships.
Social psychologist Muzafer Sherif proposed to define a social unit as a number of individuals interacting with each other with respect to: According to Dunbar's number, on average, people cannot maintain stable social relationships with more than 150 individuals. In a similar vein, some researchers consider the defining characteristic of a group as social interaction. Kinship ties being a social bond based on common ancestry, marriage or adoption. Characteristics shared by members of a group may include interests, values, representations, ethnic or social background, and kinship ties.
The system of behaviors and psychological processes occurring within a social group or between social groups is known as group dynamics.ĭefinition Social cohesion approach Ī social group exhibits some degree of social cohesion and is more than a simple collection or aggregate of individuals, such as people waiting at a bus stop, or people waiting in a line. For example, a society can be viewed as a large social group. Regardless, social groups come in a myriad of sizes and varieties. In the social sciences, a social group is defined as two or more people who interact with one another, share similar characteristics, and collectively have a sense of unity. Individuals in groups are connected to each other by social relationships.
0 kommentar(er)
