INTRODUCTION A brief history of the study of the problem of communication by psychologists The problem of communication in psychology was intensively developed in the 20-30s. XX century The first attempts to illuminate this problem among domestic scientists were made by V. M. Bekhterev in connection with the social

§ 4. Organization of life activities of small social groups Reorganization of the original diffuse social community into an association of interacting and related parties called group formation. The emergence of social groups is associated with social

43. Theoretical approaches to the study of small groups K. Lewin’s field theory is based on the fact that the behavior of an individual is, as a rule, determined by his life and social space. Levin believed that one of the distinctive features of the group was the principle

44. Types of small groups In order of occurrence: a primary group is a collection of individuals united on the basis of direct contacts, common goals and objectives and characterized by a high level of emotional closeness and spiritual solidarity (family, group of friends,

Psychology of small groups Before we move on to the story of the psychology of small groups, we will introduce several concepts. The concept of “group” is interpreted as a community limited in size, isolated from a social whole, or an association of people, related participation in some way

Psychology of small groups The concept of “group” is interpreted as a community of limited size, isolated from a social whole, or an association of people connected by participation in some type of activity based on a system of relationships. The group must have a number of characteristics:

Psychology of small groups The concept of “group” is interpreted as a community of limited size, isolated from a social whole, or an association of people connected by participation in some type of activity based on a system of relationships. The group must have a number of characteristics.

As for social psychology, it turned to the problem of group, mass behavior only several decades after mass psychology, namely in the 30s of the twentieth century. The fact is that the tradition that developed in social psychology prescribed to study social behavior at the level of action of individuals, not groups. Psychologists focused on personal perception, individual attitudes, actions, interpersonal relationships, etc. Moreover, some psychologists even argued that groups, as carriers of a special psychology, do not really exist at all, that groups are some kind of fiction created by the imagination. Thus, in particular, Floyd Allport argued that a group is only a set of values, thoughts, habits shared by people, i.e. everything that is simultaneously present in the heads of several people.
In the history of social psychology, such a point of view was called personalistic or purely psychological approach. Of course, it was not only F. Allport who adhered to it. N. Tritlett and W. McDougall also shared this point of view. Later, this tradition was continued by W. Dixon, M. Sheriff, S. Asch, L. Festinger and even J. Homans at the beginning of their scientific careers. True, the personalist emphasis of these authors was less radical than that of their predecessors.
But, as Barry Collins and Bertrand Raven note, in parallel with personalism in social psychology, a sociological tradition has also developed, coming from E. Durkheim, V. Pareto, M. Weber, G. Tarde. It was adhered to by T. Newcome, C. Cooley, J. G. Mead, T. Parsons, Y. Moreno, J. Thibault and H. Kelly, and a number of other researchers (Collins B. & Raven B., 1969).
Proponents of this approach argued that all social behavior cannot be adequately explained and understood if it is studied only at the level of individual behavior. They insisted that groups were more than random
Semechkin N.I. Social Psychology
a connection of people who share some common goals and values. Therefore, groups and group processes need to be studied in themselves, since the psychology of groups cannot be understood on the basis of individual psychology.
Active research of groups begins in the 30s. XX century. It was then that Kurt Lewin conducted the first laboratory studies of group processes (“group dynamics”) in the United States. In social psychology, thanks to K. Lewin, such concepts as “type of leadership” and “group cohesion” appeared. He also formulated one of the first definitions of a group in social psychology (Shikherev P.N., 1999).
In the 50-60s. There was an intensive convergence of the above-mentioned traditions in social psychology - personalist (psychological) and sociological (structuralist). The existing contradictions between them were gradually overcome. Newcomb, Turner, Converse, Secord, Beckman and others began “building bridges” between psychology and sociology (Collins B. & Raven B., 1969).
It seems that this unifying trend did not arise by chance. By that time, the problem of studying the patterns of group processes had acquired urgent practical significance. P.N. Shikherev notes in this regard that over three quarters of all small group research was funded by industrial firms and military organizations. The interest of government agencies, businessmen and financiers in the study of groups was dictated by the need to improve methods of managing groups - organizations, and through them, individuals.
The rapid growth of group research in the 20th century demonstrates how in demand knowledge about groups has proven to be. The number of publications concerning group problems in world literature for the period from 1897 to 1959, i.e. over 62 years there were 2112 titles. But in the next decade (1959 - 1969) it increased by 2000, and from 1967 to 1972 (in just 5 years) another 3400 studies were added. By the way, the United States accounts for more than 90% of all publications related to group research (Shikherev P.N., 1999).

More on topic 1.1. History of group research in social psychology:

1. 1.5. History of the emergence and development of legal psychology

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

COURSE WORK

Psychology of small groups

Introduction

One of critical issues The problem currently being considered by social psychology is the problem of social groups.

The reality of social relations is always given as the reality of relations between social groups, therefore, for sociological analysis, an extremely important and fundamental question is the question of what criterion should be used to isolate groups from the variety of various types of associations that arise in human society.

“A group is a certain collection of people considered from the point of view of social, industrial, economic, everyday, professional, age, etc. community. It should be noted right away that in the social sciences, in principle, there can be a dual use of the concept “group.” On the one hand, in practice, for example, demographic analysis, in various branches of statistics, we mean conditional groups: arbitrary associations (groupings) of people according to some common characteristic necessary in a given system of analysis.

On the other hand, in the whole cycle of social sciences, a group is understood as a really existing formation in which people are gathered together, united by one common characteristic, a type of joint activity, or placed in some identical conditions, circumstances, and in a certain way are aware of their belonging to this formation

1. Andhistory of small group research

The study by the American psychologist N. Triplett (1887) of the effectiveness of individual action performed alone and in a group is considered to be the first experimental study in social psychology.

Several decades passed before the experimental (more broadly, empirical) direction of research received further development in foreign special psychology. This happened already in the 20s of the 20th century. It was during this period that the craving for empirical research, an empirical boom began in the social sciences, especially psychology and sociology. Dissatisfaction with speculative schemes contributed to the search for objective factors. Two major works of those years (in Germany by V. Mede and in the USA by F. Allport) largely continued the line of research begun by N. Triplett.

F. Allport formulated a very unique understanding of the group as “a set of ideals, ideas and habits that are repeated in each individual consciousness and exist only in these consciousnesses.” F. Allport explains the refusal to consider the group as a definite reality by the lack of adequate research methods.

In the process of accumulating scientific knowledge and developing research methods, the idea of ​​a group as a certain social reality, qualitatively different from its constituent individuals, became dominant.

An important stage in the development of small group psychology abroad, dating back to the period of the 30s - early 40s, was marked by a number of original experimental studies in laboratory conditions and the first serious attempts to develop a theory of group behavior. For example, N. Sheriff conducts laboratory experiments to study group norms; T. Newman explores similar problems, but in the field; V. White, using the method of participant observation, implements a program of “live” groups in the slums of a big city.; A theory of traits, leadership, etc. is emerging. During the same period, based on a study of management activities in an industrial organization, Bernard put forward the idea of ​​a two-dimensional consideration of the group process (from the point of view of solving group problems and from the point of view of maintaining internal balance and cohesion).

A special role in the development of the psychology of small groups belongs to K. Levin, who was the founder of a major scientific direction, widely known as “group dynamics”. Under his leadership, research was carried out by R. Leppitt and R. Walt to study the group atmosphere and leadership styles, changes in the standards of group behavior during the discussion, etc. K. Levin was one of the first to study the phenomenon of social power (influence), intragroup conflicts, group dynamics life.

The Second World War was a turning point in the development of the psychology of small groups abroad - during this period, a practical need arose to study the patterns of group behavior and effective techniques for managing groups.

By the beginning of the 70s, it was possible to distinguish nine major approaches that determined the development of group psychology, such as: sociometric direction, psychoanalytic orientation, general psychological approach, formal model approach, reinforcement theory.

In our country, the study of small groups has a long psychological tradition. Some empirical facts of group behavior of people in combat conditions are contained in the publications of a number of participants in the Russian-Japanese War of 1904-1905. The scientific works and practical activities of V.M. played a decisive role in the development of small group psychologists in our country. Bekhtereva, A.S. Zaluzhsky.

After the Civil War, the development of collective psychology was characterized by an increased interest of researchers in the problem of leadership. Among the numerous developers of this problem we find the names of such psychologists as P.P. Blonsky and D.B. Elkonin, whose views on some aspects of leadership (typology, roles, mechanisms, dynamics) still attract the attention of specialists today.

The works of A.S., published in the 30-40s. Makarenko marked a fundamentally new stage in the development of the group’s psychological and pedagogical problems. Makarenko’s work implements (albeit in a simplified form) the most important methodological principles of studying a social group: activity, consistency, development.

In these studies, the phenomenology of a small group, organization, structure and management (including management and leadership), normative regulation of behavior, cohesion, psychological climate, motivation of group activity, emotional and business relationship, personality in the dynamics of the acquisition of high-quality new formations in connection with the development of this group.

The post-war years are characterized primarily by an empirical focus of work, active acquaintance with foreign experience in the study of small groups, and a rethinking of domestic experience in the study of small groups. During this period, socio-psychological centers are formed, focused on the problems of small groups operating in the field of production, sports, education, in conditions of particular difficulty and increased risk.

The 70s constituted the second stage in the development of domestic group psychology. This decade saw the emergence of several major research approaches, among which the stratometric and parametric concepts of the collective gained the greatest popularity and influence. Both rely on a large body of empirical data relating to a wide range of group phenomena. The topic of domestic research on small groups underwent a significant expansion in the 70s, in which, among others, sections related to management activities, intergroup relations, group ecology, socio-psychological training, group cohesion and effectiveness, psychotherapy.

During the third stage (80s), the trends in raising and solving methodological issues of group psychology, strengthening and expanding its theoretical foundation continued and intensified. A number of final publications appear on certain problems of group psychology: management and leadership, group integration and effectiveness, socio-psychological training, psychological climate, individual behavior in a group, intra-group and inter-group relations.

An analysis of many years of research in the field of group psychology in our country allows us to identify a number of approaches to the study of social group phenomena that have developed over the past decades and largely influence the development of scientific thought. These are the activity approach, the sociometric direction, the parametric concept and the organizational and managerial approach.

2 . Grouppy: their types, sizes, structure

Groups can be: large and small, from two people or more, conditional and real. Real groups are divided into: small and large, official and unofficial, stable and situational, organized and spontaneous, contact and non-contact. Spontaneous - K.K. Platonov called “unorganized groups”.

Groups are made up of people, societies are made up of groups. Individuals, groups and societies are three modern realities, they are interconnected. All groups are more or less specialized. Their specialization depends on the needs of people. Thus, a family in an industrial city has both genetic and educational functions. Other groups perform other functions. Individuals participate in many groups.

You can participate in several groups at the same time: members of a football team, educational institutions. There are permanent, temporary, occasional or sporadic groups. Some groups are created for long-term existence and strive for this: schools, villages, enterprises interested in continuing their business. These are groups that don't want to disappear. Other groups are doomed to short-lived existence (tourists). Some groups are free, others are mandatory. Thus, when we were born, we did not choose a family, an ethnic group or a nation, or other groups that we joined at will: a sports club, cultural societies or a social association. Formal groups are characterized by an organized structure. Social relations here are impersonal (different parties). In an informal group, there are personal, social relationships that are carried out in roles determined by the internal environment and sympathies (these are friends, buddies, a “club of interests”). The primary or limited group is the basis for a person; it is the family. The process of culturalization takes place in it. Secondary groups are large in size and the relationships in them are formalized. Example: a basketball club with several teams is a secondary group. And one team is the primary group.

Social psychology has made numerous attempts to construct a classification of groups. American researcher Yuvenk identified seven various principles, on the basis of which such classifications were based. These principles were very diverse: the level of cultural development, the type of structure, tasks and functions, the predominant type of contacts in the group. However, a common feature of all proposed classifications is the forms of life activity of the group.

For social psychology, the division of groups into conditional and real is significant. She focuses her research on real groups. But among these real ones, there are also those that primarily appear in general psychological research - real laboratory groups. In contrast, there are real natural groups. Socio-psychological analysis is possible in relation to both types of real groups. However, it is the real natural groups that matter most. In turn, these natural groups are divided into so-called “large” and “small” groups. Small groups are a well-established field of social psychology. And yet let's dwell on it.

A small group is understood as a small group whose members are united by common social activities and are in direct personal communication, which is the basis for the emergence of emotional relationships, group norms and group processes.

Laboratory studies of small groups can be brought closer to real-life conditions in two ways: different ways. The first method follows the path of creating experiments that isolate all the major and minor attributes of these situations. The second method of rapprochement follows the path of not only organizing experimental conditions, but also includes studies of real contact groups in “real life” (simulated) interaction conditions. And what is valuable is that in laboratory studies of small groups, the general psychological principle of selecting subjects is observed: they must be of the same age, gender, and similar level of education.

As for large groups, the question of their study is much more complicated and requires special consideration. It is important to emphasize that these “large” groups are also unequally represented in social psychology: some of them have a solid tradition of research in the West (these are mostly large, unorganized, spontaneously emerging “groups”, the term “group” itself in relation to which is very conditional), while others, like classes and nations, are much less represented in social psychology as an object of research. In groups of the first type, the processes occurring in them are well described in some sections of social psychology, in particular in the study of methods of influence in situations outside of collective behavior.

In the same way, small groups can be divided into two types: emerging groups, already defined by external social requirements, but not yet united by joint activity in the full sense of the word, and teams, i.e. groups more high level developments associated with specific types of social activities. Groups of the first variety can be designated as “becoming”.

Traditionally, social psychology studies some group parameters: group composition (or its composition), group structure, group processes, group values, norms, system of sanctions. Each of these parameters can take on completely different meanings depending on the overall approach to the group that is implemented in the study. So, for example, the composition of a group can, in turn, be described according to completely different indicators, depending on whether in each specific case it means, for example, age professional or social characteristics group members. Obviously, a single recipe for describing the composition of a group cannot be given, especially in connection with the diversity of real groups. in each specific case, one must begin with which real group is selected as the object of study.

Sometimes the composition of a microgroup and, accordingly, the structure of relations in it are more complex. For example, in high school you can often find associations of children, including 4-5 people, united by close friendships. However, in most real groups, in practice, such associations of schoolchildren are extremely rare. Therefore, we can assume that groups - dyads and groups - triads are the most typical microgroups that make up any small group. Their careful study can provide a lot of useful information for understanding the more complex system of relationships existing in a small group or team.

The structure of large groups, which include small ones, is varied:

social classes;

various ethnic groups;

professional groups;

age groups (for example, youth, women, elderly people, etc. can be considered as a group).

A real group is selected as the object of study: whether it is a school class, a sports team or a production team. In other words, we immediately “set” a certain set of parameters to characterize the composition of the group, depending on the type of activity with which this group connected. The same can be said about the structure of the group. There are several fairly formal signs of a group’s structure: the structure of preferences, the structure of communications, the structure of power.

The “connection” of the processes occurring in the group and other characteristics of the group is still not a completely solved problem for social psychology. If you consistently follow the path laid down by the original methodological principle, then group processes, first of all, should include those processes that organize the group’s activities.

3 . Group development. General qualities of the group

Directly general qualities of the group:

Integrity is a measure of unity, cohesion, community of group members with each other (lack of integrativeness - disunity, disintegration).

The microclimate determines the well-being of each individual in the group, his satisfaction with the group, and the comfort of being in it.

Referentiality is the degree to which group members accept group standards.

Leadership is the degree of leading influence of certain group members on the group as a whole in the direction of implementing group tasks.

Intragroup activity is a measure of the activation of the group's constituent individuals.

Intergroup activity is the degree of influence of a given group on other groups.

In addition to these qualities, the following are also considered:

the orientation of the group is the social value of the goals it has adopted, motives for activity, value orientations and group norms;

organization - the group’s real ability to self-govern;

emotionality - interpersonal connections of an emotional nature, the prevailing emotional mood of the group;

intellectual communication - the nature of interpersonal perception and establishing mutual understanding, finding a common language;

strong-willed communication - the group’s ability to withstand difficulties and obstacles, its reliability in extreme situations.

The problem of group development was never posed with the goal of finding out the different levels of this development, and, further, revealing the specifics various parameters group activities at each of these levels. At the same time, without such an approach, the picture of the group’s development cannot be complete. A holistic view of the development of a group based on the characteristics of group processes also allows for a more detailed analysis, when the development of group norms, values, a system of interpersonal relationships, etc. is separately examined. From the point of view of social psychology, the study of the characteristics of large social groups comes across whole line difficulties. Wealth of study methods various processes in small groups often contrasts with the lack of similar techniques for studying, for example, the psychological appearance of classes, nations and other groups of this kind. This sometimes gives rise to the belief that the general psychology of large groups is not amenable to scientific analysis. The lack of tradition in such research further strengthens such views. At the same time, social psychology in the precise meaning of the word, without a section on the psychology of large social groups, cannot claim success at all.

Let us also consider the psychological mechanisms of development of a small group.

The psychological mechanisms of small group development include:

· Resolution of intragroup contradictions: between growing potential opportunities and actually performed activities, between the growing desire of individuals for self-realization and the increasing tendency to integrate with the group, between the behavior of the group leader and the expectations of his followers.

· "Psychological exchange" - provision by a group of a higher psychological status to individuals in response to their higher contribution to its life.

"Idiosyncratic Credit" - the group providing its high-status members with the opportunity to deviate from group norms, to make changes in the life of the group, provided that they will contribute to a more complete achievement of its goals

4 . Mehpersonal relationships in groups

small team personality group

During the socio-psychological study of groups and teams, special attention is paid to relationships. They, in turn, are divided into official and informal, relationships of management and subordination (in particular, leadership), business and personal, rational and emotional.

Official relationships are those that arise between people on an official basis. They are fixed by law and regulated by officially approved provisions, relevant rules and regulations. In contrast, informal relationships develop on the basis of personal, or private, relationships between people. For them there is no corresponding legal basis, generally accepted laws, firmly established norms.

Business relationships arise in connection with or about joint work, and personal relationships arise between people regardless of the work being performed.

In rational interpersonal relationships, people’s knowledge about each other and the objective assessments that others give them come to the fore. Emotional relationships, on the contrary, are subjective assessments based on a person’s personal, individual perception of a person. Such relationships are necessarily accompanied by positive or negative emotions; they are not always based on actual, objective information about a person.

Interpersonal relationships in a group can be considered in the form in which they have formed at a given point in time, and in dynamics, i.e. in the process of development. In the first case, the features are analyzed existing system relations, but the second is the laws of their transformation and development. These two approaches often coexist with each other, complement each other, and this is typical, in particular, for their further consideration in the textbook.

Relationships in groups naturally change. First, on entry stage group development, they can be relatively indifferent (people who do not know or know each other poorly cannot definitely relate to each other), then they can become conflictual, and under favorable conditions turn into collectivist. All this usually happens in a relatively short time, during which the individuals composing the group cannot be imputed as individuals. A person in a crowd often ceases to be a person, which is why this phenomenon is called “depersonalization.”

Conformity is a widespread phenomenon that expresses the unconditionally negative influence of a group on an individual, encouraging him to behave dishonestly. And the more united the group is in its psychological pressure on the individual, the more conformist he is forced to act.

The significance of a group for an individual lies primarily in the fact that a group is a certain system of activity, given by its place in the system of social division of labor. The group itself acts as a subject of a certain type of activity and through it is included in the entire system of social relations. In this regard, the group acts as the most complete reflection of the fundamental features of the social system within which it is formed and functions.

Large groups can be conditional, including subjects who do not have direct and indirect objective relationships with each other, may never even see each other, but due to the characteristic on the basis of which they were allocated to such a group, have common social and psychological characteristics (national, age, gender, etc.).

Unlike large groups, small groups are always directly contacting individuals, united by common goals and objectives. Distinctive feature small group is the relative simplicity of its internal structure. This means that in a small group there is, as a rule, an authoritative leader (if the group is unofficial) or an authoritative leader (if the group is official), around whom the rest of the group members unite.

Differentiating groups by the nature of their organization, which regulates the interaction of group members, it should be noted that the official organization presupposes that the structure of the group is predetermined from outside, while the unofficial organization of the group is regulated by internal structural features that are formed as a result of the psychological, rather than legal, interaction of people.

Depending on the tasks facing the psychologist, small groups can be divided

· according to the degree of closeness of relationships between group members into primary (family, close friends) and secondary (educational, industrial contacts);

· depending on the rights that are granted to the participants by the group, into parity (all members of the group have equal rights) and non-parity (there is a certain hierarchy of rights and responsibilities);

· depending on the value of the group for the individual, into membership groups (where the individual is present only due to certain circumstances, although he does not share the attitudes, relationships, etc. existing in it) and reference groups (acting for the individual as a standard, a model for behavior , self-esteem).

The very fact that people are included in groups according to the types of their activities and the nature of social connections becomes so obvious that it requires the close attention of researchers. We can say that the role of small groups is objectively increasing in human life, in particular because the need to make group decisions in production, in life, etc. is increasing.

A small group is considered as a special kind of psychological phenomenon, as an intermediate link in the “personality - society” system.

5 . Co.team as a small group.SamoaPdivision of personality in a team

A team is a group where interpersonal relationships are mediated by the socially valuable and personally significant content of joint activities, and this is its main psychological difference from other groups.

Knowing well the team as a whole and many of its members, the individual consciously and selectively reacts to the opinions of everyone, focusing on the relationships and assessments that have developed in joint activities, on the values ​​that are accepted and affirmed by everyone. The state of an individual in an unfamiliar, random, unorganized group, in conditions of a lack of information about the individuals who form it, helps to increase suggestibility. Thus, if a person’s behavior in an unorganized random group is determined solely by the place that he chooses for himself (most often intentionally), then in a group there is another specific possibility - collectivistic self-determination of the individual. A person selectively relates to the influences of one particular community, accepting one and rejecting another, depending on mediating factors - assessments, beliefs, ideals. Not only the predominance of collectivist self-determination and a decrease in conformist reactions, but also a number of other psychological phenomena distinguish the collective from other communities.

There is a wide variety of groups, which necessitates their classification. It seems most appropriate to classify groups on the basis proposed by E.A. Yablokova (1984):

* by type of ownership;

* by class;

* according to belonging to global areas of society and prevailing function;

* by belonging to the spheres of division of labor and the main type of activity;

* by place in the organizational-level structure;

* by level of development;

* by method of education;

* in size;

* by time of existence.

In general, in Russian psychology, the team is considered the highest form of social organization, based on ideological community and relations of comradely cooperation and mutual assistance of its members. The formation and development of a team is one of the organized group processes. The main factors in forming a team are:

1) wide application group and collective forms of organizing joint activities, creating a system of functional, material, informational, organizational, managerial interconnectedness and interdependence of team members;

2) providing competent leadership and positive

personal example of the leader;

3) purposeful formation of the collective’s self-awareness, its orientation towards self-improvement and transformation into a subject of management and education.

The main or secondary team has its own characteristics. Firstly, it, as a rule, consists of several primary teams and small groups and, most often, is simply numerically larger than them. Secondly, the secondary collective, as a rule, has greater economic and political autonomy.

6 . Eididentification and integration of the individual in the team.Conformal reactions

Collectivistic self-determination arises when an individual’s behavior under conditions of specially organized group pressure is determined not by the direct influence of the group and not by an individual tendency to suggestibility, but mainly by the goals and objectives of the group’s activities and stable value orientations. In a team, collectivistic self-determination is the predominant way an individual reacts to group pressure and therefore acts as a special quality of interpersonal relationships that contributes to the preservation of the goal of the team, and therefore ensures its integration.

In the context of psychological studies of integrative processes in a group, a phenomenon called collectivistic identification was experimentally identified. This is a phenomenon of interpersonal connections, which presupposes such a motivation of relations towards a comrade as a member of a team, when the subject, based on high moral ideological principles, really, effectively treats others as himself, and himself as all others in the team, when the opposition between “I” and “THEY” is removed by the concept of “WE”.

Collectivist integration equally implies a rejection of altruistic forgiveness and a selfish consumer attitude towards others. Humanity, concern for a comrade, as well as demandingness towards him are the norm of collectivist relationships. This creates a psychological climate favorable for the all-round harmonious development of the individual. A violation of the principles of collectivist integration is behavior in which an individual applies different moral standards to himself and to others in the same similar situation and bases his actions on the basis of these standards. The parameter characterizing the fact of maintaining the antagonism between “I” and “THEY” or removing it in the collectivistic principle of “WE” is called sympathy or participation. Sympathy as participation is a collectivistic identification for which some unfavorable incident, as well as the associated experiences of one of the group members, are given to others as motives of behavior that organize their own activities, aimed simultaneously at achieving the group goal and at blocking the action of this incident.

When a specific person, being in a small group, reacts (acts, thinks) in it in exactly the same way as the majority of its members, but not in the same way as he thinks and acts alone in similar cases, such reactions are called conformal. People who exhibit such reactions are considered conformists, because they get used to doing this all the time and conformity becomes a trait of their personality. As studies by numerous scientists dealing with this problem show, conformal reactions constitute a significant part of human behavior in a small group.

From data published by various authors, it becomes clear that a small group has a very strong influence on all its members. This influence is caused and carried out by various psychological mechanisms, in particular, such as “group pressure”. Members of any group experience a constant desire to resolve disagreements with the group. At the same time, each member of the group has a unidirectional tendency to bring his opinion closer to the opinion of the group. The group tends to bring the group member's extreme reaction closer to its own opinion. And if the mechanism of the first is an agreement with the group, then the mechanism of the second is an increase in pressure exerted on a group member declaring a deviant opinion. This can happen in the following way: group members begin to laugh at the advice of the subject and at himself, to doubt the usefulness of his senses and himself in an offensive manner for the subject, etc., which has a strong impact on the degree of conformity of the group member. Pressure can have several channels through which an individual feels it. First of all, this is your own psychological pressure; then - the threat of condemnation; as well as other factors, such as goodwill, indifference or hostility towards the test taker, the possibility of encouragement, rewards for conformity, etc.

Thus, with the emergence of a group, its pressure automatically arises. It is obvious that groups different in composition, age and other parameters potentially exert different maximum pressure. The concept of maximum pressure is extremely important. In studies using the method of the American psychologist S. Asch and other methods, maximum pressure was not created in groups, but in each individual case some unknown pressure, specific from the point of view of the channel of influence, was applied.

Even the same group, when solving the same problems as a group, has a different effect on different individuals within an hour. This can also happen due to the fatigue of the group, and its interest in persuading this particular member of the group to conform, and not another member of the group, and for many other reasons.

The amount of pressure is especially closely related to such an organic property of the group as tolerance. Moreover, apparently, tolerance is a parameter that determines the amount of group pressure, while censure, repression, etc. - only by means of its implementation. It would be correct to say that the amount of pressure is a function of the degree of tolerance of the group.

The pressure of a group primarily depends on its physical parameters - size, composition, uniformity of behavior of its members, etc. For example, the larger the group, the less pressure applied.

7 . Spgroup loyalty

Cohesion is the highest manifestation of the harmony of human relations. But the complexity of human relationships inevitably gives rise to conflicts. Conflict does not always prevent the unity of the people involved in it.

In Russian psychology, cohesion is considered from different positions. Within the framework of the principle of activity, this is done by the A.V. school. Petrovsky. In her developments, cohesion is presented as a process of development of intragroup connections that correspond to the level of development of group activity. At the first level (corresponding to the surface layer of intragroup relations), cohesion is expressed by the development of emotional contacts. At the second level of development (corresponding to the second layer of the structure of a small group - “value-oriented unity”), the basic system of values ​​associated with the process of joint activity coincides. At the third level (which corresponds to the “core” layer of intragroup relations), the integration of group members (and therefore its cohesion) is manifested in the fact that all group members begin to share the common goals of group activity.

The leading way to identify cohesion is to register interactions, communicative acts, mutual choices and preferences. Based on the likes and dislikes of group members.

So, there is a direct connection between the number, frequency and intensity of contacts in a group and its cohesion, and therefore the number and strength of mutual positive or negative choices is evidence of cohesion. At the same time, it is not even assumed that the frequency and number of interindividual contacts, as well as their duration, may be precisely a consequence of group cohesion. The sources of group and individual activity, the formation of attitudes, value orientations and norms - all this, therefore, is considered as a derivative of the level of interpersonal communication and the emotional coloring of communications.

The development of a team goes through a number of stages: nominal group, association group, cooperation group.

From cooperation to the collective, the group goes through a level of autonomy, which is characterized by a fairly high internal unity in all respects. general qualities, except for intergroup activity. It is at this level that group members identify themselves with it (my group). However, an autonomous group can move away from the collective. It is possible for a group to develop in a negative direction, when the development of the group leads it to the position of being closed from outside the group, but characterized by intra-group antipathy, interpersonal egocentrism and selfishness, and aggressiveness.

Social collectivity lies in the fact that, uniting people by common social and production interests, it sets as its highest goal the creation of conditions for the disclosure of the individuality of each member of society and is responsible for the implementation of the full development of the individual. The term “Social psychology” is designated by L.S. Vygodsky: Psychology that studies the social conditioning of the psyche of an individual person,” “Collective” psychology in its concept coincides with the traditional “Everything in us is social, but this does not mean that all the properties of the psyche of an individual a person is inherent in all other members of a given group.” Only some part of personal psychology can be considered belonging this person, and it is this part of personal psychology in the conditions of its collective manifestation that collective psychology studies (the psychology of war, etc.) As a result of the development of its members, the collective itself develops: the brighter and richer the individuality, the higher the level of development of each member of the collective, the more The collective as a whole is capable and humane in its social capacity. The essence of social collectivism is not limited to joint activities to achieve a common goal. And it doesn’t even come down to the ability to live together, resolving all issues together. The state and maturity of social collectivity is determined by the extent to which the social, the public is imbued with personal, individual interest.

Any interaction between people, even with a minimal number, begins with the distribution of functions. Without this, the existence of the group as a single whole is not possible. The group can be understood through the individual, since the human personality is the main material for its creation. A.V. Petrovsky believes that when classifying groups, determine the degree of their development, taking into account the nature of interpersonal relationships that are formed depending on the value-orientation unity of the group (optimal coincidence of goals connecting the individual, group, society).

The hierarchy of real contact groups can be represented as follows:

Diffuse group - in which relationships are mediated not by the content of group activity, but only by likes and dislikes.

Association is a group in which relationships are mediated only by personally significant goals.

Corporation - relationships are mediated by the personally significant, but associative in their attitudes, content of group activity.

Team - interactions are mediated by the personally significant and socially valuable content of group activity (team, crew, crew).

They can optimally combine personal, collective and social goals and values.

Until now, we have assumed that the group as a whole aims to achieve maximum convergence in views and elections, striving to develop a common position. However, we know that this assumption is only partly true. In fact, in many different circumstances, and especially when change is required, the opposite occurs: tension and differences of opinion prevail. A significant number of a person's social attitudes are related to or associated with one or more social groups. The nature of this connection is not simple or clear. On the one hand, a person’s attitudes are associated with social attitudes, usually manifested in the groups to which he belongs. On the other hand, changes in the influence of prestige, opinion leadership, rejection of member groups by those who occupy a low status in them, as well as the influence of external groups on the level of aspirations show that social attitudes are often associated with non-member groups.

As recognition of this fact, the term “reference group,” first used by Haymon, came to be used to designate any group with which an individual relates attitudes. At the same time, a general theory of reference groups began to develop. This concept is used to designate two types of relationships between an individual and a group (Modern foreign SPS - p. 197).

A pattern has been noticed: the closer the group is to the collective in terms of its level of development, the more favorable conditions it creates for the manifestation of the best sides of the individual and inhibition of what is worst in it. And on the contrary, the further the group is from the collective in terms of its level of development (and closer to the corporation), the more more possibilities it represents for manifestation in the system of relationships worst sides personality with simultaneous inhibition of best aspirations.

This is an example of relationships in a microgroup - a dyad. They are represented by close friends and young families. They are most often found in any small group. Couple relationships are always built taking into account relationships with others around them.

For this reason, a more representative model of relationships is the system of relationships existing in the triad microgroup. Their possible options:

8 . Epheffectiveness of group activities

The socio-psychological characteristics of a group can be divided into two classes: formal, describing the structure, ways of organizing joint activities and communication of people, and substantive, directly reflecting the relationships in a given group, its psychology. Formal ones include the number of members in the group, its composition, communication channels, features of the group task associated with the distribution of responsibilities between group members. The content ones include interpersonal relationships, norms, value orientations, roles, statuses, internal attitudes, leadership. The formal features of a group characterize its parameters, which do not directly affect the psychology of people. Along with the content, they influence the success of group work.

The psychological states of people directly influence the work of the group, but they are very difficult to change, and besides, they depend on the formal characteristics of the group, for example, on its composition. The formal aspects of group work are easier to manage, but they only indirectly influence group activity - through the psychology of the people who make it up. Therefore, it is important, among other things, to find an answer to the question of how the formal and substantive characteristics of a group are interconnected.

However, it is possible to arrange the various factors that determine the success of group work according to their logical priority.

In the relationship between the formal and substantive characteristics of the group from the point of view of their joint influence on the success of work, the first place should still be given to the substantive ones, and not all of them, but only those that characterize the group as a developed team. Following them should, apparently, be placed the formal and general substantive characteristics of the group

When deciding whether a group’s activities comply with the requirements imposed on it, in each specific case it is necessary to clearly distinguish between two different levels of such compliance: legal, or normative, and moral, or above the norm The first level is the compliance of the group and the results of its work with the mandatory requirements that are imposed on the group by law, and the second - with social expectations expressed in the form of moral judgments and social ideals. We will call the latter above-standard, meaning by norms officially legitimized, legally formalized standards, and we will consider that above-standard activity is exhibited by a group that takes upon itself additional obligations in front of society and people. moral obligations and selflessly fulfills them.

What are practical ways increasing the effectiveness of group activities?

Determined that group size does not have a direct and unambiguous impact on the success of its activities. However, increasing or decreasing the number of members depending on the group's mission, structure, and relationships can affect performance outcomes. The psychological consequences of increasing or decreasing the number of group members are different and can be both positive and negative.

Positive:

1. As the group grows, more people with a distinct personality appear in it. This creates favorable conditions for a broad and diverse discussion of various issues.

How more group, the easier it is to distribute responsibilities among its members in accordance with their capabilities and abilities in the interests of the cause.

Big by In size, a group can collect and process more information in the same time.

In a large group larger number people can participate in developing and making decisions, weighing and evaluating its positive and negative aspects.

As a group grows, its “talent resource” usually increases. This increases the likelihood of acceptance optimal solutions. For problems that have many alternative solutions, this circumstance seems to be very significant.

Negative:

1. As the number of group members increases, its cohesion may decrease, and the likelihood of formation and disintegration into groups increases. This makes it very difficult to achieve unity on issues discussed in the group.

Big group difficult manage, organize interaction of its members, establish normal business and personal relationships between them.

The growth of a group can lead to increased differences of opinion and strained relationships.

As the group grows, the status and authority of some of its members increases, others decrease, and the psychological distance between them increases. Opportunities for developing and using one's abilities, satisfying the needs for communication, self-expression, and recognition increase for some group members, and decrease for others, which creates unfavorable conditions for personal development.

5. As the group grows, the average contribution of each participant to the results of joint activities usually decreases.

The success of a group's work is greatly influenced by task, standing in front of her. It should be noted that the task determines the structure of interaction between group members in the process of their collaboration, and the structure, in turn, affects its results.

Composition, those. individual composition influences the life of the group So the same as its size and tasks to be solved, through a system of relations that characterize the level of its socio-psychological development as a collective. With the same composition, a group can be psychologically compatible and incompatible, efficient and ineffective, united and disunited

Highly developed groups with a heterogeneous composition - with significant individual psychological differences among the participants - cope better with complex problems and tasks than homogeneous groups. Due to differences in experience, in approaches to solving problems, in points of view, thinking, characteristics of perception, memory, etc. their participants with different sides approach to solving problems. As a result, the number of ideas, various solution options and, consequently, the likelihood of effectively completing the task increases.

The heterogeneity of the composition of the group, if it is poorly developed, complicates mutual understanding and the development of a common position. In such conditions, the heterogeneity of the composition leads to the emergence of contradictions and conflicts in the sphere of personal relationships. Along with streamlining the activities of such groups, it is advisable to divide them into working subgroups consisting of people who are psychologically compatible with each other, to ensure coordination of actions and division of labor between subgroups within the group.

In homogeneous groups, people are usually more satisfied and eager to communicate. This especially applies to short-term associations of schoolchildren. In difficult situations that cause increased emotional, psychological and physical tension, in conditions of shortage of time allotted for solving the problem, with relatively simple tasks top scores Usually they show psychologically homogeneous groups, since here the participants understand each other perfectly. Dependence of group success on leadership style is also directly related to the level of socio-psychological development of the group. For a group that is approaching the level of development of the team, has bodies of self-government, and is capable of self-organizing activities, collegial forms of leadership that involve a democratic, and in some situations even liberal, leadership style will be more effective.

In groups at an average level of development, the best results are achieved by a flexible leadership style that combines elements of directivity, democracy and liberality.

In relatively underdeveloped groups, not ready for independent work who are not capable of self-organization of activities and have complex, conflictual relationships, a directive leadership style with elements of democracy is preferable. The directive style as a temporary measure can also be useful in moderately developed groups when working in difficult situations. It should, however, be remembered that too frequent, psychologically unjustified use of a directive (or authoritarian) leadership style in a moderately developed group negatively affects people’s mood and reduces the effectiveness of group work. This style limits independence and is especially bad for solving creative problems that require deep thinking.

Of no small importance for the successful work of a group are the established personal relationships. Mutual likes and dislikes, the intensity and emotional coloring of interpersonal contacts, and other forms of interaction and relationships have different effects on the effectiveness of group work. Good emotional and interpersonal relationships among group members most often contribute to their successful teamwork. However, in groups of different levels of socio-psychological maturity, these relationships manifest themselves differently. With relatively simple tasks that have become familiar to group members, which do not require large joint efforts from them, and do not cause emotional tension, personal relationships do not significantly affect the results of group work. If a group is faced with unusual tasks that require complex, concerted, coordinated efforts, generating increased emotional tension (especially a stressful situation), then groups that are more socially and psychologically developed perform better in their work. The success of a group also depends on the form of organization of its activities.

Similar documents

Small group. Psychological and behavioral community. Classification of small groups. What are collectivist relations? History of small group research. Transactional analysis communication. Psychology and behavior of the individual as a person.

test, added 11/03/2002


Definition of a small group and its boundaries. Directions in the study of small groups in the history of social psychology. Research programs for real small groups operating in certain type society. School of "group dynamics", construction of field theory.

test, added 11/28/2010


The concept of small groups, their essence and characteristics, composition and activities, study in social psychology. Classification of small groups, their varieties and characteristics. Modern socio-psychological research in the field of small groups, their results.

course work, added 02/10/2009


Personality structure according to Aristotle and Hippocrates. Correspondence of certain mental characteristics to body type. Skills and abilities as components of activity. Habit is the need to perform an action. Classification of small groups, the concept of a team.

test, added 01/27/2010


Theoretical aspect studies of small informal groups, their concept, structure, dynamics, classification and research methods. Empirical analysis of small informal groups in educational institution, characteristics and factors of the emergence of groups.

course work, added 03/20/2010


Social and psychological characteristics of groups. Phenomenology and small group sizes. Structure and typology of a small group. Factors of group performance effectiveness. Features of formal and informal groups. Study of the psychological portrait of the group.

course work, added 02/10/2011


Humanistic theories of personality. Psychology of the small group. Freud's theory of the structure of the psyche. Classification of small groups. Ability, temperament and dynamic traits. Main directions of small group research. Personality structure according to Cattell.

course work, added 03/22/2012


Analysis of the organization of group activities and the interaction of individuals in groups. A small group as a group with external status. Social and psychological support for management of small groups. Features of group activities, management team.

test, added 11/07/2008


Definition of a small group, its most essential features (principles for identifying small groups). Quantitative parameters of a small group - lower and upper limits. Criteria for classification of small groups. A socio-psychological approach to small groups.

abstract, added 09/24/2008


Theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of small groups. Development of interpersonal relationships in adolescent groups. The role and status of the individual in the group. Formal and informal leadership. Diagnosis of interpersonal relationships in a small social group.