Offering the most comprehensive treatment of groups available, Group Dynamics, sixth edition, combines an emphasis on research, empirical studies supporting theoretical understanding of groups, and extended case studies to illustrate the application of concepts to actual groups. This best-selling book builds each chapter around a real-life case, drawing on examples from a range of disciplines including psychology, law, education, sociology, and political science. Tightly weaving concepts and familiar ideas together, the text takes students beyond simple exposure to basic principles and research findings to a deeper understanding of each topic.
group dynamics forsyth 6th edition pdf 62
Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice publishes original empirical articles, theoretical analyses, literature reviews, and brief reports dealing with basic and applied topics in the field of group research and application.
The journal publishes articles examining groups in a range of contexts, including ad hoc groups in experimental settings, therapy groups, naturally forming friendship groups and cliques, organizational units, self-help groups, and learning groups.
Theoretically driven empirical studies of hypotheses that have implications for understanding and improving groups in organizational, educational, and therapeutic settings are particularly encouraged.
The journal publishes articles examining groups in a range of contexts, including ad hoc groups in experimental settings, therapy groups, naturally forming friendship groups and cliques, organizational units, self-help groups, teams, and learning groups. Theoretically driven empirical studies of hypotheses that have implications for understanding and improving groups in organizational, educational, and therapeutic settings are particularly encouraged.
The editor and associate editors, in consultation with members of the journal's editorial review board and ad hoc reviewers, will determine which manuscripts are accepted for publication in the journal. The primary criterion for acceptance will be the scientific quality of the manuscript and the work's impact on understanding groups.
The introduction should be theoretically coherent and compelling, and any relevant literatures should be reviewed. The methods and measures used should be appropriate, the findings should be interpretable and statistically meaningful, and conclusions drawn should be suitable ones given the results obtained. Whenever possible, authors must report effect sizes, indices of model fit, as well as statistical significance. In the case of grouped and/or longitudinal data, authors must indicate how the data analyses accounted for possible dependence due to the hierarchically nested nature of the data.
Group Dynamics is the forum for empirical research on all aspects of groups, and so primarily publishes data-based papers that test hypotheses about groups. Theory papers and literature reviews will be published, provided they meet the standards set by such journals such as Psychological Review and Psychological Bulletin.
Thompson-Hollands, J., Litwack, S. D., Ryabchenko, K. A., Niles, B. L., Beck, J. G., Unger, W., & Sloan, D. M. (2018). Alliance across group treatment for veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder: The role of interpersonal trauma and treatment type. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 22(1), 1-15.
Special issue of the APA journal Group Dynamics, Vol. 24, No. 3, September 2020. This special issue presents six articles that address aspects of how group dynamics and processes have been impacted by, and have the potential to impact, the SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19 pandemic.
Special issue of the APA journal Group Dynamics, Vol. 20, No. 3, September 2016. The issue gathers 8 articles that are structured as tutorials for conducting statistical analyses that are appropriate to capture the unique and emergent properties of groups.
Special issue of the APA journal Group Dynamics, Vol. 14, No. 3, September 2010. Focusing on prevention groups, the issue includes articles about their history, effectiveness, and use in various populations and settings.
Special issue of the APA journal Group Dynamics, Vol. 12, No. 1, March 2008. Includes articles about social networks; group-level evolutionary adaptations; interpersonal and intergroup aggression; social exclusion; and cooperation in large-scale groups.
Special issue of the APA journal Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, Vol. 11, No. 4, December 2007. Includes articles about Glasser quality school; group approaches to reducing aggression and bullying; the efficacy of using music in children of divorce groups; student success skills; counseling and psychotherapy groups; and schools as team-based organizations.
Many different fields and subjects of study have emerged that are involved in group research with artificial agents. Most research has addressed technical challenges to enable robots to identify, keep track of and attend to multiple humans in interactions. It has been researched in online studies and in interaction studies how humans perceive and evaluate robot groups and whether humans tend to prefer robots that were marked as ingroup members. In laboratory settings and observational studies in the field, researchers explored how interaction in dyads deviate from interaction in groups involving robots and humans with the goal to derive relevant concepts that need further investigation such as emotional climate, social signal modelling, group norms and so forth. In addition, robots have been used to positively shape interactions between humans.
The present paper provides a brief overview of three very relevant concepts in group research: entitativity, cohesion and ingroup identification. Subsequently, a theoretical framework integrating all concepts based on theories from sociology and psychology is presented that gives an overview on their relation and differentiation. Social psychology is largely influenced by psychological and sociological theories. Roughly, these two areas can be differentiated by the focus and perspective of research: while psychologists are largely interested in intra- and interindividual phenomena, sociologists are concerned with a societal perspective. In group dynamics research, both perspectives together deliver a holistic understanding and are of equal importance. Influencing theories in the field of group dynamics stem from both areas. In the present paper and the presented framework, the two perspectives are considered through the different levels in which the three concepts entitativity, cohesion and ingroup identification are located: the group-level and the individual-level.
Ip studied the influence of Gestalt principles on perceived entitativity of groups [39]. In their studies they used cartoon aliens to exemplify different constellations. Different from the previously described study by Lickel et al. [53], here, the focus was on finding out which specific cues led participants to see a group as entitative [39]. Thus, participants were given different information on the cartoon aliens, e.g. a group of aliens that was physically similar or that moved synchronously. They found: similar ratings of entitativity resulted from different information. Furthermore, the authors describe the mediating role of perceived common traits for the perception of entitativity when physical similarity was the cue. In addition, the perception of common goals mediated the relationship between synchronous movement and the rating of entitativity [39]. A rather complex relational model of cues is the result of this research. The main finding, however, is that the extent of entitativity was rather independent of the cue given: the ratings were similarly high or low. These findings are consistent with a theory of the formation of perceived entitativity. The theory postulated that a group can be perceived as entitative resulting from two distinct ways: through a categorical construal and a dynamic construal. Depending upon the information an observer has, he or she base their perception upon either categories or dynamics. Both, perceived similarity of group members (a categorical construal) and perceived interaction (a dynamic construal) were found to be antecedents of entitativity [63]. The reported findings suggest that entitativity does not depend on a single cue or factor, but is rather based upon many cues independently, or a combination of them [69].
Many studies between the 1940s and 1970s involve factor analyses disentangling individual and group variables (e.g. [18]). With the use of factor analyses, researchers started to view cohesion as a multidimensional concept. An influential model stems from research conducted in the field of sports psychology where group processes play an important role. This model integrated the multidimensional view of cohesion [20]:
In order to understand how humans start to identify with a group (cf. Sect. 4.3) they are or become a member of, we first have to understand how humans categorize themselves into groups (cf. Sect. 4.1) and why they do so (cf. Sect. 4.2). In the following subsections, first of all, the theories of social identity and self-categorization are explained. Thereafter, ingroup identification is described.
To sum up, SIT gives an explanation on social categorization of oneself and others which serves to mark off different groups and derive a positive social identity. SCT builds upon SIT and gives an insight in the reason why people engage in social categorization. In the present paper, both (social identity and self categorization) are understood as concepts on the group-level. Social identity and self categorization processes depend on differentiating groups [1, 23, 26]. In order to categorize oneself to one group, one has to create an overview over other groups and be able to distinguish them. This is understood as perspective taking on the group-level.
The beforementioned theories (SIT and SCT) are different from the concept of ingroup identification. An individual might readily self-categorize into a certain group, but that does not necessarily imply a strong identification with that group. Hence, the concept ingroup identification, especially, the process of how someone comes to identify with a certain group, becomes relevant. 2ff7e9595c
Comments