Seasons

The concept of psychological types

home

Any organization consists of groups of people. Such groups are not just a random collection of people, but, as a rule, a carefully selected group, trained and prepared to perform certain actions. Therefore, organizational behavior can be viewed from the perspective of group behavior, understood as the totality of actions of groups and the individuals that make them up. If individuals form groups and determine their goals, plans for achieving goals and the means necessary for this, then the groups as a whole, in turn, influence individuals, changing, modifying their behavior, interests and needs. A manager must know the psychological patterns of behavior of people in groups and use this knowledge to ensure the highest performance of the group.

Definition and classification of organizations and groups Before we begin to consider group behavior, it is necessary to define the concepts of “organization” and “group”, as well as give their classifications.

Organization - is a group of two or more people, interacting and dependent on each other, united to achieve common goals. There are formal and informal organizations.

Formal organization is a group of people, structured in a certain way, and possessing special documents (for example, a charter, a certificate of registration), which indicate its goals and spell out its legal status. Such an organization is “registered” in accordance with current legislation. In a formal organization, the behavior of each member must be aimed at achieving common goals.

Informal organization -

Managed and target groups belong to formal organizations, but interest groups and friendly groups are more likely examples of informal organizations.

Let's look at the characteristics of these groups.

Managed group consists of a manager and those subordinates who report directly to him for the work done. So, for example, the director of a school and the 12 teachers who teach there are a manageable group. The group of the senior railway auditor and his assistant belongs to the same group.

Target group also organizationally formalized, it represents an association of people who work together to achieve some common working goal. However, the target group unites not only the immediate hierarchical environment, it can also affect other relationships. So, for example, a specialist in the analytical department of a corporation, when a problem arises, can turn not only to colleagues or the head of the department, but also to a lawyer he knows who works in the corporation, an experienced supplier, the secretary of the head of the department and other persons who, in his opinion, can help help. In turn, he himself is ready to provide help and assistance to these people. The combination of all these people will constitute the target group. It should be noted that all control groups are also target groups; their members work to achieve specific goals.

Interest group is created when there are two or more people whose work interests coincide. So, for example, employees who want to change their vacation schedule are an interest group. Such a group would consist, for example, of people who want to support a fired colleague. Workers campaigning for better working conditions are again an association that has a common interest.

Friendly groups are formed based on the fact that people have one or more similar character traits. These associations often go beyond the boundaries of the organization; they can be formed on the basis of the same ethical principles that people have developed; they can unite workers of the same age or, for example, fans of a football club. Such groups can be formed from those whose political views coincide or unite people whose characters are somewhat similar.

Table 4. Reasons for people joining groups

Informal groups arise to meet the social needs of workers. People tend to communicate with each other, which is why employees often play golf together or drive home from work, have lunch together and drink tea together during breaks. It is important to remember that such groups, although not formal, have a great influence on the behavior of employees in the organization.

It is difficult to single out a single reason that would explain why people unite in such informal groups. Obviously, different groups provide different benefits to their members, which is why one person can often belong to several different informal associations. Typical reasons for people joining groups are shown in table. 4.

Often the group faces problems in which it is difficult to find an objective indicator of the correctness of the solution. Then the opinion of the majority turns out to be the only guideline of behavior for everyone. The situation becomes critical when a group member finds that his point of view contradicts the views of others. Then he has an internal conflict: “to believe himself or the opinions of other people.” The mere presence of other people is enough to change a person’s feelings, emotional states and behavior.

A group is often spoken of as an organism. One of the proofs of this is the readiness of group members to converge opinions and psychological qualities. As a result, the group can solve joint problems.

Often the group faces problems in which it is difficult to find an objective indicator of the correctness of the solution. Then the opinion of the majority turns out to be the only guideline of behavior for everyone. The situation becomes critical when a group member finds that his point of view contradicts the views of others. Then he has an internal conflict: “to believe himself or the opinions of other people.” The way out of this difficult situation depends on a number of circumstances, among which the main ones are the following:

• complexity of the task that has to be solved: increasing the complexity of the task leads to a decrease in self-confidence;
• experience in solving this type of problem: if there is a lot of experience, the task is solved easily, but if there is little experience, then difficulties arise with orientation in the task - focus on yourself or on other people?
• the authority of an individual in a given group: if it is high, then you can rely on your abilities, but if it is low, then the opinion of others may become preferable;
• the significance of the group for the person making the decision: if a person respects the opinion of the group, and he needs it, then the issue is resolved by agreeing with the opinion of the group; if the group is not significant, the choice is focused only on one’s own opinion.

Typically, differences of opinion at the beginning of group formation are greater than when the structure of relations is formed. To a large extent, the convergence of group members’ opinions is influenced by common tasks. In the minds of everyone, they create a willingness to agree rather than challenge the state of affairs. True, exceptions are possible if there is a struggle for leadership in the group. This struggle dictates its own rules of behavior to the group members. The struggle for leadership often divides the group into two, with each having its own leaders. This situation is called dual leadership. The emerging factions feed the egos of the leaders, and they complete the split of the group. In this case, a single task takes on two meanings - separate for each of the subgroups. Convergence of opinions becomes the most problematic in such a situation.

The basis for the change and convergence of opinions is the mechanism of imitation and suggestion. Academician V.M. Bekhterev believed that imitation and suggestion are often poorly understood by a person. People differ in the degree to which they are aware and critical when they have to change their own judgments. One, for example, is aware of the fact of contradictions and agrees with the opinion of the group or leader-manager, but then returns to his own judgment. Another, unaware of the effect of imitation and suggestion, is so susceptible to influence that he ceases to notice the replacement of his own judgment with someone else’s (group, leader). Researchers identify the following circumstances that determine the degree of compliance of group members:

1. The maximum inspiring pressure on a group member is exerted by three people with a common opinion. Especially if these persons have authority.
2. The influence of a group depends on a person's position in the group. Those least susceptible to suggestion are those who are weakly dependent on the group, but highly valued by it. Usually these people's abilities are greater than those of the rest of the group, which forces the majority to follow a highly valued leader. It is easier for the more capable to choose between the groups in which he has to function.
3. The unity of opinions is stronger in groups with a democratic system of relations than in authoritarian groups, but there is more order and precision in the authoritarian type of groups. This happens because in groups with democratic relations, its members switch to interpersonal communication. If the situation is far from extreme or critical, then the effectiveness of joint activities decreases. The authoritarian system of relations turns out to be more effective in difficult, crisis situations. A more rigid distribution of roles and functions not only streamlines everyone’s behavior, but also increases the accuracy of solving management problems.
4. Opinions expressed out loud have a greater influence than those received in writing. The exception is documents from higher authorities, which are of particular importance in authoritarian societies. Living witnesses are always more valuable, because papers can be destroyed.
5. Compliance with group pressure depends on the order in which opinions are expressed. Group members who express their opinions earlier than others have a greater influence on the behavior of others. The unity of opinions of a large part of the group members has a stronger influence on the statements of the last speakers. To increase the inspiring effect, a leader or manager can express his opinion not only at the beginning, but also sum it up at the end, choosing the optimal line of behavior.
6. Susceptibility to influence from others is significant if differences of opinion exist but are minor. Optimal is a certain degree of reliability of discrepancies, not reaching the point of absurdity.
7. In cohesive groups, the pressure of a single opinion on individual members is stronger than in less cohesive groups. The established positive relationships bind group members with obligations to each other. In less cohesive groups, members have little to value other than their own opinions, so they experience less pressure from each other.
8. With the threat of punishment, the effect of public consent and internal rejection most often occurs. Dissent, suppressed in every possible way by totalitarian regimes, leads to external unanimity, which ensures the self-preservation of group members and society as a whole. However, this external unanimity makes people indifferent, passive, and lacking initiative, which leads to a gradual decrease in labor efficiency with external well-being.
9. The opinion developed by the group is more stable than the individual opinion of ordinary group members. Group opinion becomes the norm, a “role model.” It is no coincidence that legislation at the stage of completion and adoption requires mandatory discussion and voting.

• The first type of independent people is characterized by complete trust in their own intellectual abilities and life experience. Usually these are people of the older generation with high authority in the past, and even more so in the present.
• The second type of independent people is characterized by their withdrawal from group pressure while maintaining their own opinions. This behavior is possible in the presence of other significant groups and authorities.
• The third type of independent people is characterized by significant tension and doubt in the conditions of choice of decisions. But still, as a rule, they remain unconvinced.
• The first type of dependent people shows sufficient confidence in their intellectual abilities, but the reluctance to be rejected by the group forces them to accept other people's judgments. They can be considered prudent people.
• The second type of dependent people relatively easily accepts the point of view of the majority, because they have little confidence in their own intellectual capabilities.
• The third type of dependent people does not notice that their opinion is determined by the point of view of the majority.

Exposure to group influences depends on the type of professional activity. Technological specialists trust their own knowledge more, and the group’s opinion is less important to them. Humanists and especially social scientists are less confident in the reliability and truth of humanities knowledge and are more likely to change their judgment under conditions of group pressure.

A person’s compliance to group influences also depends on his psychological qualities. Persons with the following personal characteristics are more suggestible:

• anxious, emotionally unstable, dreamy and sophisticated
• having a type of temperament close to melancholic and slightly less often to choleric (stable sanguine and phlegmatic people react poorly to the opinions of others, even authoritative people);
• unsociable, responsible and loving order;
• having original creative thinking and good indicators of theoretical and practical intelligence, although this may seem paradoxical.

Civilized relations between entrepreneurs and managers should be based not on immediate benefits, but on the future. To do this, you need to find psychologically acceptable options for business relationships.

The creation of favorable conditions for group work is facilitated by a positive emotional atmosphere that reduces psychological tension, reflection, as well as mastery of the basic rules of behavior during classes. The basic rules of the group include:

1) activity, involving the inclusion of all participants in the work of the group, the manifestation of intellectual, emotional, and motor activity;

2) communication based on the “here and now” principle, which involves addressing the present, what worries the participants right now, discussing what is happening in the group;

3) identifying positive personality traits each participant;

4) sincerity and trust in communication;

5) inadmissibility of direct assessments person (not the qualities of the participants are assessed, but only their actions);

6) confidentiality everything that happens in the group.

Let us dwell on the procedural aspects of training groups. The optimal group size, as indicated by training researchers, is 10-12 people, who are included in the lesson based on the principle of voluntariness, i.e. free choice of this type of training. The practice of uniting people of different gender, age, education, and degree of acquaintance in one group justifies itself. A group of participants working in the same institution or organization can also be created, but it is more difficult to work with. The cycle of training sessions is usually designed for 30-50 h., average duration of each lesson - 3 h. In some cases, marathon classes are held, the duration of one lesson is 8-12 h.

Training technologies are widely described in the literature. In its most general form, personality-oriented trainings are conducted as follows:

The training is conducted by two educational psychologists; at the very beginning of the lesson they introduce each other;

An introduction to the training issues is provided, ensuring openness and trust among the participants towards each other;

Willingness for mutual cooperation and motivation to achieve training objectives are formed;

Psychotechniques of new professional behavior and the development of socially and professionally important skills, qualities and abilities are being mastered;

The professional and psychological potential of specialists is being updated;

Correction of the professional and psychological potential of the specialist’s personality is carried out.

When conducting training sessions, leading educational psychologists are required to comply with the ethical rules and code of a practical psychologist.

The presenter plays an important role in all types of psychotechnologies. He acts more as a facilitator - a person who facilitates the manifestation of initiative and personal interaction of participants, providing psychological support, rather than evaluating. The presenter himself acts as a model of a self-revealing personality, talking about himself openly, like other participants. Showing attention and care, he creates an atmosphere of acceptance and empathic understanding in the group.

The implementation of personality-oriented communication determines the use of pedagogical facilitation technologies 1, which take into account as much as possible the psychological characteristics of all aspects of interpersonal communication. The main principles for selecting such technologies are:

Ensuring cooperation of all educational facilities;

Building communication on a parity basis;

Recognition of each participant’s right to their own position and opinion;

Recognition of each subject of communication as a unique personality;

Open expression of one's own feelings and emotional experiences;

Facilitation organization of communication space 2.

Let us present technological methods of training sessions that are adequate to these principles.

The teacher reacts not to the superficial emotional reactions of the students, but to their hidden feelings, thereby helping to understand why the students experience such feelings and experiences. Pedagogical empathy includes the following levels:

Rational (understanding the emotional state);

Emotional (empathy for the student’s condition);

Effective (providing real assistance in overcoming negative emotions);

Anticipatory (forecasting possible emotional states).

An effective facilitation technique is the teacher’s self-presentation, his self-disclosure of his life and teaching experience. The use of this technique contributes to the acceptance by members of the training group of the personality of the teacher and thereby makes it possible to remove the psychological barriers of alienation between all subjects of personality-oriented pedagogical communication.

K. Rogers identified three levels of humanization of any interpersonal relationships that ensure constructive personal changes: 1) non-judgmental positive acceptance of another person; 2) active empathic listening; 3) congruent (adequate, genuine, sincere) self-expression in communication. Followers of K. Rogers emphasize that learning should become a means of personal growth for students and teachers.

The results of personally oriented professional trainings and the criteria for their effectiveness are:

Increasing autopsychological, psychological and professional competence;

Transition of specialists to a new level of professionalism;

Development of readiness for self-change, self-development and self-realization in the field of professional activity;

Creating an optimistic professional perspective and mastering techniques (technologies) of professional self-preservation;

Overcoming destructive professional changes and preventing the loss of meaning in professional life.

Conducting person-oriented professional training requires compliance with a number of ethical rules, and from participants - a vigilant and careful attitude to the training with a clear awareness of what kind of impact will be exerted on them, what consequences this may lead to. From this point of view, it is important that when conducting professional training, its goals and objectives are precisely specified, that is, it is determined exactly what professional qualities of a specialist it is aimed at improving.

Let's consider the main ethical contradictions,

1 arising during trainings that can become sources of value and moral problems:

Between the interests of society, organization, enterprise and specialist, who cannot always

coincide;

Between the right of a specialist to professional growth, a career and the inability to realize this need based on the results of the training;

Between the high goals and objectives of the training and the pragmatism of the participants seeking to receive specific recommendations and clear instructions.

Expressing the feelings of the group.

Summarize what is being formed as a feeling of the group. Describe group members' reactions to ideas and solutions to problems.

R. Schindler described the four most common group roles and one less common role:

1. Alpha - a leader who impresses the group, encourages it to be active, to take action, draws up a program, directs it, gives it confidence and determination.

2. Beta is an expert who has specialized knowledge, skills and abilities that the group always requires or values. The expert analyzes and considers the situation from different angles; his behavior is rational, self-critical, neutral and indifferent.

3. Gamma - predominantly passive and adaptable members of the group, trying to maintain their anonymity, most of them are identified with alpha.

4. Omega is the most “extreme” member of the group, who lags behind the team due to inability, some difference from the rest, or fear.

5. R – adversary, oppositionist, actively opposing the leader. M. Belbin's research suggests that eight roles are needed to create a truly effective group. Among them:

Chairman. This is the person who manages the team and coordinates its actions. He must be disciplined, purposeful and balanced. This is someone who knows how to listen and speak well, judge things and people correctly, and understand the needs of other people.

Organizer. Unlike the organizers, the people at the heart of a company are inward-looking, but intellectually they have a great influence on others. They are a source of original ideas and proposals. At the same time, they can be inattentive to details, take offense at criticism, are often silent, and are reserved in nature.

Controller-critic. He has an analytical rather than a creative mind. Analyzes ideas meticulously and has the ability to see weaknesses in arguments. Less sociable than others, hides his information, stays away from the team, but may be necessary for quality control. Reliable, but can be tactless and unemotional.

New employee pool researchers. Such people are popular team members, extroverts, they are sociable and risk-taking, they bring new contacts, ideas, and improvements to the group. However, they are not creative people and do not hold the reins of power in their hands.

Workaholics. They are practical organizers of all company activities. Turn ideas into achievable tasks. Methodical and efficient in their work, they inspire confidence. They are not leaders, but they are skillful and efficient workers.

Team coordinators. Such employees unite the entire team, supporting others, listening to them, encouraging them, delving into everything, understanding everything and bringing a sense of harmony and agreement to everything. They are popular and pleasant, but do not strive for competition.

Determinator-destroyer. He checks details, worries about schedules, annoys others with the need to do something urgently. His persistent, systematic work is very important, but not always popular.

Too many employees in one role means there is an imbalance, and when the number of roles is too small, tasks will not get done. In a small team, therefore, one person will have to fulfill more than one role. A complete set of roles is important when there are rapid changes in the workforce, technology, product or market. More stable groups can do without a full set of roles. There may be many other roles in groups that are not always reducible to these basic ones.

The structure of a group can be revealed using sociometry.

Group cohesion

This is a measure of the mutual attraction of group members to each other and to the group. Cohesion is expressed in the desire to remain in the group, in the desire to cooperate in solving common problems and to preserve the group. In general, the better a group meets people's needs for emotional interpersonal connections, the more cohesive it is. The more united the group, the tighter the group control over the views and actions of its members. A close-knit group creates an atmosphere of attentiveness and mutual support. Cohesion generates emotional attachment among group members and a loyal attitude to common tasks, and provides stability to the group. A highly cohesive group performs well and can improve the performance of the entire organization. However, if the group's goals and the organization's goals diverge, a high degree of cohesion can negatively affect the productivity of the entire organization.

The negative side of excessive group cohesion may also be the reluctance of its members to think critically and make serious decisions as a result of the development of the process group unanimity. This tendency arises from the tendency of group members to quickly agree on opinions without considering the possibility of error.

To increase the positive effects of cohesion, the leader of the organization can periodically hold meetings to explain the group's goals and their relationship with the goals of the organization, creating an environment where each group member can see his contribution to achieving these goals. Cohesion is also promoted by: satisfying the personal needs of group members in the group or through the group; consistency of the goals of the entire group with individual needs and goals; mutual dependence when working on specific tasks; benefits arising from group membership; sympathy between group members; motivation of group members; friendly, inviting atmosphere; rivalry with another group or groups; enmity, hostility and negative attitude of society (closedness of sects and factions); prestige of the group.

Group voltage

As a result of the interaction of group members who differ in views, command patterns, plans and needs, tension arises in the group. It can be expressed in aggressiveness, irritation, rejection, fear, alienation, and in some cases, lead to open conflict.

However, tension in the group also plays a positive role as a factor motivating group members to activity and change. Effective group activity requires a dynamic balance between cohesion and tension.

Phases of group development

The following stages of group development are distinguished: the formation stage, the stage of psychological tension, the normalization stage, and the activity stage.

1. Formation stage. Once a group is formed, its members carefully explore the boundaries of acceptable behavior in the group. This is the stage of transition of an individual from the status of an independent person to the status of a member of a group. Group members experience feelings such as excitement, impatience, optimism, suspicion, apprehension, and anxiety about future work and how to interact with other group members. They take the initial, tentative steps of adjusting to the group, trying to define the task and decide how it will be accomplished, trying to determine how to behave in the group and how to deal with the problems of the group; decide what information is needed and how it should be collected.

Hiddenly or openly, group members are looking for a leader, waiting for explanations of goals, plans, craving activity, they are busy discussing secondary or well-known things, abstract concepts and problems, signs or issues that are not related to the task. There is “small talk”, facade communication, refusal of personal self-expression.

2. Stage of psychological tension– boiling stage. Probably the most difficult stage for the team. It is as if the members of the group took a jump into the water and, thinking that they are drowning, begin to thrash around. They realize that the task is more difficult than they expected and become short-tempered, touchy, blaming, or overly fanatical. At the storming stage, group members typically:

· resistance to task performance and new approaches to quality improvement (other than those that each individual member finds comfortable to use);

· sharp fluctuations in attitude towards team members and the success of the project;

· continued discussion of problems among group members, even when they agree on a specific outcome;

· defensiveness and competitiveness; breakdown into factions and choice of allies; struggle for leadership;

· setting unrealistic goals;

· perception of “hierarchy”;

· Lack of unity, increased tension and jealousy.

Many team members feel pressure and tension, but gradually they begin to understand each other.

3.Normalization stage. During this stage, group members determine their level of loyalty and assign responsibilities. They accept the group, its basic rules or norms, roles in the group and the individual characteristics of group members. Emotional conflict is reduced, initially competitive relationships are replaced by more cooperative ones. In other words, because team members realize they are not going to sink, they stop thrashing around and start helping each other stay afloat.

The normalization stage is characterized by the following factors:

· acceptance of group membership;

· the emergence of a new ability - constructive expression of criticism;

· mutual assistance and focus on getting the job done;

· an attempt to achieve harmony, avoiding conflict;

· more friendly, trusting attitude towards each other, people share personal problems;

· a sense of group belonging, compatibility, common spirit and common goals;

· establishing and maintaining the ground rules and “norms” of the group.

As team members begin to embrace their differences, they now have more time and energy to devote to the project as a whole. In this way they are able to make significant progress.

4. Activity stage. At this stage, the group begins to effectively complete assigned tasks. Group members settled their relationships and set expectations, identified and accepted each other's strengths and weaknesses, and learned what their roles were. Now they start working - diagnosing and solving problems, making the necessary changes.

This stage of activity is characterized by the following data:

· group members understand personal and group processes, strengths and weaknesses of each other;

· constructive self-change;

· satisfaction with the group's progress;

· working with problems; ability to anticipate and prevent problems;

· the group is important for its members;

· members of the group perceive all its problems closely.

Now the group truly becomes an effective unit of the organization and begins to work productively.

The duration and intensity of these stages varies from group to group. Sometimes the fourth stage is achieved in one or two meetings, sometimes it can take months and years.

Each social group performs a certain system of roles in the life of the organization, the significance of which depends on the significance of each of its members. And the latter can be either exaggerated or reduced. It depends on the character of the person, the environment from which she came to the group, the level of her interests, and the like. A person joining a group must clearly and realistically (at least for himself) define his intentions, rights and responsibilities in relation to other participants. However, as the American sociologist D. Turner notes, even if this or that person determines “his” place in a given group, this does not mean that it will be easy for it to resolve its issues in the context of the life activities of other members. It is necessary that the place and functions of a given person are clear to other members of the group, although their number will be determined by several individuals.

Types of behavior in groups

Each of us, writes D. Turner, has many roles in life and, in accordance with them, many “faces” and types of behavior. For example, we behave completely differently at work than in the family, even differently among friends, etc. A lot can be said from how a person behaves in a small group: whether she has her own dignity, or her no, either warm-hearted and polite, or boorish, prone to compromise, or such a “truth-seeker” that he causes others to have a heart attack, etc. It is in a small group that the essence of a person is determined.

For example, the management of the organization is interested in a specific person - a member of a small group, they set her up as an example to follow, reward her with awards, etc., but in a small group there is a completely different opinion about the “advanced person”, and sometimes they don’t understand how they cannot notice this “above.” Research shows, writes D. Turner, that over time a person with a “double” and sometimes “triple” face suffers failure in life, because the skill (primates line “requires enormous nervous effort.

The question may sometimes arise: where is such a person really present - in a small group or in the office of the director of a company, in a family or somewhere else? She is herself, says Tarner, in the first, second, and third cases. Man is a social being; she accumulates within herself everything that exists in society. But if the majority of people, under the influence of family, school, literature, art, religion, etc., form in themselves everything that is better, more humane, and fair, then the other part is the worst features of social life.

There is also a third type of people, writes Turner. There are fewer of these, and it is they, when their essence is revealed, that cause disgust (at least outwardly) and condemnation not only of the first, but also of the second part of society.

Representatives of this type of people are sometimes quite sincerely convinced that they have nothing to hide their behavior. This is life, and people, they believe, must adapt to different life situations. Life is an ocean, your birth throws you into it, how and where you go is your business.

When a person comes to a specific group, she encounters a more or less established system of values, which can sometimes differ significantly from those found in the organization as a whole. To become a full member of a group, a person must accept the “rules of the game” of its other members. Of course, it also happens that some values ​​are accepted even with pleasure, but we cannot agree with others. In this case, notes Jan Turovsky, a person must make a choice: either “break” himself and submit to the common values ​​of the group, or leave it. You can, of course, live in a group and with different “persons,” as mentioned above, but this is beyond the power of an honest, decent person.

Normative and relative comparison groups

Each person joining a group tries to determine a priori: a) who does this group represent? b) who will she be in this group? In Western sociology, two types of groups are defined: normative and relative comparison.

The term “comparison groups” was first introduced into sociological literature in 1942. X. Newman. He came to the conclusion that every person, being a member of a group, from time to time asks himself the question: what is the status of our group? Who am I here? who were we before and who can we become?

According to the results of a study by R. Merton, L. Festinger, S.A. Streuffer and others, a normative comparison group is a group in which its members determine their status in accordance with their origin, level of education, economic position in society, political and government elite and the like. For example, a Polish nobleman, who knew well who his ancestors were, was still 70-80 years ago ready to work in low-paid mental work, but in no case to engage in trade, much less physical labor.

Another example. The times are still not far off when Soviet people reasoned in a similar way: there is bread, then there is bread, chosen for holidays and weekdays, there is order in the family, there is no war. What else is needed? For most people in our country today, this is an achievement, but it is also no secret that the norm for the owner of several companies is to own several well-furnished apartments, an estate house, a prestigious foreign car, and the opportunity to vacation abroad.

Employees of higher education (for example, faculty), civil servants, army officers, diplomats, and the like want to have the appropriate status (and not necessarily material status).

A relative comparison group is a group in which people compare their previous status with their current one. American sociologist Theodore M. Newcomb, revealing the content of comparative comparison, only that a person who came from a rural environment and entered the ranks of the intelligentsia, all the time in his daily behavior will not only affirm his present, but also try to remember his former as little as possible status.

It is known that back in the 30s of the 20th century, American blacks experienced echoes of the previous racist attitude towards them by a significant part of the white population. But the situation changed dramatically when a black man ended up in the American army. Here he was no different from his white-skinned colleagues in the platoon, company, battalion, etc. Even the most notorious racist could not afford to somehow offend a black soldier and only because he wore the uniform of a defender of the state who proclaimed democratic rights and freedom.

Some sociologists, in addition to groups of normative and comparative comparison, also distinguish groups of aggregate comparison. For example, N. Goodman is trying to prove that some comparison groups perform not one, but more functions. For example, a family, he believes, is a combination of three comparisons: parents teach their children, shape their responsibility before God and the law (normative comparison), they also serve as a model for them (comparative comparison), and express their approval or dissatisfaction with their children’s behavior. The latter, Goodman believes, is a cumulative function.

Even in very small groups, traits of the human psyche begin to appear that are hardly noticeable in an individual person. Her socio-biological needs begin to emerge, the uniform and the struggle for leadership become more important, the concept of “we” and “not us” arises, which acquire significant strength in large groups.

Crowd behavior

When communicating with a large mass of people, you need to be careful. Through careless behavior, enormous forces, as noted by Russian scientist AM Zimichev, can be wasted, and, sometimes, even a small effort will cause big changes. The scientist considers the following features of the psychology of large masses of people:

1. In a crowd, individual characteristics between people become equalized, barriers that hold them back in everyday life are removed.

2. Prerequisites for the emergence of a uniform arise; even if it is not introduced, it will appear on its own.

3. Increased tendency to emotional disturbances. Feelings are easily born in a crowd: laughter, excitement, anger, fear, delight, joy. One thing can turn into another, and their power, multiplied by the power of the crowd, becomes destructive.

4. The role of the example of others as a motivation factor is increasing. If everyone around him does one thing, then an individual will do the same, even if she alone did not do it.

5. The ability to become more active and follow the leader appears. As an example, a herd of sheep runs after the leader.

6. It becomes possible to focus on completing an impossible task. A crowd can be raised to build a low structure, although calls to destroy something become more effective; there are no limits to what is possible here.

7. Rejection of evidence, logic and common sense appears. If a crowd were to storm the White House, a few security guards would not stop it. Members of the crowd are ready to break their heads, and it would be good if only for themselves.