Most people realize that quality of life is improved with there are friends and family for support, feedback, and entertainment. As the lifestyles of many become more hectic and centered on careers and technology, consciously creating social connections may fall fairly low on the list of priorities. However, recent studies indicate that ties to other people not related to material gain are one of the most influential factors for predicting longevity, health, and happiness (Leung, Kier, Fung, Fung & Sproule, 2010; Rodríguez-Pose & von Berlepsch, 2013). Aside from the self-perception of being happy, there are other benefits attributed to the importance of being part of a group; the development of empathy promotes involvement in social change, environmental improvement, volunteer activities, and others.
But while there are obviously benefits to belonging to a group, there is also a potential for negativity through pressure to indulge in unhealthy or illegal activities, feelings of isolation with lack of acceptance from all group members, or suffering from stigma from being part of a socially ostracized group. This paper examines the Drive Theory, the Uncertainty-Identity Theory, the Social Identity Theory, the Social Comparison Theory, and the Identity Fusion Theory of social psychology in order to discuss people belonging to groups.
What are social groups and why do people belong to them? As a group separates out from the indistinctive whole of society, there are individual characteristics that cause the members to come together (Halberstadt et al., 2016). Groups do not form randomly, but rather because they identify with other members of the group. The Social Identity Theory states members prefer the company of people who share common characteristics, even though they may be superficial. Levels of social status, education, careers, income levels, degrees of attractiveness, personal and political beliefs, and ethnicity are only a few of the ties that bind individuals together into groups.
The reason people join social groups, either consciously or unconsciously, are because of the human need to belong, to not be alone (Swann, 2014). Members of a social group share information, help each other in defining themselves and establishing a social identity, and encourage each other toward achieving goals. The Uncertainty-Identity Theory of Michael Hogg proposes that people are drawn to social groups to establish a base for their identities and assist in resolving uncertainties. Because the members of the group share characteristics, they are able to offer suggestions and insight into common challenges. In the process, the members develop a group mentality, falling into the definition of the Social Identity Theory.
However, Wood (1989) reprised the Social Comparison Theory to propose that people do not simply use a social group for feedback on their personalities and abilities; they will compare themselves to others in the group sharing the same characteristics and judge themselves based on that comparison. The outcome of the comparison affects the individual’s sense of identity. Unfortunately, there can be a dark side to this comparison within the accepted social group. When happy people compare themselves to members of their social group, they are generally unaffected by the results; unhappy people with depression and low self-esteem, on the other hand, not only made more frequent comparisons but were more influenced by the perceived results (White, Langer, Yariv & Welch, 2006). Therefore, when an individual is a member of a social group, sharing some characteristics, he makes social comparison in order to gain confidence in his abilities by rating himself against an external standard. If the member does not have a clear idea of his abilities and have few internal standards, it is beneficial for him to have the standards of the group with which to compare himself. Individuals with low self-esteem have been found to benefit from this activity and much as positive confirmation of their abilities against the group standard. In addition, some individuals reacted to the feedback concerning the comparison of their abilities against the standard of the group by becoming more competitive, enhancing their abilities from the comparison (Garcia, Tor & Schiff, 2013).
In the process of gravitating to one social group or another, there is an identification that takes place with the members of the group (Greenaway et al., 2015). The influence of the group on an individual is called the “social cure”. Research on the power of the social cure indicates that the benefits a person experiences from being a part of a healthy social group not only promotes positive feelings in the member from the interactions involved, but that a sense of competence and discipline results psychologically. The support of the social group reinforces the identity of the members to encourage successful lives. Sometimes the Drive Theory of the social group motivates members to achieve and standout; other times, if the group is large, some members will stand back and allow other individuals to carry on the identity of the group.
Swann et al. (2014) conducted a study concerning how committed a member of a social group may become and what criteria fostered the most intense feelings of commitment. When asked what groups they would be more willing to die for, the majority stated that smaller groups with a large number of shared characteristics such as friends or family took precedence over death for a country or a cause. Willingness to make extreme sacrifices such as serving in a war zone to support a country were increased by accentuating common characteristics with other members of the larger group which included protecting the smaller family group. The shared characteristics could be either psychological or sociological. The end result was that family was replaced by a pseudo-family of comrades and immediate superiors. The Identity Fusion Theory is based on an individual fusing the identity a person holds of himself with the social identity of the group, creating a single entity socially. As bonds are formed between the members of the group, the fusion becomes intensified and the unity becomes tighter. The bond becomes so strong the members are willing to die for each other. This is the type of mentality fostered by the military in combat units.
The social cure hypothesis is grounded in the theory of social identity which focuses on the idea that how people place themselves and others into categories that are excluded or included in activities based on the social group’s behaviors, beliefs, and character (Islam, 2015). The theory posits that individuals shape their distinctiveness in relation to their chosen social group and this perception encourages their sense of being unique yet still part of the group. Belonging to the social group places a status on being “in” or “out” with the individual’s own group as being the desirable “in” group. The member of the group develops a sense of identification with the collective “we” of the chosen social group, assuming the superior status and positive attributes of the group.
Padilla and Perez, (2003) discussed the concept through the aspect of psychological acculturation experienced by immigrants as they come into contact with the culture of their host country. The model of acculturation presented by the authors contend that there are four supportive elements: 1) Social stigma attached to the group as being alien to the host culture, 2) the social identity the immigrants develop to support each other in the new culture, 3) the values, attitudes, principles, and structures that allow cultural competence for integration, and 4) social cognition based on cultural influences. The primary influence on immigrants in terms of a social cure is the support provided by the group in the face of becoming unintentionally part of a subculture that is socially stigmatized (Shelton, Alegre & Son, 2010). In order to reduce stigma related to culture and race, social psychologists dwell not on differences but similarities between the cultures. Progressive generations show various degrees of assimilation into the host culture, which become their home culture, but many retain the traditions and beliefs brought over to the new country by their parents and grandparents, causing a melding of the two belief systems. As the succeeding generations become more similar to the host culture, the differences are less apparent and stigma lessens. Also, the original inhabitants of the host country become for used to the presence and differences of the immigrants and time decreases feelings of distrust and threat.
While belonging to a social group holds potential for personal and societal good, there are also instances when belonging to a social group that is socially stigmatized and/or behaves in a manner that is illegal or otherwise not acceptable results in harm to the individuals within it. Immigrants frequently experience social stigmatism as a result of their cultural differences. In some cases, the negative influence of an unhealthy social group may occur with “mob” mentality seen on college campuses or during soccer matches in Europe during and after sporting events. Looting, vandalism, and physical acts of violence may be performed by otherwise law-abiding citizens. But when the social group identifies with socially harmful behavior, the negative effects on the members are more serious and long-lasting.
A possible explanation of violent social group behavior is the Drive Theory of social psychology; it proposes that the “drive” component of the theory is the idea that a state of excitement arises that drives the person’s actions. If a drive, or desire, is not satisfied a negative state of being is created and acts on behavior. In essence, it is a type of feedback process where when the desire is satisfied the drive is reduced, but when the need is not satisfied, the drive increases. In addition, the Drive Theory incorporates approval by others; having an audience creates a desire to be dominant or aggressive, sometimes in conflict with the usual behavior of the individuals. Storms and Broen (1966) conducted a study that concluded that there are so many variables influencing behavior that it is not possible to predict outcomes. In some cases the same variable will act on various individuals in completely different ways, either as an inhibitor or a motivator. There is a question as to why a person would belong to a social group that has negative consequences. In the case of immigrants, they are cast into a stigmatized group through their culture and nationality. But members of gangs, self-destructive cults, violent subcultures, and other types of unhealthy social groups band together for the same reasons anyone else melds with a social group: a sense of identity, support, and belonging (Taylor, 2013). Potential members are frequently targeted by the members of the unhealthy social group based on characteristics that would further the goals of the membership. Young people suffering from anxiety and frustration are more likely to be draw to groups that operate outside the boundaries of accepted social behavior. Gangs offer the opportunity for release of aggression, protection on the street, opportunities to make money, and gratification by moving up in rank within the gang. Low-income, minority individuals are susceptible to recruitment based on disrupted homes, lack of income for the family, and negative psychosocial development. Like the military combat unit, the gang member comes to view the other members of the group as “family”, pointing again to the Identity FusionTheory
The information and theories presented do not state that once an individual joins a social group, he becomes an identical member with the others. The involvement of a member is drawn by shared characteristics with the other members, but he will not share all his characteristics with them. Some beliefs may promote more vigorous involvement, such as environmental activists. But a member of a social group may become disenfranchised with the activities of the group and in order to maintain his personal integrity, he will shift alliance to another group more in line with his beliefs or establish a deviant subgroup (Goldenberg, Saguy & Halperin, 2014). A member may also share characteristics with the other members, yet have some traits that cause the others not to fully accept him into the group and his feelings of isolation will prompt him to seek another avenue. The violent behavior associated with gang members compared to non-gang members is attributed to the belief that violence is expected behavior for acceptance as a gang member and reflects the attitudes and beliefs that reflect the “code of the street” and may not have originally been characteristic of a new recruit (Matsuda, Melde, Taylor, Freng & Esbensen, 2013). The violent behavior was fostered by the desire of the member to be accepted into an unhealthy social group.
In conclusion, it is important for the mental and physical health of an individual to be involved in a social group that promotes appropriate behavior through supportive and acceptable activities. The theories discussed join together in explaining why people join social groups and the benefits they may receive. There are lures to becoming a member of a social group that is stigmatized and indulges in unsuitable behavior, but when family and friends offer an acceptable alternative, positive influences may prove more attractive. However, if the member of an unhealthy gang gives precedence to his gang “family” over his relatives, conversion may prove difficult. As social psychologists continue to conduct research into the impact of social groups on individual outcomes, it will become possible to focus attention on methods to encourage the public to choose support groups wisely.
References
Garcia, S., Tor, A., & Schiff, T. (2013). The Psychology of Competition: A Social Comparison
Perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(6), 634-650.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1745691613504114
Goldenberg, A., Saguy, T., & Halperin, E. (2014). How group-based emotions are shaped by
collective emotions: Evidence for emotional transfer and emotional burden. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 107(4), 581-596. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0037462
Greenaway, K., Haslam, S., Cruwys, T., Branscombe, N., Ysseldyk, R., & Heldreth, C. (2015).
consequences for health and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
109(1), 53-74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000019
Halberstadt, J., Jackson, J., Bilkey, D., Jong, J., Whitehouse, H., McNaughton, C., & Zollmann,
S. (2016). Incipient Social Groups: An Analysis via In-Vivo Behavioral Tracking. PLOS
ONE, 11(3), e0149880. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149880
Islam, G. (2015). Social Identity Theory. In R. Cautin & S. Lilienfeld, Encyclopedia of Clinical
Psychology (1st ed., pp. 1781-1783). Wiley-Blackwell.
Leung, A., Kier, C., Fung, T., Fung, L., & Sproule, R. (2010). Searching for Happiness: The
Importance of Social Capital. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12(3), 443-462.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10902-010-9208-8
Matsuda, K., Melde, C., Taylor, T., Freng, A., & Esbensen, F. (2013). Gang Membership and
Adherence to the “Code of the Street”. Justice Quarterly, 30(3), 440-468.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2012.684432
Padilla, A., & Perez, W. (2003). Acculturation, Social Identity, and Social Cognition: A New
Perspective. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 25(1), 35-55.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0739986303251694
Rodríguez-Pose, A., & von Berlepsch, V. (2013). Social Capital and Individual Happiness in
Europe. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15(2), 357-386. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10902-013-9426-y
Shelton, J., Alegre, J., & Son, D. (2010). Social Stigma and Disadvantage: Current Themes and
Future Prospects. Journal of Social Issues, 66(3), 618-633.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2010.01666.x
Storms, L., & Broen, W. (1966). Drive theories and stimulus generalization. Psychological
Review, 73(2), 113-127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0022961
Swann, W., Buhrmester, M., Gómez, A., Jetten, J., Bastian, B., & Vázquez, A. et al. (2014).
What makes a group worth dying for? Identity fusion fosters perception of familial ties,
promoting self-sacrifice. Journal f Personality and Social Psychology, 106(6), 912-926.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0036089
Taylor, S. (2013). Why American boys join street gangs. International Journal Sociology and.
Anthropology., 5(9), 339-349. http://dx.doi.org/10.5897/ijsa12.073
White, J., Langer, E., Yariv, L., & Welch, J. (2006). Frequent Social Comparisons and
Destructive Emotions and Behaviors: The Dark Side of Social Comparisons. Journal of
Adult Development, 13(1), 36-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10804-006-9005-0
Wood, J. (1989). Theory and research concerning social comparisons of personal attributes.
Psychological Bulletin, 106(2), 231-248. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.106.2.231
