Blackwell Reference Online

Extract

A favorite childhood story is Hans Christian Andersen's tale of the Ugly Duckling. For those whose memories have faded, the story recounts the perils of an ugly fowl whose characteristics set him apart from his siblings. This unsightly bird just did not fit in with the flock. He was criticized, rejected, and mistreated. However, as time passed and the ducklings matured, the ugly duckling grew into a beautiful swan, becoming the envy of all his peers. In many respects, this has been the fate of “the group” in social psychology. With its focus on the individual, social psychology has had a difficult time accepting the group as a true member of the flock. Although the group has been a part of social psychology since the field's beginning ( Triplett, 1898 ), it has occupied a rather tenuous position. Social psychologists have scoffed at the notion of a “group mind” ( Le Bon, 1895/1960 ). Allport (1924) observed that nobody ever tripped over a group, an insult questioning the very existence of the group. The rejection of the group became so complete that Steiner (1974) entitled an article, “What ever happened to the group in social psychology?” For a time, the group was banished to the foreign lands of organizational psychology and sociology. But the group could not stay a stranger for long. It wormed its way back into the fold, but its rebirth had a unique twist. Early definitions ... log in or subscribe to read full text