Intergroup Relations- a Communication and Psychological Studies

Intergroup Relations- a Communication and Psychological Studies Perspective The society that we live in today is comprised of many groups, and many units in the society are characterized as groups, such as the family, political, economic, and other important institutions that functions in the society. Within a group exists relationships that can be constructive or destructive to the functions of the group. Group relations can be explained using the communicative and psychological perspectives.

This paper will discuss the dynamics of group relations in relation to these two perspectives, and analyze how relations are established within a group, and how similarities and differences within a group can cause conflict or cooperation within its members, contributing to the development or disintegration of a group. In the psychological perspective, group relations are focused in the study of social psychology. In social psychology, individuals are studied according to their relationship in the society.

One important concept studies in the psychology of group relations is the concept of group influence. Group influence includes the primary motivations and behaviors of individuals when it comes to accomplishing group performance. A psychological study conducted by Norman Triplett theorized that individuals belonging in competitive groups perform better than individuals who do not belong to any group or affiliation (Santrock 2001 365). When the term 'group' is mentioned, this means that a group is any group of reference that an individual may treat as influential to him or her.

Triplett's study on social psychology led to the formulation of other theories from psychologists that characterize the relational dynamics in a group. Three (3) important concepts were introduced in social psychology, the concepts of: self-facilitation, social loafing, and deindividuation. Social influence is defined as "the phenomenon that occurs when an individual's performance improves because of the presence of others." Social influence looks at groups as a functional entity wherein there is constructive development in an individual.

This concept also supports Triplett's theory about how people are motivated to perform effectively and at their best if they have someone to accomplish it, competitively or cooperatively. Social loafing, on the other hand, is the opposite of the concept of self-facilitation.

Defined as the "the tendency (of an individual) to exert less effort in a group because of reduced monitoring." This attitude in group members can be destructive and dysfunctional to the group's objectives and aims, and does not develop the knowledge and skills of each member; rather, social-loafing encourages dependency on others, decreases responsibility and self-reliance, and lowers group performance.

Finally, the last concept in group relational dynamics is the concept of 'deindividuation,' which "occurs when the presence of a group results in the loss of personal identity and a decrease in responsibility." Like social loafing, deindividuation can be dysfunctional to both the member and the group because the member loses his or her sense of individual personality, while group performance lowers because of the member's too much reliance and dependency on the group (Santrock 2001 566).

These are the concepts that characterize the psychological aspects of group relational dynamics in a society. It is evident that psychology focuses more on the individual attitudes of each member, and how their attitudes and behavior affect the group holistically. Thus, through the theory on self-facilitation, the group performs constructively and its members cooperate with each other for the successful accomplishment of a group task.

Meanwhile, both social loafing and deindividuation are theories that explain how group membership can bring about dependency in each member to the group and wherein individuals' unique identity and personality are altered into becoming the group's personality, since the member is already immersed and integrated in the group he or she belongs to.

The communicative aspect of group relational dynamics has theories and concepts that are derived from social studies; however, most of these concepts are focused in the communication and process of decision-making within a group (unlike the psychological aspect wherein the individual is the primary focus of the study). There are two important aspects that communication studies focus on when discussing group relational dynamics: first, the motivations of individuals for joining a group, and second, the process of group decision-making during task accomplishments.

The first aspect of communication studies in group relations is the enumeration of factors that can have a possible effect in motivating an individual to join or affiliate himself or herself in a group. Individuals affiliate themselves in a group because of the following factors: appearance, similarity, complementarity, reciprocity, exchange, competency, proximity, and/or disclosure (Adler 1998 276-82). Appearance is vital to group affiliation because people often judge individuals according to their appearance. An Asian would be more comfortable relating with an Asian-looking person than a Caucasian one, and vice versa.

Complementarity means that people relate well with each other because one person complements or compensates for another person's shortcomings or defects; reciprocity describes the mutual response between or among individuals in a group. Disclosure is also important in group relations because the more information a person has about another, and then there is greater closeness and understanding between them. These factors prove that there are various reasons that determine the relations among members/individual within a group.

Another important aspect in group relation is the process wherein members try to communicate and relate with.