Empirical research in the discipline of sociology

Sociological Research

Analysis of group collectivism and interaction in "Culture in Interaction" by Nina Eliasoph and Paul Lichterman

The journal article entitled, "Culture in Interaction," authored by Nina Eliasoph and Paul Lichterman, brought into fore the use of empirical studies in identifying, analyzing, and interpreting the group culture of organizations and civil groups in terms of their use of speech acts and group interaction. The study's general objective was to describe the culture of civil organizations through a qualitative analysis of their speech acts and styles. Using the method of ethnographic analysis, Eliasoph and Lichterman was able to analyze and interpret how these civil groups' cultures, i.e., through collective representations, are characterized by their use of specific kinds of speech acts and styles.

Through the literature gathered by the researchers/authors, the choice of the sample was to select a civil group that center on activities related to activism and volunteerism, since these groups have significant impact in mobilizing people and promoting causes that have potential benefits to society. More specifically, ethnography was conducted on two civil groups -- that is, the study involved two cases of ethnographic analysis. These two civil groups were the Airdale Citizens for Environmental Sanity (ACES) (activist group) and bar patrons of the Buffalo Club (volunteer group), two civil groups that were found to have a unique culture, specifically in their speech and interaction. Concepts that were used in the study were group boundaries, group bonds, and speech norms. Group boundaries determined the position of the group's culture and nature in the context of the larger organizational setting; group bonds identified the type of interaction prevalent in the group; and speech norms determined the communication style of the members of the group.

Results of the study reflected the unique culture of each civil group. The ACES was identified as an organization that, when put in the larger context of group activism, was more 'individualist' rather than collectivist. This meant that ACES members tend to focus more on the idea that empowerment and motivation to participate actively was not through group cohesion, but on the pursuit of one's self-interest. This self-interest was identified as the will to fight for a cause, which, in ACES's case, was environmentalism. The concept of "timid affiliation" was also another character of the group, wherein one's affiliation of the group was not public knowledge, mainly because members felt that 'association' was made "calmly, individually, finding one's own way into the thick of public engagement -- no standing out individually and loudly from others. ACES was considered an activist group that was distinct and autonomous from urban activist groups, which were often loud in character and more collectivist in nature. ACES's nature of "timid affiliation" and autonomy from other activist groups became evident with their communication style, which was described by the researchers as 'more articulate' but with a certain level of 'nervousness,' very unlike the typical activist group which is loud and fierce, even angry.

A similar depiction of group culture was found among bar patrons of the Buffalo Club. Though the group's activist were somewhat subdued in nature than the ACES, centering their activities on socialization rather than demonstrations, Buffalo Club was distinct from other volunteer groups in that they were known for adopting a "wild, irrational, excitable, passionate" -- that is, a bad -- image, in order to reflect the group's "un-political" nature. Though the Buffalo Club was actively socially, its members deviate from expressing political opinions during interaction, and this was interpreted by the researchers as, in fact, a unique kind of politics. For Eliasoph and Lichterman, Buffalo Club's " ... aversion to "good manners" was a powerful rule itself: Do not talk seriously in the group context, and try to appear to be breaking the rules [sic] ... The members' "fierce joking" was a speech act, a way of "doing something" with words." Thus Buffalo Club's existence and cause was for pure interaction and communication with other people only, though its communication style was distinctly louder and more straightforward (yet implicit) than the ACES members' "timid" nature of affiliation.