Main trends of research in the social and human ... - unesdoc - Unesco

148 P. F. Lazarsfeld
extended famil~.~3O In the USSR dramatic changes were reported when ‘backward‘
ethnic groups were caught up by the Government’s industrial policy, and
a number of spectacular studies on the change of the status of women in various
parts of the country were presented at the 1966 International Congress of Psychol0gy.~3~
A third group of critical situations has been called by Heinz Hartmann ‘horizontal
socialization’: movements of men back and forth between public service
and private jobs and of women between work and marriage, the experience of
migration, the coping with cycles of success and failure. All these are topics which
require the attention of both the sociologist and the social psychologist.
I have excluded from this report the discussion of childhood training. But one
aspect of it has relevance here: class differences. The lower class child lives in a
world with less external stimulation and a restricted vocabulary - factors which
make subsequent intellectual growth more difficult. The middle class child is
more likely to be punished by the withdrawal of love, which fosters the development
of ‘intrapunitive’ character traits. A careful classification of the literature
reveals many such training features which are likely to affect the socialization of
the ad~lt.~3~
Group dynamics
For many experiments in social psychology a small number of people are assembled
so that differences in reactions can be analyzed. When special attention
is given to interactions between members of such groups and to the way they
form at least temporary ‘organizations,’ then one usually speaks of the problem
of group dynamics. Work along this line is potentially important for sociologists.
After all, a small group may be viewed as a miniature society where one can
study sociological problems as under a microscope. But in reviewing the literature
of the last IO or 15 years one is bothered by the fragmentation of the whole
field. An experiment in group dynamics is ideal for a doctoral dissertation;
consequently we have a large number of scattered studies which seem to resist
systematic integration. Such synthesis is difficult, but indeed productive if it
succeeds. A brilliant example is Roger Brown’s 60-page discussion of a single
experimental result.233
His starting point was the following: people who must make choices between
more or less risky decisions take greater risks when they make their choices in a
group than when they are alone. He then proceeded to interpret this hypothesis
in the light of all other knowledge available in the literature on group dynamics.
When the various alternatives are discussed, the more prominent members of
the group are likely to be risk-taking personalities. It is evident from these considerations
that a reasonable amount of risk-taking is considered appropriate in
an American context; the ‘rhetoric’ of risk-taking is more likely to find a
response than the appeal to caution, etc. Not surprisingly, Brown concludes
that the experiments that wouId fully clarify the issue remain to be done. A few
more efforts similar to his might make a great difference in the entire field.
Still, in this somewhat sprawling stream of group dynamics there is one trend
which deserves respectful attention. More and more, social psychologists have