Download - HSRC Press

GROUPSCollectivities of individuals are also frequently studied as groups as, forexample, in the case of families, gangs, census blocks, couples, and so on. Thereason for studying groups rather than individuals is to be found in the fact thatgroups possess characteristics which are not necessarily applicable to thebehaviour of individuals. Families (but not individuals) share values of loyaltyand cohesiveness; while gangs display norms which include solidarity andcollective responsibility — their own code of behaviour. For the exact reasonthat groups possess their own characteristics, it is necessary to try tounderstand and explain the functioning of either families or gangs in terms ofthose characteristics. It would, quite simply, be wrong to attempt, for example,to consistently try to understand the behaviour of groups in terms of thecharacteristics of the individual.ORGANIZATIONSFormal social organizations such as companies, churches, universities,academic departments, factories, and supermarkets are frequently used as theunit of analysis. Here, as in the previous case, attention is once again focussedon the unique qualities of these social organizations such as organizationalstructure, lines of authority, promotional policy, the representativeness ofminority groups on the pay roll, labour relations, and productivity.Free download from www.hsrcpress.ac.zaSOCIAL ARTEFACTSIn a general sense, the term “social artifacts” is used to refer to all products ofhuman behaviour. Babbie distinguishes between social objects such as books,paintings, cars, buildings, and songs, on the one hand, and social interactionssuch as marriage ceremonies, court hearings, traffic offences, divorces, raceriots, prostitution, and juvenile delinquency, on the other.The classification of individuals, groups, organizations and social artefacts istaken a stage further by Babbie. Thus far we have referred to thecharacteristics of these four units of measurement in general terms. Morespecifically, it is possible to distinguish between the conditions, orientations,and actions of individuals, groups, organizations, and social artefacts. Althoughsuch a refinement facilitates understanding in the majority of cases, it does notinvariably do so. Bearing in mind that social groups and organizations usuallydiffer only in terms of intensity and degree, they have been included under thesame category in the table that follows. The table, therefore, includes only themost significant refinements. Empty cells indicate that a particular refinementwould not have been enlightening.39