Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-sjtt6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-25T08:25:37.625Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

11 - Why groups fall apart: A social psychological model of the schismatic process

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

By
Fabio Sani
Edited by
Fabrizio Butera  and
John M. Levine
Fabrizio Butera
Affiliation:
Université de Lausanne, Switzerland
John M. Levine
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
Get access

Summary

For decades, social psychologists have explored the processes that lead social groups to achieve oneness and uniformity. For instance, some researchers have investigated the way in which social groups transmit and maintain shared norms and standards (Crandall, 1988; Sherif, 1936). Others have studied the pressures to conform to majority views (Abrams et al., 1990; Asch, 1956) or to obey leaders and authorities (Milgram, 1974). With regard to the field of group decision-making, a substantial body of work has addressed the processes leading group members either to polarize their opinions (Brauer & Judd, 1996; Moscovici & Zavalloni, 1969) or to overlook alternative courses of action because of striving for unanimity (Janis, 1972). Finally, social psychologists have also explored the way in which groups achieve cohesiveness (Hogg, 1992; Lott & Lott, 1965) and people's tendency to loose their sense of individual identity when acting in group situations (Diener, 1979; Zimbardo, 1970).

Undoubtedly, these processes are of central importance for group life and deserve to be studied in depth. However, despite a clear tendency to cohere and to seek consensus, most social groups are internally divided into subgroups (Hornsey & Hogg, 2000). What is more, in some situations the members of a subgroup may decide to undergo a schism; that is, they may leave the parent group either to form a breakaway group or to join a different group.

Type
Chapter
Information
Coping with Minority Status
Responses to Exclusion and Inclusion
 , pp. 243 - 266
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abrams, D., Wetherell, M., Cochrane, S., Hogg, M. A., & Turner, J. C. (1990). Knowing what to think by knowing who you are: Self-categorization and the nature of norm formation, conformity and group polarization. British Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 97–119.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Asch, S. (1956). Studies of independence and conformity: I. A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 70, 1–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barr-Zisowitz, C. (2000). “Sadness” – Is there such a thing? In Lewis, M. & Haviland-Jones, J. M. (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (2nd ed., pp. 607–622). New York and London:The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Bizman, A.,& Yinon, Y. (2002). Social self-discrepancies and group-based emotional distress. In Mackie, D. M. & Smith, E. R. (Eds.), From prejudice to intergroup emotions: Differentiated reactions to social groups. (pp. 13–30) New York and Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Brauer, M., & Judd, M. (1996). Group polarization and repeated attitude expressions: A new take on an old topic. European Review of Social Psychology, 7, 173–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, D. T. (1958). Common fate, similarity, and other indices of the status of aggregates of persons as social entities. Behavioral Science, 3, 14–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crandall, C. S. (1988). Social contagion of binge eating. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 588–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Diener, E. (1979). Deindividuation, self-awareness, and dishinibition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1160–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gundle, S. (2000). Between Hollywood and Moscow: The Italian Communist Party and the challenge of mass culture, 1943–1991. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority: An experimental view. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Moscovici, S. (1976). Social influence and social change. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Haslam, S. A., Turner, J. C., Oakes, P. J., McGarty, C., & Reynolds, K. J. (1998). The group as a basis for emergent stereotype consensus. In Stroebe, W. & Hewstone, M. (Eds.), European Review of Social Psychology (Vol. 9, pp. 203–239). Chichester: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94, 319–340.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hogg, M. A. (1992). The social psychology of group cohesiveness: From attraction to social identity. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
Hornsey, M. J., & Hogg, M. A. (2000). Assimilation and diversity: An integrative model of subgroup relations. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 143–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janis, I. (1972). Victims of groupthink: A psychological study of foreign-policy decisions and fiascos. Boston: HoughtonMifflin.Google Scholar
Lott, A. J., & Lott, B. E. (1965). Group cohesiveness as interpersonal attraction: A review of relationships with antecedent and consequent variables. Psychological Bulletin, 64, 259–309.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moscovici, S., & Zavalloni, M. (1969). The Group as a polarizer of attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 12, 125–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mugny, G. (1982). The power of minorities. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Prentice, D. A., Miller, D. T., & Lightdale, J. R. (1994). Asymmetries in attachments to groups and to their members: Distinguishing between common-identity and common-bond groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 484–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roseman, I. J. (1991). Appraisal determinants of discrete emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 5, 161–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sani, F. (2005). When subgroups secede: Extending and refining the social psychological model of schisms in groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 1074–1086.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sani, F., & Reicher, S. (1998). When consensus fails: An analysis of the schism within the Italian Communist Party (1991). European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 623–645.3.0.CO;2-G>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sani, F., & Reicher, S. (1999). Identity, argument and schism: Two longitudinal studies of the split in the Church of England over the ordination of women to the priesthood. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 2, 279–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sani, F., & Reicher, S. (2000). Contested Identities and Schisms in Groups: Opposing the ordination of women as priests in the Church of England. British Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 95–112.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sani, F., Todman, J. & Lunn, J. (2005). The fundamentality of group principles, and perceived group entitativity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 567–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherif, M. (1936). The social psychology of social norms. New York and London: Harper & Brothers Publishers.Google Scholar
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behaviour. In Worchel, S. & Austin, W. G. (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relation (pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.Google Scholar
Terry, D. J., Carey, C. J., & Callan, V. J. (2001). Employee adjustment to an organizational merger: An intergroup perspective. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 267–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, J. C., Oakes, P. J., Haslam, S. A., & McGarty, C. (1994). Self and collective: Cognition and social context. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 454–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyler, T. R., & Smith, H. J. (1999). Justice, social identity, and group processes. In Tyler, T. R., Kramer, R. M., & John, O. (Eds.), The psychology of the social self (pp. 223–264). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Knippenberg, D., Knippenberg, B., Monden, L., & Lima, F. (2002). Organizational identification after a merger: A social identity perspective. British Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 233–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yzerbyt, V., Castano, E., Leyens, J.-P., & Paladino, M.-P. (2000). The primacy of the ingroup: The interplay of entitativity and identification. In Stroebe, W. & Hewstone, M. (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 11, pp. 257–295). Chichester: Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Zimbardo, P. G. (1970). The human choice: Individuation, reason, and order versus deindividuation, impulse, and chaos. In Arnold, W. J. & Levine, D. (Eds.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 1969 (Vol. 17, pp. 237–307). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×