Social psychology - scientific discipline, born at the intersection of two sciences (psychology and sociology), which introduces certain difficulties in formulating the subject of research social psychology, in determining the range of problems being studied.
Sociology (from Latin socius - social + other Greek Xbuos; - science) is the science of society, the systems that make it up, the patterns of its functioning and development, social institutions, relationships and communities.
Social psychology is a science that studies psychological phenomena (processes, states and properties) that characterize the individual and group as subjects of social interaction.
The subject of social psychology is a system of socio-psychological phenomena based on the mental interaction of people, in connection with which social psychology studies:
psychological processes, states and properties of an individual that manifest themselves as a result of his inclusion in relationships with other people, in various social groups (family, educational and work groups, etc.) and in the system as a whole social relations(economic, political, managerial, legal, etc.), the most frequently studied are sociability, aggressiveness, compatibility with other people, conflict potential, etc.;
the phenomenon of interaction between people, for example, marital, child-parent, pedagogical, psychotherapeutic, etc.; Moreover, interaction can be not only interpersonal, but also between an individual and a group, as well as intergroup;
psychological processes, states and properties of various social groups as integral entities that differ from each other and cannot be reduced to any individual; The greatest interest of social psychologists is in studies of the socio-psychological climate of the group and conflict relations (group states), leadership and group actions (group processes), cohesion, teamwork and conflict (group properties), etc.;
mass mental phenomena such as crowd behavior, panic, rumors, fashion, mass enthusiasm, jubilation, apathy, fears, etc.
The object of social psychology is various social communities of people; psychology of the individual as a member of these communities:
personality in a group (system of relations),
interaction in the “person - personality” system (parent - child, manager - performer, doctor - patient, psychologist - client, etc.),
small group (family, school class, work team, military crew, group of friends, etc.),
interaction in the “person - group” system (leader - followers, leader - work collective, commander - platoon, newcomer - school class, etc.),
interaction in the “group-group” system (team competition, group negotiations, intergroup conflicts, etc.),
large social group (ethnicity, party, social movement, social strata, territorial, religious groups, etc.).
In accordance with the main objects of research, modern social psychology has been differentiated into such sections as:
social psychology of personality,
psychology of interpersonal interaction (communication and relationships),
small group psychology,
psychology of intergroup interaction,
psychology of large social groups and mass phenomena.
Within social psychology there are several psychological schools: functionalism, behaviorism, humanistic psychology, cognitiveism and interactionism.
Functionalism (or functional psychology) arose under the influence of the evolutionary theory in biology of Charles Darwin and the evolutionary theory of social Darwinism of G. Spencer, who believed that the basic law of social development is the law of survival of the fittest societies and social groups. Representatives of functionalism (D. Dewey, D. Angell, G. Carr, etc.) studied people and social groups from the point of view of their social adaptation - adaptation to difficult living conditions. The main socio-psychological problem of functionalism is the problem of the most optimal conditions for social adaptation of subjects of public life.
Behaviorism (later neobehaviorism) is behavioral psychology that studies the problems of patterns of human and animal behavior (I.V. Pavlov, V.M. Bekhterev, D. Watson, B. Skinner, etc.). Behavior was viewed as an objective, observable reality that could be studied under experimental conditions. The central problem of behaviorism is the problem of learning, i.e. gaining individual experience through trial and error. Four laws of learning have been identified: the law of effect, the law of exercise, the law of readiness and the law of associative shift.
The psychoanalytic direction is associated with the name of S. Freud, who studied the problems of unconscious, irrational processes in the individual and in his behavior. He believed that the central driving force a person is a set of drives. Some of the aspects of this direction were developed in the works of K. Jung and A. Adler. Social and psychological problems of the direction: the conflict between man and society, manifested in the clash of human drives with social prohibitions; the problem of sources of social activity of the individual.
Humanistic psychology (G. Allport, A. Maslow, K. Rogers, etc.) studied a person as a fully developing personality who strives to realize his potential and achieve self-actualization, personal growth. In every a normal person there is a tendency towards self-expression and self-realization.
Cognitivism interprets human social behavior as a set of predominantly cognitive processes and focuses on the process of human cognition of the world, his comprehension of the essence of phenomena through basic cognitive mental processes (memory, attention, etc.). In the course of this cognition, his impressions of the world are transformed into a system of images, on the basis of which various ideas, beliefs, expectations and attitudes are formed, which ultimately determine his actions and actions. Representatives of these directions S. Asch, K. Levin, T. Newcomb, F. Heider, L. Festinger and others made a serious contribution to social psychology. The problem of cognitivism is human decision making. Representatives of the cognitive school (J. Piaget, J. Bruner, R. Atkinson, etc.) paid special attention to human knowledge and methods of its formation.
Interactionism (later symbolic interactionism) explored the problems of the social aspect of interaction between people in the process of activity and communication. The main idea of interactionism: personality is always social and cannot be formed outside of society. Particular importance was attached to communication as the exchange of symbols and the development of common meanings and meanings.
Reduces socio-psychological phenomena to interpersonal interaction, seeing in it the source of explanation of the essence, origin and dynamics of these phenomena. He explains the formation of personality by situations of communication and interaction of people with each other, which should be understood as systems of mutually oriented actions and reactions unfolded over time. The state of society, relationships and personality, according to its ideologists (E. Hoffman, R. Linton, T. Newcome, M. Sheriff, etc.), are nothing more than a product of communication between people, the result of their adaptation to each other.
The entire set of methods of socio-psychological research can be divided into two large groups: research methods and methods of influence. The latter belong to a specific area of social psychology, the “psychology of influence.”
Among the research methods, a distinction is made between methods of collecting information and methods of processing it. Data processing methods are often not allocated to a special block, since most of them are not specific to social psychological research.
Methods of collecting information: observation, reading documents (content analysis), surveys (questionnaires, interviews), tests (the most common sociometric test), experiment (laboratory, natural).
Let us consider the leading methods of socio-psychological research.
Observation in social psychology is a method of collecting information through direct, targeted and systematic perception and recording of socio-psychological phenomena (facts of behavior and activity) in natural conditions. The observation method can be used as one of the central, independent research methods.
The object of observation is individuals, small groups and large social communities (for example, a crowd) and the social processes occurring in them, for example, panic.
The subject of observation is usually the verbal and nonverbal acts of behavior of an individual or a group as a whole in a certain social situation. To the most typical verbal and non-verbal characteristics of A.L. Zhuravlev includes speech acts (their content, direction and sequence, frequency, duration and intensity, as well as expressiveness); expressive movements (expression of the eyes, face, body, etc.); physical actions, i.e. touching, pushing, hitting, joint actions, etc.
The main disadvantages of this method include:
high subjectivity in data collection introduced by the observer (halo, contrast, leniency, modeling, etc. effects) and the observed (observer presence effect);
the predominantly qualitative nature of observational findings;
relative limitations in generalizing study results.
Ways to increase the reliability of observation results are associated with the use of reliable observation schemes, technical means of recording data, training the observer, and minimizing the effect of the presence of the observer.
The document analysis method is a type of method for analyzing the products of human activity. A document is any information recorded in printed or handwritten text, on magnetic or photo media.
All methods of document analysis are divided into traditional (qualitative) and formalized (qualitative-quantitative). Any method is based on the mechanisms of the text understanding process, i.e. the researcher's interpretation of the information contained in the document.
Content analysis (content analysis) is a method of translating textual information into quantitative indicators with its subsequent statistical processing. The quantitative characteristics of the text obtained using content analysis make it possible to draw conclusions about the qualitative, including latent (not explicit) content of the text. In this regard, the content analysis method is often referred to as qualitative-quantitative analysis of documents.
The survey method is a very common method in social psychological research. The essence of the method is to obtain information about objective or subjective (opinions, moods, motives, relationships, etc.) facts from the words of the respondents.
Among the numerous types of surveys, two main types are most common:
a) direct survey (“face to face”) - an interview, a face-to-face survey conducted by a researcher in the form of questions and answers with the interviewee (respondent);
b) correspondence survey - questioning using a questionnaire (questionnaire) designed for self-completion by the respondents themselves.
The source of information during a survey is the verbal or written judgment of the person being interviewed. The depth, completeness of answers, and their reliability depend on the researcher’s ability to correctly construct the questionnaire design. There are special techniques and rules for conducting a survey.
An interview is a type of survey. There are two types: standardized and non-standardized interviews. In the first case, the interview assumes the presence of standard formulations of questions and their sequence, determined in advance.
The non-standardized interview technique is characterized by flexibility and variation over a wide range. The interviewer is guided only by the general plan of the survey, formulating questions in accordance with the specific situation and the respondent’s answers.
It is customary to identify key phases: establishing contact, the main part and completion of the interview. Criteria for the effectiveness of the interview: completeness (breadth) - it should allow the interviewee to cover, as fully as possible, various aspects of the problem being discussed; specificity (concreteness) - it must provide accurate answers to each aspect of the problem that is significant for the respondent; depth (personal meaning) - it must reveal the emotional, cognitive and value aspects of the respondent’s attitude to the situation under discussion; personal context - the interview is designed to reveal characteristics of the interviewee’s personality and life experiences.
Types of surveys are divided by the number of respondents (individual and group), by location, and by the method of distribution of questionnaires (handout, postal, press). Among the most significant disadvantages of handout, and especially postal and press surveys are the low percentage of questionnaires returned, lack of control over the quality of filling out questionnaires, and the use of only questionnaires that are very simple in structure and volume.
The preference for the type of survey is determined by the goals of the study, its program, and the level of knowledge of the issue. The main advantage of questionnaires is associated with the possibility of mass coverage of a large number of respondents and its professional accessibility. The information obtained in an interview is more meaningful and in-depth compared to a questionnaire. However, the disadvantage is, first of all, the difficult-to-control influence of the personality and professional level of the interviewer on the interviewee, which can lead to a distortion of the objectivity and reliability of the information.
The group assessment method (GAL) is a method of obtaining characteristics of a person in a specific group based on mutual questioning of its members about each other.
This method allows you to assess the presence and degree of expression (development) of a person’s psychological qualities, which are manifested in behavior and activity, in interaction with other people. The widespread use of GOL for applied and research purposes is associated with its simplicity and accessibility for users, the ability to diagnose those human qualities for which there are no reliable tools (tests, questionnaires), etc. Psychological basis GOL is a socio-psychological phenomenon of group ideas about each of the group members as a result of mutual knowledge of people with each other in the process of communication.
A test is a short, standardized, usually time-limited test. With the help of tests in social psychology, inter-individual and inter-group differences are determined. On the one hand, it is believed that tests are not a specific socio-psychological method, and all methodological standards accepted in general psychology are also valid for social psychology.
On the other hand, the wide range of used socio-psychological methods for diagnosing individuals and groups, intergroup interaction allows us to talk about tests as an independent means of empirical research.
Areas of application of tests in social psychology:
group diagnostics,
the study of interpersonal and intergroup relations and social perception,
socio-psychological properties of the individual (social intelligence, social competence, leadership style, etc.).
The testing procedure involves the subject (a group of subjects) performing a special task or receiving answers to a number of questions that are indirect in nature in the tests. The point of subsequent processing is to use a “key” to correlate the received data with certain assessment parameters, for example, with personality characteristics. The final measurement result is expressed in a test indicator.
The term “experiment” has two meanings in social psychology:
experience and testing, as is customary in the natural sciences;
research in the logic of identifying cause-and-effect relationships. One of the existing definitions of the experimental method indicates that it involves interaction organized by the researcher between the subject (or group) and the experimental situation in order to establish the patterns of this interaction. Among specific signs Experiments include modeling of phenomena and research conditions (experimental situation); active influence of the researcher on the phenomena (variation of variables); measuring the reactions of subjects to this influence; reproducibility of results.
The experiment is criticized primarily for its low ecological validity, that is, the impossibility of transferring conclusions obtained in an experimental situation beyond its boundaries (into natural conditions).
Nevertheless, there is a point of view that the problem of the validity of an experiment is not that the facts obtained in the experiment have no scientific value, but in their adequate theoretical interpretation.
Despite many critical assessments of this method, the experiment remains an important means of obtaining reliable information in social psychological research.
The sociometry method refers to the tools for socio-psychological research into the structure of small groups, as well as the individual as a member of the group. The area of measurement using sociometric technology is the diagnosis of interpersonal and intragroup relationships. Using the sociometric method, they study the typology of social behavior in group activities, evaluate the cohesion and compatibility of group members.
A sociometric procedure may aim to:
a) measuring the degree of cohesion-disunity in the group;
b) identification of “sociometric positions”, i.e. the relative authority of group members on the basis of sympathy and antipathy, where the “leader” of the group and the “rejected” are at the extreme poles;
c) detection of intragroup subsystems, cohesive formations, which may have their own informal leaders at their head.
The use of sociometry makes it possible to measure the authority of formal and informal leaders to regroup people in teams so as to reduce tension in the team that arises due to the mutual hostility of some group members. The sociometric technique is carried out using a group method; its implementation does not require much time (up to 15 minutes). It is very useful in applied research, especially in work to improve relationships in a team. But it is not a radical way to resolve intra-group problems, the causes of which should be sought not in the likes and dislikes of group members, but in deeper sources.
The measurement involves surveying each member of a small group in order to identify those group members with whom he would prefer (choose) or, on the contrary, would not want to participate in a certain type of activity or situation. The measurement procedure includes the following elements:
determination of the option (number) of elections (deviations);
selection of survey criteria (questions);
organizing and conducting a survey;
processing and interpretation of results using quantitative (sociometric indices) and graphic (sociogram) analysis methods.
A scientifically purposeful, organized and recorded perception of an object under study is called observation. The study of people's social behavior using the observation method was carried out by sociologists, ethnographers, journalists, lawyers, psychiatrists, social psychologists and teachers. The pioneers of the use of socio-psychological observation are considered to be researchers of child behavior in the 20s and 30s: M.Ya. Basov, P.P. Blonsky, A.S., Zaluzhny, S. Bühler, V. Stern, V. Olson and others.
In 1923, M.Ya. Basov developed a method of psychological observation, the most advanced for its time. The unit of behavior, in his opinion, is not a reaction, as with behaviorists, but an “act” of behavior, which is an active action. The psychological observation scheme should ensure registration of not only the external manifestation, but also the external and internal stimuli that caused the behavior, as well as the general environment in which it is carried out (“background”). The main and original principle of this technique, which distinguishes it from previously used diary psychological observations (for example, by V. Stern, K. Bühler), is the maximum possible recording of objective external manifestations, clearly demarcated from their psychological interpretation. It assumes observation of a continuous process, and not its individual moments, continuous selective “photographic” recording in certain periods of time. 1
P. .P. Blonsky (1921) great attention paid attention to the accuracy of recording what was observed, the use of various technical means and quantification.
1 Basov M. Ya. Selected psychological works. M., 1975, p. 13.
They carefully identified the signs of the instinctive-emotional (non-verbal); behaviors that future psychologists were trained to identify. This meant elements of facial expression, eyes, facial expressions, pantomime, gestures and movements. A. S. Zaluzhny (1931) criticized foreign psychologists (Russell, Bark, Varendok) for insufficient attention to the environment and inaccuracy in choosing the object of observation. When studying children's groups, he used a three-member observation scheme to describe the environment, the situation (exogenous, i.e., external, sphere of observation) and acts of behavior of individual members of the group (endogenous, i.e., internal sphere).
The systematic quantification of observations of children's behavior began with the research of D. Thomas and her associates (1933). Further development The observation method was obtained in the works of E. Chapple, R. Bales, R. Lippitt, L. Carter, and other social psychologists. The improvement of observation techniques was facilitated by the development of a group experiment method, in which observation constitutes a necessary procedure for monitoring and recording primary information. A certain incentive for using the observation method was technical advances in recording various signs of human behavior, as well as the development of other methods. The observation method was especially used in studying the behavior of individuals and groups in their ordinary life and activities (A. F. Lazursky, 1916; E. Mayo, 1927; K. Toki, 1935; K. Levin, 1937), including when the researcher becomes a member of the observed group or community (N. Anderson, 1923; W. White, 1937; V. B. Olshansky, 1966; W. Sargent, 1973, etc.).
The observed social behavior of a person, groups or communities is always specifically historically determined by society, the immediate environment, and certain motives and goals. In turn, observation is subject to the corresponding task, the researcher’s hypothesis, and depends on his focus, theoretical positions, knowledge and experience. Features of observing socio-psychological phenomena are determined by the specifics of the subject of research. Soviet psychologists, using any methods of understanding the human psyche, groups and communities, proceed from the Marxist understanding of the active, transformative essence of human activity. Their research is based on the principles of the unity of consciousness and activity (S. L. Rubinstein, 1934), general structure internal and external activity, the mediation of the psyche by “signaling” processes, the relationship between the meaning and personal meaning of the elements of consciousness. 2 In this regard, certain requirements are imposed on the observation procedure. 3
2 Leontyev A.N. Activity. Consciousness. Personality. M., 1975, p. 94-101.
3 See: Yadov V. A. Sociological research. M., 1972, p. 112; The social research process. M.,
1975, p. 335-338; Rogovin M. S. Introduction to psychology. M., 1969, p. 148-168
General observation procedure. Observation usually consists of the following processes:
a) definition of the task and purpose (for what, for what purpose?);
b) choice of object, subject and situation (what to observe?);
c) choosing an observation method that has the least impact on the object under study and most ensures the collection of the necessary information (how to observe?);
d) choice of methods for recording what is observed (how to keep records?);
e) processing and interpretation of the information received (what is the result?). 4
The objectives of observation can be preliminary orientation in the object, putting forward a hypothesis, testing it, clarifying the results obtained using other methods, and illustration. The objects of observation are individuals in various communication situations, their large and small troupes, and communities. Observed situations can be natural and experimental, controlled and not controlled by the observer, spontaneous and organized, standard and non-standard, normal and extreme, differing in types of activities, contacts and relationships between people, communication environment, etc.
The subject of socio-psychological observation is the verbal and non-verbal acts of behavior of an individual, group or several groups in a certain social environment and situation. Observed: a) speech acts, their content, sequence, direction, frequency, duration, intensity, expressiveness, features of vocabulary, grammar, phonetics, synchronization; b) expressive movements, expression of face, eyes, body, sounds; c) movement, movements and stationary states of people, distances between them, speed and direction of movement, contact; d) physical impact: touching, pushing, hitting, supporting, joint efforts, transferring, taking away, delaying; e) a combination of the listed characteristics.
E. Chapple (1940), when studying interpersonal contacts, suggests measuring their quantity, duration, pace, activity, adaptation, initiative, synchronization, dominance and other indicators of the behavior of communication participants. 5
4 See also: Yadov V.A. Decree. Works, p. 113
5 Chapple E. D. Measuring human relations: an introductions to the study of the interaction of individuals. –
Genet. Psychol. Monogr. N. Y., 1940, 22.
According to Yu. P. Voronov, the recorded signs of personal contacts should be situations (mise-en-scène), sequence and direction of contact (to everyone at once, to oneself or without an address, to individuals). 6
The method of observation is determined by the task, the object and the situation, and the nature of the interaction between the observer and the observed. A distinction is made between included observation, when the observer becomes a member of the group under study, and non-involved observation, “from the outside”; open and hidden (incognito); field and laboratory. 7 According to the order of observation, observations can be random and systematic, continuous and selective; by the nature of fixation - ascertaining and evaluative, as well as mixed type.
Methods of recording and measuring observed processes and events differ in the degree of accuracy, completeness, reliability and validity of information, in technical and mental capabilities, in the form and language of recording, in the complexity of the process of recording, encoding and decoding, analysis, and in the use of various measurement scales.
The observation results are subject to classification, grouping, mathematical analysis, content analysis, and comparison with results obtained by other researchers and other methods.
Types and techniques of observation . Socio-psychological observation is subject to the rules common to any scientific observation: compliance with the purpose of the study, planning and conducting observation according to a certain pattern of interaction between individuals, expression of perceived facts in an operational language accessible to other observers, choice of methods of observation and recording depending on the nature of the people’s actions being studied and observation capabilities, checking the objectivity and reliability of observation by other researchers and other methods.
E. S. Kuzmin notes three categorical requirements for the successful use of observation: a clear formulation of the goal, the development of an appropriate scheme and methods of recording. 8 In social psychology, the method of observing significant situations is recommended primarily. 9 As a rule, when studying interpersonal communication between members of groups and collectives, the frequency, intensity, direction, and duration of various acts of behavior are simultaneously recorded, their description and graphic representation are given (dynamometry or sociogram).
6 Voronov Yu. P. Methods of collecting information in sociological research. M., 1974. p. 131-138.
7 See: 3dravomyslov A.G. Methodology and procedure of sociological research. M., 1969, p. 156-164;
The social research process. M., 1975, p. 338; Alekseev A. N. Application of the included method
observations in complex social research. - In the book: Youth. Education, upbringing,
professional activity. L., 1973, p. 65-72.
8 Kuzmin E. S. Fundamentals of social psychology. L., 1967, p. 30.
9 Ibid., p. 29-30.
The observation procedure and technique always depend on the purpose, object and capabilities of the study.
Observation is used mainly in the study of small groups and primary teams. As the number of observed objects increases, the number of measured features decreases. Thus, crowd observation is limited to recording such parameters as the number of collisions or their presence, the movements of groups, people of a certain gender, the color of clothing, the direction and speed of their movement, the number of gesticulating, shouting, talking, looking at one object, changes in the volume of crowd noise and etc. Such observation can only give the general dynamics of mood, communicative activity of individuals and their groups. Without questioning and analyzing the situation, it is impossible to understand the motives and content of the relationships between people in the crowd. 10 For socio-psychological research of individuals, small groups and teams, a set of methods is usually used. Leading place occupies observation in experiments, especially when developing little-studied problems. According to P. Fress, the first phase of the experiment consists of “observation, which makes it possible to detect important facts and recognize them with certainty." 11
To study the structure and dynamics of relationships, contacts in groups and teams, observation is used as the main or auxiliary method. Clarifying the nature of the relationships that had developed in the vocational school groups, we observed the students’ interactions, recording them with the help of a film and photographic camera. This made it possible to confirm the results obtained by the sociometry method. 12 The main method for analyzing the communicative behavior of the foremen of the bottling shop of the first dairy plant in Leningrad was quantified observation. The frequency and duration of acts of verbal and non-verbal communication between the foreman and workers, manipulations with the machine and visual control of its operation were recorded. Processing of the observation results was simplified by the fact that a ten-minute measurement of the communicative behavior of each foreman was carried out ten times. Testing for the stability of the observation technique was carried out by a standardized choice of time and place for observation, simultaneous observation and recording of the foreman’s behavior by two researchers, and comparison of results.
10 Fedorov V. F. Study experience auditorium. - “Life of Art”, 1925, No. 23; Vahemetsa A. L.,
Plotnikov S.N. Man and art. M., 1968, p. 84-93.
11 Fresse P., Piaget J. Experimental psychology. Vol. 1-2, M, 1966, p. 106.
12 Ershov A. A. The influence of relationships between people on the formation of their attitude to work. Abstract
Ph.D. dis. L., 1969.
As a result, it was concluded that the effectiveness of the team’s work depends on the communicative activity of the foreman. In the best teams, the foreman communicated with the workers relatively more often. 13
With the help of observation, conflicts in communication between people are detected and traced. Studying conflicts in production teams, Romanian psychologist Geta Dan Spinoiu used quantified observation and group dynamograms. The following parameters of behavior were recorded: time, relating exclusively to the relationship between man and work; the time of the relationship between man and labor with the perceptual connection between man and man; the time of interaction between labor and relationships established orally; time occupied exclusively by perceptual and verbal communication and work skills. By “photographing” the dynamics of functional and interpersonal connections, in segments of 10 s. Conflict situations and their manifestation in functional, communicative and perceptual connections were discovered. It is not enough to state only that, for example, worker A is in conflict with worker B. The distribution and resolution of the conflict is still unclear from here. By “photographing” the dynamics, researchers were able to identify not only the epicenter of the conflict, but also the driving forces involved, the direction of spread, and the results. All this is recorded in the form of a dynamogram (arrows indicate the direction of acts of behavior of the participants in the interaction). 14 In order to diagnose tensions in work groups at capitalist enterprises, F. Scherke identifies three stages in the dynamics of interpersonal conflicts and their inherent behavioral signs that are observed:
first stage - negative tension in relationships, its signs: “nervous” anxiety, unfriendly tone of address, frequent complaints and difficulties, illnesses, “tendentious” misunderstanding, general disagreements, desire to criticize, gossip, increasing “unpunctuality.”
second stage - negative tension, its signs: mutual irritation, “charged” tone of address, differences in opinions, frequent difficulties, grumbling, prolonged dissatisfaction, whining, opposition, intrigue, gossiping.
third stage - a conflict that is openly expressed in outbursts of affect, outbursts, severe grievances and insults, support, bickering and quarrels, violence, insults, refusal to work, open persistence, disobedience, and other similar clashes and ruptures. 15
13 Ershov A. A., Maksimova R. A. Socio-psychological approach to labor productivity
teams. - Vestn. Leningr. University, 1974, No. 5.
14 Dan Spinoiu Geta. Relatiile conflictuale in grupele de munca. - In: Revista de psihologie. Bucuresti, 1970, t. 16 N 1
15 Scherke F. Die Arbeitagruppe in Betrieb. Wiesbaden, 1956, S. 45-46.
The given signs of conflict relationships are far from equivalent both in their definiteness, external expression and unambiguity, and in the possibility of interpreting the observed facts. To adequately reflect socio-psychological processes when observing them in the field, it is necessary to avoid vague indicators that carry a figurative, general, and therefore very subjective interpretation of observations, such as “nervous” anxiety, “charged” tone of address.
It is recommended to observe the structure and dynamics of group activity when solving a common problem without involvement, from the outside, using a diagram that models the progressive and cyclical change in the interaction of group members. A classic example of such observation is research according to the scheme proposed by R. Bales (1957). 16 This scheme is most suitable for observations under laboratory experimental conditions. An example of a field observation procedure is a study conducted under the direction of V. Newstetter at a summer camp for schoolchildren aged 10 to 15 years (1932 and 1933). 17 The purpose of the observation was to determine the relationships of group members to each other in dyads. All adolescents were observed for 10 minutes. Their behavior, according to special instructions, was noted in a notebook. In particular, the instructions say the following:
Choose a spontaneously occurring group situation to observe. Note the location of the action and so many social situations so that each point of the record is clear: to whom the action of the observed individual is directed, to whom in particular, by name or to everyone. Record every action of another that relates to the individual being observed. As much as possible, record every word and every action. The following is a 9-point scale for assessing the development of relationships from cordiality to hostility:
1) physical expression of sympathy (touching, stroking, etc.);
2) signs of special favor in a benevolent sense (to give, to lend, to invite, to prefer, to protect);
3) signs of camaraderie (playful fuss, whispers, laughter, smiles, collaboration, statements, inclusion of others);
16 Yadov V.A. Decree. Works, p. 115; Voronov Yu. P. Decree. Works, p. 131 – 138.
17 Newstetter W. J. e. a. Group adustment: A study in experimental sociologi. N. Y., 1938.
4) casual conversations (conversations that are not necessary for classes, greetings);
5) almost neutral, but still slightly positive disposition (questions, agreement, approval, praise, kind favors, fulfilling small requests, ignoring offense);
6) signs of indifference to the rights, demands or requests of another (ignoring a question or request, refusing to fulfill a request, trying to be ahead or dominate without a quarrel, mild irony or criticism);
7) signs of an undisguised, obvious conflict with the rights, demands or desires of others (dispute, objections to rules, norms, primacy of others);
8) signs of anger or contempt of a personal type without a direct violation of rights, demands or desires (criticism, irony, accusation);
9) signs of anger or intentional insults (disregard, resist, swear, threaten, challenge, beat).
Observation can be carried out by members of the study groups using questionnaires. This also includes self-observation.
As an example, let us give the leader behavior description questionnaire (BDQ), designed by D. Hemphill and A. Koons (1957). 18 The researchers' goal was to create as objective a method as possible for describing and measuring the specific behavior of a group leader, how he expresses his activity. Hence the procedural problems: which fragments of general behavior should be considered as leadership behavior, and with the help of which categories can this behavior be classified? To highlight leader behavior, the following operational working definition of leadership was used: leadership is the behavior of an individual when he directs the activities of a group regarding a common goal. Consequently, behavior aimed at achieving individual goals is excluded from observation. The following classification of group leader (manager) behavior types was adopted:
1) integration - methods of behavior that are aimed at increasing cooperation among group members or limiting their competition;
2) communication - ways of behavior that increase understanding and knowledge about the processes occurring in the group;
3) productivity - modes of behavior that target the amount of work performed;
4) representation - methods of behavior with the help of which the group is presented outside of it;
5) membership - modes of behavior that allow the leader to become a member of the group;
6) organization - ways of behavior that promote differentiation of responsibilities and roles and prescribe rules (norms) of behavior in a group;
7) assessment - methods of behavior that are associated with the distribution of rewards and punishments;
8) initiation - modes of behavior that lead to a change in group activity;
9) dominance - modes of behavior in which the leader ignores the ideas or personality of a group member.
18 Yemphill J.K. and Coons A.E. Development of the leader behavior description questionnaire. – In: Leader
behavior: its description and measurement. Columbus (Ohio), 1957, p. 6-38.
To ensure the greatest accuracy in describing behavior, independent of observers and different situations, the following criteria were prescribed for constructing survey items:
1) items should describe specific acts of behavior, and not general properties or characteristics of behavior;
2) questions should be applicable to different organizational structures, groups or situations; they should not be so specific that they are used only in a few situations or groups;
3) items should be formulated in terms that are meaningful to the respondents;
4) questions must be relevant to what is being measured, as well as to other dimensions;
5) behavior must be described in the present tense;
6) the paragraph begins with the pronoun “He”;
7) the question should be limited to one way of behavior;
8) questions should not be limited to adverbs characterizing the frequency with which acts of behavior occur;
9) questions should not have either emotional or evaluative components, except in situations where these components are inextricably linked with the behavior being described.
The most significant are the 1st, 2nd and 9th criteria, compliance with which minimizes the distortion of the description of behavior coming from the describer and the situation. To counteract the possible confusion between an objective quantitative description and a qualitative assessment of the leader's behavior, a form of “forced choice” was used, that is, an alternative response, both alternatives of which were equally socially acceptable. Three five-speed combinations are offered. Combination A and B consist of adverbs that express the frequency of acts of behavior, with scale B excluding extreme ratings. Scale C contains adverbs that express the quantity, volume of behavior:
Combination A: always, often, sometimes, rarely, never.
Combination B: often, quite often, sometimes, rarely, very rarely.
Combination C: a lot, quite a lot, average, relatively little, not at all.
It is preferable to use combination A whenever possible. Metrically, all combinations are ordered from (-2) to (+2).
This technique was presented to 357 students and teachers. 205 people described the behavior of the leader of a group in which they were members. 152 people described their own behavior as leaders. Additionally, a general assessment of the behavior of the described leader was given, his assessment on 10 dimensions, as well as biographical information of those described and describing. The results showed that extreme ratings were rarely used, especially in self-descriptions. Responses were concentrated at high or low frequencies, unevenly distributed along the measurement scale. Checking the connection between the general assessment of the leader’s behavior and the answers to individual items of the questionnaire confirmed the effect of the “halo effect,” i.e., the transfer of the assessment of one characteristic to others. Correlations were lower for self-descriptions than for descriptions of others' behavior.
The questionnaire was repeatedly modified in relation to the objects and purposes of the study. For example, the questionnaire by X. Unger (1969) offers questions of this type:
1. He leaves the workplace later than his employees:
always every time often sometimes quite never
2. He is dissatisfied with his employees if things go poorly:
every time often repeatedly time from on occasion quite
time is rare
The degree of intensity of the reaction can be expressed using numbers, for example: 1 - weakly, 6 - strongly expressed. In addition, the interactions of group members can be differentiated by symbols of agreement, acceptance, sympathy (+), rejection, rejection, antipathy (-), indifference, indifference (0). By doubling the sign, a measurement of the expressed attitude of people towards each other is achieved, for example: (+ +) - strong agreement, (+ 0) - little agreement.
A type of observation - introspection - underlies many materials studied by social psychologists (autobiographies, letters, records of introspection, surveys).
Systematic self-observation is most often carried out in the form of answers to questionnaires compiled by the researcher. “In this case, as Paul Fresse writes, they do not observe the subject, but turn to his experience. So, the answer to the question: “Do you get angry when you are teased?” - replaces a possible, but difficult to provoke observation with information reported by the subject himself and based on many observations.” Consequently, the procedures for constructing and testing the reliability of self-observation methods are the same as for questionnaires. “Psychologists who use the method of questionnaires or questionnaires should not forget that self-observation does not provide direct data that is of indisputable significance, but an answer that still requires interpretation.” 19
A variant of self-observation that complements observation and sociometry is a method that we called sociocommunicametry. Using a single scale and homogeneous characteristics, the studied group members determine the intensity or frequency of real and desired contacts with each of the other group members in the process of joint activities of one type or another (ordinary business and personal communication). The advantage of this method compared to sociometry is the following:
Like the acceptability or social distance scale, this method allows you to reflect the connections everyone has with each member of the group. In addition, not only projective communication is measured, which is what sociometry does, but also at the same time, in the same units, the intensity and direction of real communication. When sociometry is supplemented with observation, the comparability of results can be hampered by differences in the subjects who measure communication in a group and their frames of reference. With sociocommunicametry, this kind of distortion is removed, although the subjectivity of assessments of behavior and relationships can be high. The following socio-psychological indicators are measured through sociocommunicametry:
1) communicative activity of the group and its members, i.e. the intensity of real communication (activity coefficient);
2) sociometric activity of the group and its members, i.e., the intensity of the desired communication;
3) comfort of communication - a state in which the intensity of actual communication coincides with the desired one;
4) communication discomfort - a condition in which the intensity, frequency or duration of real and desired communication do not match, i.e. the assessment of the desired activity is not equal to the assessment of the actual activity. If the assessment of the desired activity is relatively higher than the actual one, then the discomfort has a positive direction - towards rapprochement. If lower - negative. Indicators of the communicative and sociometric status of each group member can also be calculated.
Discomfort in communication is a state of a certain need to change the nature of contacts with people.
19 Fresse P., Piaget J. Decree. Works, p. 115.
It serves as a motive for changing the behavior of group members. Using this method, the socio-psychological situation in engineering teams was studied. The results allow us to conclude that the frequency, duration and direction of contacts between group members depend on:
a) on the characteristics of the functional relationship and dependence of team members in the process of joint activities;
b) on gender, age, profession and other characteristics of team members;
c) on spatiotemporal and other physical conditions of communication (for example, location of workplaces, noise;
d) finally, on the individual characteristics of the team members and the existing relationships between them.
Advantages and disadvantages of the observation method . Reliability problem . Observation allows you to directly perceive and record acts of behavior, reflect specific processes in specific situations, which eliminates the danger of forgetting or subsequent errors in judgment. Between describing one’s own behavior, for example, during a survey, and observing the same behavior “from the outside,” there is a significant difference in the degree of objectivity in favor of the latter.
Through observation, one can more accurately measure the intensity of acts or behaviors than other methods. Thus, the degree of interaction in a work team, the influence of individual prestige on spontaneous communication, the reactions that arise in the team when a superior manager makes a statement, can be measured much more accurately by observation than by subjective description of the impressions of group members. Moreover, the results of observation do not depend on the attitudes observed in response to stereotypical or ostentatious answers, as is the case in the case of a survey, although, of course, feigned behavior in the presence of an observer is not excluded. In addition, an experienced observer perceives what is happening holistically and can simultaneously record the behavior of a number of individuals or an entire group. 20
However, observation also has its drawbacks. Attitudes, interests, psychological states, personal characteristics observers can very sensitively influence the results of observation. 21 The more the observer is focused on confirming his hypothesis, the greater the distortion in the perception of events. He perceives selectively, only part of what is happening. Prolonged observation leads to fatigue, adaptation to the situation, and a feeling of monotony, which increases the risk of inaccurate recordings. The observer may be influenced by the persons being observed. Difficulties in interpreting what is observed are also due to the ambiguous relationship between motives and forms of behavior. Finally, observation requires a significant investment of time.
20 The Social Research Process, p. 327-329.
21 Rogovin M. S. Decree. Works, p. 162-168.
The problem of reliability of observation comes down not only to clarifying the hypotheses of the subject of research, to identifying criteria and categories, signs of observation, to monitoring and comparing the results obtained on identical objects, but also to eliminating errors of personal and psychological origin in the very perception of the observer.
The following are considered typical observation errors:
1. Halo effect, which is based on the generalized impression of the observer and leads to a rough generalization, an assessment “in black and white”;
2. The effect of leniency, which consists in the tendency to give an overly positive assessment of observed events and actions;
3. Error of central tendency, which consists in the desire to average estimates of observed processes; it is known that extreme signs of behavior are much less common than properties of average intensity;
4. A logical error when, for example, one draws a conclusion about a person’s intelligence from his eloquence or that an amiable person is also good-natured; this error is based on the assumption of a close connection between certain personality traits;
5. Contrast error, which is caused by the observer’s tendency to emphasize features that are opposite to himself in those being observed.
There are errors of first impressions, prejudices, ethnic, professional and other stereotypes, substitution of a description of a fact with an opinion about it, etc. 22 Thus, increasing the reliability of observation results primarily depends on the preparation and training of observers, on the clear organization of observation, the selection of reasonable, unambiguous observables characteristics that are recorded using a unified system of indicators in a language accessible to others.
Observation requires observation, the ability not only to look, but also to see qualities, which were considered the most important for a scientist by C. Darwin and I. P. Pavlov. Vigilance, freshness of view, the ability to see what does not fit into the framework of what was previously learned are characteristic of creative thinking. Observer training includes exercises to observe individual signs, aspects of behavior, without losing touch with the whole; practicing terminological accuracy in describing events and phenomena; mastery of modern technical means of observation and recording.
22 See The Process of Social Research, p. 329-333; Vodovich.V. I. Reliability of information in
sociological research. Kyiv, 1974, p. 109-120.
It is also worth remembering that P. P. Blonsky advised psychologists to use shorthand.
For a social psychologist in the role of an observer, it is important to establish mutually acceptable relationships with the people being observed. At the same time, psychologists, like doctors, always need to remember the well-known ethical covenant: “do no harm.”
The scope of application of the observation method is determined by the personal and mental capabilities of observers, technical means of observation and recording, characteristics of the object, accessibility for observation of certain socio-psychological phenomena, relationships between observers and observed, etc.
Observation is used primarily when minimal intervention is required. natural process behavior, relationships between people, when they strive to get a holistic picture of what is happening, to reflect both conscious and unconscious, verbal and non-verbal forms of behavior.
Typically, observation in socio-psychological research is used together with other methods: experiment, survey, document analysis.
Observation in learning
Lecture 1. Subject and tasks of social psychology
Social psychology as a field of science
Formation of the subject of social psychology and its theory
Relationship between social psychology and other sciences
Methodology and methods of social psychology
In the process of formation of the subject of social psychology as a science, several periods can be distinguished:
1. Accumulation of socio-psychological knowledge in the field of philosophy and general psychology (VI century BC - mid-19th V.).
2. Separation of descriptive social psychology from philosophy, sociology and general psychology into an independent field of knowledge (50-60s of the 19th century - 20s of the 20th century).
3. Formalization of social psychology as a science with all its inherent attributes (20s of the XX century).
The unique date of birth of social psychology is considered to be 1908, when the works of V. McDougall and E. Ross, whose titles included the term “social psychology,” were simultaneously published.
Currently, most scientists come to the conclusion that social psychology is a science that studies patterns of behavior and activity of people determined by their inclusion in social groups, as well as the psychological characteristics of these groups.
The process of formulating the subject of social psychology can be considered not only chronologically, but also conceptually, or rather, chronologically-conceptually. This approach is more expedient, since it allows us to consider the process of polishing the subject of science both over time and within the framework of various scientific schools.
Initially, social psychology could not precisely define its subject. Some authors, considering it a branch of sociology, limited social psychology to the tasks of additional psychological interpretation of the phenomena studied by sociologists. Others believed that social psychology is part of general psychology, and its purpose boils down to introducing social amendments into general psychological knowledge. Still others argued that social psychology is an intermediate link between sociology and general psychology. This interpretation of the subject of social psychology is reflected in its position among other sciences. In particular, in the United States, the section of social psychology is affiliated with both the American Sociological Association and the American Psychological Association. A similar situation has developed in domestic social psychology. All this suggests that the subject of social psychology has not yet been clearly defined.
In foreign social psychology, each scientific school tried to define its subject in its own way, based on its own understanding of the issue. A unique approach to identifying the main problems of social psychology was shown by representatives of such scientific directions as the psychology of peoples and masses, the theory of instincts of social behavior and group dynamics, social Darwinism and behaviorism, Gestalt psychology and psychoanalysis, interactionism and cognitivism, existential psychology and transactional analysis, etc.
In domestic social psychology, several stages can be distinguished that are associated with a discussion about its subject. This debate took place most acutely in the 1920s. As a result, a pseudoscientific understanding of social psychology was formed. The fate of domestic social psychology was influenced by the point of view of the founder and director of the psychological institute, G. I. Chelpanov, who proposed dividing psychology into two parts: social and psychology proper. Social psychology, in his opinion, should be developed within the framework of Marxism, and psychology itself must remain empirical. During these years, representatives of collective reactology and reflexology expressed their understanding of the subject of social psychology. Thus, the subject of collective reflexology was defined as follows: “The study of the emergence, development and activity of meetings and gatherings that manifest their conciliar correlative activity as a whole thanks to the mutual communication of the individuals included in them.” Thus the issue was not resolved.
In the 50-60s, the discussion about the subject of social psychology was again launched. At this time, there were three approaches to solving this issue. Representatives of the first understood social psychology as the science of “mass phenomena of the psyche.” Proponents of the second approach saw personality as its main subject, while others tried to synthesize the two previous ones, i.e. they viewed social psychology as a science that studies both mass mental processes and the position of the individual in a group. Not a single textbook on social psychology contained a definition of its subject.
The definition of the subject of social psychology was greatly complicated by the fact that for a long time it developed as a descriptive science, in line with everyday ideas. Hence, instead of a clear conceptual apparatus in social psychology, a terminological conglomerate has developed based on uncritical borrowing from sociology, general psychology and other sciences. All this clouds the question of the subject of social psychology. However, the main difficulty is related to the ambiguous understanding of the unit of analysis.
In psychology, a unit of analysis means a universal concept, a common component of various mental processes. In general psychology, the unit of analysis is a sensation, image, etc. In social psychology, various phenomena are considered the unit of analysis. Some scientists believe that this is a joint activity, others - communication, others - personality, etc. “Interaction” is considered a universal concept, as a result of which socio-psychological phenomena are formed. Essentially, they are interaction effects. And it is they who act as the universal concept of social psychology, the unit of its analysis.
Socio-psychological phenomena- these are phenomena that arise as a result of the interaction of subjects (individuals and communities) in certain conditions, reflecting them in various forms, expressing attitudes towards them, motivating and regulating people’s behavior, exchanging messages and experiences, and also contributing to the organization, both socially useful and and criminal activity.
The main socio-psychological phenomena include: communication, opinion and mood, community, stratification, stereotype, conflict, lifestyle, etc. Socio-psychological phenomena are reflected in the corresponding conceptual apparatus, thesaurus. They are classified on various grounds: content, sustainability, etc. So, according to their content, they are divided into normal and deformed. The criteria for normal socio-psychological phenomena are their positive, stabilizing influence on the state of politics, economics and society, on the life perceptions and actions of individuals. As for the deformation of socio-psychological phenomena, their differences consist in negative, destabilizing, disorganizing influences. This circumstance creates the preconditions for the creation of extreme social psychology.
Depending on the subject of occurrence, the following socio-psychological phenomena differ: interpersonal; group; intergroup; mass-like. Conscious and unconscious socio-psychological phenomena are distinguished.
According to the degree of stability, socio-psychological phenomena are divided into dynamic (for example, various types of communication), dynamic-static (for example, opinions and moods) and static (for example, traditions, customs). Typically, only group phenomena were considered in dynamics and statics. This tradition goes back to the school of “group dynamics” by K. Lewin.
Communication acts as the main mechanism for the emergence of socio-psychological phenomena. As a result, a personality is formed, small groups and the psychology of broader communities are formed, and changes of varying degrees of complexity occur. If we keep in mind the mechanisms of the emergence and spread of socio-psychological phenomena, then they are divided into those created intentionally (rumors, various groups, etc.), as well as spontaneously arising and spreading (fashion, etc.).
The universal mechanisms of socio-psychological phenomena include:
Imitation is following an example or image;
Suggestion is a process of influence associated with a decrease in consciousness and criticality in the perception and implementation of the transmitted content;
Contagion is the process of transferring an emotional state from one individual to another;
Persuasion is a method of influencing the consciousness of an individual;
Identification is the process of unification or, more precisely, identification.
It is these mechanisms that underlie social learning and behavior. A vivid description of one of the mechanisms of socio-psychological phenomena is contained in famous fairy tale X. Andersen about the naked king. This tale is an example of conformism, with the help of which mass deception is committed. The fear of not being “like everyone else,” of being punished for disagreeing with the general opinion, preserves the lie and forces it to be perceived as the truth.
Thus, subject of social psychology is the study of the patterns of occurrence, functioning and manifestation of socio-psychological phenomena at the macro, average and micro levels, in various fields, in normal, complicated and extreme conditions. As a matter of fact, this is the subject of only one part of social psychology - its theoretical field. The subject of applied social psychology consists of the laws of psychodiagnostics, counseling and the use of psychotechnologies in the field of socio-psychological phenomena.
Social psychological theory cannot be imagined without particular theories, that is, without such theoretical and applied disciplines as political psychology, ethnopsychology, management psychology, economic psychology, environmental psychology, etc. As for the content applied social psychology, then its “core” is formed by socio-psychological diagnostics, counseling, influence and psychotechnologies in social practice. In this case, socio-psychological theory is like the trunk of the tree of social psychology, and its branches, accordingly, are the listed branches.
The main task of socio-psychological theory is to illuminate the main characteristics of socio-psychological phenomena, explain the causes and mechanisms, make forecasts for their development, as well as scientifically disclose and substantiate the essence of methods for providing socio-psychological assistance.
The structure of socio-psychological theory includes the following components: 1) methodology; 2) phenomenology; 3) patterns and mechanisms; 4) theoretical justification for praxeology (methods of applying various influences or their combinations from the point of view of their effectiveness). Western social psychology is freer from methodology, instead of which it uses professional “ideology”.
Russian social psychology has long-standing traditions, although not always positive, of interaction with philosophy. In the past, the development of social psychology was hampered by the overly rigid framework of a philosophy that was ossified in its dogmas. Now in the field of philosophy and social psychology the situation has changed dramatically.
In the humanities, the approach to social phenomena from the standpoint of understanding sociology and psychology. As the German philosopher and cultural historian V. Dilthey correctly noted, it is not enough to record socio-psychological phenomena; they also need to be “felt” in order to be known. Social psychology needs cooperation with social philosophy and sociology. At the same time, it cannot do without history, just as it is impossible to understand and explain history without social psychology.
Social psychology has three levels of research: 1) experimental-empirical; 2) theoretical; 3) philosophical and methodological. At the experimental-empirical level, the accumulation of empirical material necessary for further generalization is carried out. At the theoretical level, the results of empirical research are generalized, conceptual models of socio-psychological processes are created, and the categorical apparatus of science is improved. The philosophical and methodological level provides a worldview generalization of research results and allows us to highlight new aspects of the influence of the “human factor” on social development. The listed levels of research reflect the logic of constructing socio-psychological research, however, the beginning of any research is the determination of the methodology of scientific research . In modern scientific knowledge methodology is considered in three aspects.
1. General methodology - this is a certain general philosophical approach, a way of cognition (for social psychology, dialectical and historical materialism). General methodology formulates the most general principles that are applied in research.
2. Private (special) methodology - it is a set of methodological principles applied to a given field of knowledge. Frequent methodology is also a way of cognition, but applicable to a narrower sphere of knowledge (for example, the principle of activity, the principle of development, etc.).
3. Methodology as a set of specific methodological techniques – These are specific techniques, a tool for understanding certain socio-psychological phenomena.
Based on methodological principles, the researcher selects those adequate to the suppressed task. research methods , which are divided into two groups: 1) methods of collecting information (observation, experiment, survey, testing, study of documents); 2) methods of information processing (correlation analysis, factor analysis, construction of typologies, etc.).
One of the oldest, proven methods used in all sciences is observation. This is a scientifically targeted, organized and recorded perception of the object being studied in a certain way. The subject of socio-psychological observation is the verbal and non-verbal acts of behavior of an individual, a group or several groups of people in a certain social environment and situation. The main advantage of observation is its naturalness and the ability to “cover” the phenomenon as a whole. The disadvantages of observation include its passivity and the inability to know the cause of the phenomenon. Its implementation requires quite a long time. Observation can be used either independently or in combination with other methods.
Experiment – one of the main research methods in social psychology. It involves the study of cause-and-effect relationships. Unlike observation, this is an active method. There are two main types of experiments: laboratory, which is carried out under special conditions, and natural, carried out in real conditions. For both types, there are general rules that express the essence of the method, namely: 1) arbitrary introduction of independent variables by the experimenter and control over them, as well as observation of changes in dependent variables; 2) selection of control and experimental groups. In addition, each type of experiment is subject to specific rules.
U survey As a method of social psychology, there are several types: 1) questioning (correspondence survey); 2) interview (face-to-face survey); 3) sociometry (some scientists attribute this method to natural experiments). The advantages of the survey are the relative simplicity of the methodology, ease of data processing (currently using a computer) and the ability to reach a large number of people in a short time.
Among all types of survey, the one that stands out is sociometry, aimed at studying interpersonal relationships. Founder of the theoretical concept of sociometry D. Moreno. Sociometry is a system of techniques that allows for the quantitative determination of preferences, indifferences and rejections that individuals receive in the process of communication in a group.
Sociometry involves analyzing the meaningful responses of group members to a series of questions posed that relate to the business or personal relationships of group members. The generalized picture of the elections is represented by a sociomatrix, based on which various indices (coefficients) are calculated, reflecting the parameters of communication and interaction in the group (for example, the value of the sociometric status of each group member, the index of group cohesion, integrativeness, group referentiality, etc.). The picture of relationships in a group is presented graphically in the form of a sociogram. Indices reflect only the quantitative side of the relationship, and the motivation for choice remains outside the scope of study.
Tests and method of studying documents in social psychology they are used less frequently, although they are also quite informative. These methods have an independent status, but can also be used in combination with others. The study of documents is usually carried out using content analysis and is aimed at understanding the products of human activity. In social psychology, personality tests are most often used.
When researching in social psychology, the following problems are distinguished: 1) socio-psychological in large groups (problems of the psychology of classes, nations, patterns of the spread of fashion, rumors, problems of mass communication, etc.); 2) socio-psychological in small groups (problems of compatibility, interpersonal relationships, perception and understanding of a person by a person, the position of a leader in a group, etc.), as well as in special (special) groups: family, brigade, military, educational and others teams; 3) socio-psychological manifestations of personality in a team.
Each science has its own methods of research and collection of information. Social psychology is no exception. Although, as an independent science, it began to be singled out only towards the end of the 19th century. Methods of social psychology are used to study the basic psychological phenomena in society and their patterns. Studying the totality of all indicators helps to reveal the essence and depth of ongoing processes and phenomena in society.
All methods used in social psychology can be divided into two large groups:
1. Method of collecting information (observation, experiment, survey, test, study of documentary sources).
2. Method of information processing (correlation and factor analysis, construction of typologies, etc.).
Observation
This method can rightfully be called the most “ancient” and one of the most popular. It does not require special preparations or tools. True, there is also a significant drawback - there is no clear plan for recording data and their interpretation. Each subsequent researcher will describe the data through the prism of his own perception.
What is the subject of observation in social psychology? First of all, verbal and non-verbal acts in the behavior of one person, small or large group who are in certain conditions of the social environment or situation. For example, answer the question?
There are several types of observation:
External observation is a method of collecting information that each of us often uses. The researcher, through direct observation from the outside, obtains information about the psychology and behavior of people.
Internal observation or self-observation is when a research psychologist wants to study the phenomenon of interest to him exactly in the form in which it is presented in consciousness. Sets a task for himself and conducts internal observation of himself.
Observation examines an object or phenomenon as a whole. This method of social psychology is not limited to a clear study program. The observer can change the object of his observation at any time if he is interested in something that was not planned in advance. Using this method, it will not be possible to identify the cause of what is happening, and you will have to spend a lot of time.
Experiment
This method of psychological research is quite specific. The researcher, if necessary, can work and create an artificial situation to study a certain property, which “here and now” will be manifested best.
The experiment can be natural or laboratory. What distinguishes them is that the psychology and behavior of people can be studied in remote or close to reality conditions.
A natural experiment takes place in an ordinary life situation. The researcher only records data without interfering in the course of events.
Laboratory experiment opposite. It takes place in a previously artificially created situation. This is done in order to study a certain property as best as possible.
Survey
One of the frequently used methods of social psychology can be safely called a survey. These are usually a series of questions that subjects must answer. Its greatest advantage is that it can reach a large number of respondents in a short period of time.
Specialists use oral questioning when they need to observe how a person behaves and how he reacts to questions. It, unlike written, will allow a deeper study of human psychology. However, it requires more special training and time.
In order to cover a large number of subjects, a written survey is used - a questionnaire.
If a written or oral survey is not limited to certain answers to questions, then it is called free. Its advantage is that you can get interesting and non-standard answers.
The tests we all know are also one of the methods of social psychology. With their help, the researcher receives accurate information, both qualitatively and quantitatively.
With the help of tests it is easy to compare psychology with each other different people, give assessments, study yourself. Probably everyone has answered test questions at least once?
Tests are divided into two types - assignment and questionnaire. You and I come across questionnaires more often. They are based on a system of responses that are carefully selected and tested for reliability and validity. The test questionnaire allows you to study the psychological qualities of people.
The test task will help to assess the psychological and behavioral qualities of a person based on what and how he does. This method is based on a series of special tasks presented to the subject. Based on the results of the test, we can talk about whether a person has a certain quality and how developed it is.
Sociometry is widely used in the study of psychology and behavior of small groups.
Statistical method
In social psychology, methods and models of mathematical statistics are widely used. They help in collecting information, as well as its processing, analysis, modeling and comparison of results.
In the article we have listed the main research methods in social psychology. Each of them has its own advantages and disadvantages. Which method to choose depends on what goal the researcher sets for himself and what process or phenomenon he plans to study.
Historically, the observation method in psychology is one of the most popular, as well as one of the simplest methods. In psychology, observation is understood as a systematic and targeted study of someone’s behavior for the purpose of further analysis and explanation. In this case, intervention on the part of the observer is strictly prohibited, since it can cause changes in the behavior of a person or group of people.
Despite the fact that everyone uses observation to some extent, scientific observation differs in many ways from everyday observation and is much more difficult to perform. Thus, scientific observation should be carried out on the basis of a clear plan and serve to obtain the most objective picture possible. It also implies a strict procedure for carrying out and recording the results in a special diary (which is generally typical for psychology or medicine).
Observation in psychology claims not only to describe observed phenomena, but also to describe them. psychological interpretation. This is the main feature of psychological observation: the goal is to reveal the psychological content based on the available facts about the behavior of the object. This means that scientific observation requires special training, which gives the observer special knowledge and qualities that will help in interpreting psychological facts.
In psychology, scientific observation can take two forms: introspection (introspection) and external (objective) observation.
Considering that in modern psychology it is customary to proceed from the unity of internal and external, we will rather talk not about two methods that complement each other, but about their unity and transition into each other.
Observation helps to study various phenomena under certain conditions without interfering with their course.
The subject of observation in psychology can be a person’s actions, his speech and the accompanying facial expressions and gestures.
Of interest to the observer may be a manifestation of behavior that is related to a specific research task; therefore, the observer should wait until the observed person manifests himself in a certain way. Since the perception of external behavior is only subjective, one should never rush to conclusions. To obtain correct conclusions, it is necessary to check the results of the study several times and compare them with the previously obtained results of other observations.
In addition, observing and recording manifestations of mental properties is not always enough. The observer should be convinced of the typicality and repeatability of a particular property. When observing great value acquires an analysis of the individual’s erroneous actions. Having analyzed the nature of errors and the reasons for their occurrence, we can outline effective ways to eliminate them Kamenskaya, E. N. Social psychology: Lecture notes: Tutorial/ E. N. Kamenskaya [Text].-- Rostov n/D: Phoenix, 2006.- P. 56.. The objectivity of observation (which is the main criterion for its scientific nature) is verified either by repeated observation, or by conducting an experiment and using other observation methods . To increase the objectivity of observation, modern technical means are often used, such as photography, video recording, and audio recording.
The main advantage of this method is the following: since the observation is carried out in a natural setting, the behavior of the observed persons does not change dramatically. This means that you can monitor both one person and a group of people. This method is suitable for use in a variety of conditions: in a work team or, for example, in a school class. Unfortunately, the observation method has not only undeniable advantages, but also disadvantages. For example, due to the fact that observation does not make changes in the activities of the group being studied, situations that are of interest to the observer may not always arise in it. The second significant disadvantage of the observation method is its labor intensity and complexity of execution.
Types of observations (see Appendix A) Social psychology: Reader: [Text] Textbook for university students / Comp. E. P. Belinskaya, O. A. Tikhomandritskaya. - M: Aspect Press, 2003.- P. 78.:
1) hidden (in the case when the subject is not aware that he is being observed);
2) internal (introspection - introspection, observation of one’s thoughts and feelings);
3) standardized (occurs within the framework of an established program);
4) free (without restrictions within the program);
5) included (the researcher takes an active part in the process);
6) not included (the researcher becomes an outside observer).
First, let's look at standardized and free observations.
Standardized observation involves the perception of a situation, which must proceed sequentially and lead the observer to the final goal. Standardized observation is possible if a number of conditions are met:
There must be a clear surveillance plan;
Proposing a hypothesis proposed to explain the phenomena that have arisen.
And its further confirmation and refutation.
The results are necessarily recorded.
Free observation, as mentioned earlier, is not limited by the scope of the experiment. Nevertheless, it cannot do without a plan, control methods, and sometimes even a system of methods. Free observation is considered initial stage research to expand knowledge about the problem being identified.
Participant observation. With the participation of the person being studied. That is, the psychologist himself is involved in the process in its internal component, and conducts observations, creates notes and conclusions. This method is relevant for use in relation to special social groups. Those to which outside access is limited. (sects, criminal groups, etc.).
Participant observation is divided into two variations:
1) full participant observation.
2) simple participant observation.
In the first case, observation is more secretive in nature, since the motivation for the psychologist’s actions is known to those being observed. When placed in the right environment, the psychologist takes an active position in participating in the process along with everyone else.
At that moment when, with simple participant observation, the researcher takes a neutral side and engages only in observation.
Sometimes the following problem arises: that when a psychologist is involved in the process, he is faced with a violation of his personal perception of reality. Then the following type of observation comes to replace it.
Not included (external) observation. With such an observation, one must take into account the fact that the outer shell of the process is only the source, and the main point be inside. The extent to which the participant interacts with the process in this case depends on the initially set tasks and the general nature of the experiment.
Now it's time to talk about covert surveillance, which is characterized by the fact that the participant is not aware that he is being watched from the outside. The peculiarity of this method is that the psychological state of the person being monitored can change quite radically if he somehow receives this information. And, based on many years of practice, as a rule, the behavior of the subject in such a situation changes quite significantly.
Using this method, one can well study the characteristic traits of a person, his mental characteristics and temperament. After all, it is known that from the visible factors of a person’s behavior in a certain situation, it is quite possible to create, if not a complete, but rather approximate portrait of his essence, emotional state, inclinations and other aspects.
But we know that, depending on the tasks set, the psychologist’s area of interest is aimed at identifying a certain manifestation.
The popular Gesell mirror, transparent on one side (from the observer’s side), but reflecting rays on the other side (from the side of the person being monitored), a camera, a tape recorder - these are the most used means for covert observation of an object. This method is often used in in relation to children, their characteristics of interaction during games and direct contact. Internal observation is a purely psychological method, which is characterized as an object’s personal observation of itself, its emotions, internal manifestations, thoughts. This is necessary so that before allowing oneself to more or less realistically analyze the state of other individuals, the psychologist has the opportunity to conduct a personality study using his own example. The method of self-observation is continuously connected with observation. As mentioned above, introspection is a specific phenomenon of psychology. This method is considered as an independent separate part practical identification of the situation, and as a supplement to the main actions. Such basic things as the ability to distinguish colors, to rehabilitate oneself in the environment, to express emotions - all this is the result of involuntary introspection. Agree that if a person is not able to study himself, he will not be able to study others, much less bring new knowledge into the field of social psychology. After all, all available knowledge today takes its root from the results of a person’s curiosity about his personality in an internal spiritual sense. In the process of this method, mental manifestations such as performance, wakefulness, irritability, professional productivity and much more are observed. For successful work a psychologist needs to learn to assess his condition as objectively as possible. Because when faced with other individuals in practice, attempts to understand their essence are often based on comparison with their personal reactions to certain things. That is, there is a certain comparison between oneself and others. But! No matter how useful the method of self-observation is, it has a number of significant drawbacks. These include factors such as:
It is quite difficult to monitor oneself morally. Since mental influence on oneself can distort the expected reactions of the individual;
It is impossible to perceive a situation completely objectively, since subjectivity is inseparable from a person.
It is not always possible to grasp all the nuances of a person’s experiences Rudensky, E. V. Social psychology / [text]. - M.: INFRA-M; Novosibirsk: NGAEiU, “Siberian Agreement”, 1999. - P. 135..