SOCIAL GROUPS
The term group has a specific definition in sociology that differs from everyday
usage. In colloquial language, almost any group of people can be called a group.
However, two or more people who are in close physical distance are not a group in the
sociological sense of the word. Sociologically, a group is a group of people who interact
regularly based on common interests and who develop a sense of belonging that sets
them apart from other groups of people. They form social relationships. This is
sometimes referred to as developing a sense of "belonging". All groups share this factor
of interdependence (Lewin 1948). People who happen to be in the same place at the
same time are not a group. Instead, they are aggregates. Individuals who drive buses or
walk their dogs in the park are examples of aggregates.
If these people interact and develop some kind of common interest or feeling as
a group, then they become a group by definition. For example, a walker who takes a
dog in the afternoon might start talking to each other about their pet, then start walking
each afternoon by bringing their dog on the same schedule, and even plan events
together, such as obedience classes and training for their dog. Through these shared
interests and interactions, these walkers can begin to identify themselves as members
of a group of dog lovers. They may even adopt some kind of name to identify
themselves, for example Depok Dogs Lover Community.
Another example, albeit tragic, of a group that grew very quickly into a group
was on September 11, 2001, when the hijackers flew planes to the World Trade Center
and the Pentagon. The passengers of United Airlines Flight 93 that crashed in
Pennsylvania started in aggregate and became a group when they joined together to
fight the hijackers.
Another term that is often confused with group is category. A category refers to
people who share some common characteristics or status. Categories are often used by
sociologists and other researchers interested in studying social life. Age, race, gender,
income level, religious affiliation, being a musician, owning a pet, or living in an
apartment that is all categories. People in a category don't always interact or share a
sense of belonging, and may not even know each other.
Researchers have also shown that sometimes the categorization in our minds is
as fundamental as the group with which we identify and feel a sense of belonging and
loyalty, in the in-group, and the group of groups with which we do not identify or in
which we may develop a sense of hostility towards that group, the so-called out-group.
We also tend to develop a bias in which we prefer the group within us, viewing them in
a better light than that "other" (Sumner 1906).
We often prefer fraternities or sororities, or people from our ethnic group, for
example, over others for this reason. For example, a group of students from ethnicity A
will be more likely to accept new members from ethnicity A than B. Perhaps the group
will even teach new members how bad other groups outside the group are. This in-
group/out-group difference serves to build group identity and solidarity. Groups use a
variety of ways to distinguish who is "in" and who is "out". Rituals such as secret
handshakes (Collins 1989) or symbols such as team uniforms, gang colors, or awards
honoring members' achievements are all ways to show the group's identity and
strengthen membership.
Conflict with other groups can also strengthen group solidarity (Coser 1956).
Members of one group come together to challenge a common enemy—the ancient idea
of "us" against "them." Thus, having an outgroup to focus on can strengthen a sense of
belonging and support the development of a sense of group identity as members tend to
focus on differences between groups rather than similarities (Coser 1956; Sherif 1966;
Quattrane 1986). Street gangs or racist groups such as skinheads or Ku Klux Klan
illustrate this concept in their daily actions.
This group identity can even defeat and eliminate pre-existing relationships
between members and "other" groups. Research conducted by Sherif and colleagues
shows this process. A number of boys participated in a camping trip where they were
closely observed by the researchers. The research team organizes and manipulates
various situations involving group membership and competitions. After the boys
participated in camp activities and made friends for a week, the researchers divided the
boys into two competitive groups, deliberately placing the best friends into different
groups. The resulting in-group/out-group conflict became stronger than the previous
bond of friendship (Sherif and Sherif 1953). A more recent example of this dynamic
occurred in the former Yugoslavia, where the emphasis on in-group/out-group conflict
led to horrific bloodshed between Serbs and Muslims, some of whom had individually
become friends before.
