scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question

Showing papers on "Ingroups and outgroups published in 1973"




Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors investigated the implicative meaning of philotimo (or "love of honor" -the highest Greek value which regulates proper in-group behavior) across milieux within Greece.
Abstract: This study investigated the implicative meaning of philotimo (or "love of honor"-the highest Greek value, which regulates proper in-group behavior) across milieux within Greece. The antecedent-consequent method of measuring subjective culture was used. The sample interviewed consisted of 740 subjects (47% male and 53% female) 15 to 64 years of age, who were representative of Athens and Thessaloniki (30% of Greece's population). Findings showed that as milieu complexity, education, and social involvement increase, the antecedents and consequents of philotimo change. The direction of change suggests that, when the individual moves from a less to a more highly complex milieu within Greece, his social conduct ceases to be regulated by ingroup norms, and role perceptions become more important. Consequently, philotimo is expressed in terms allowing for more individualized interpretation depending on the social context.

41 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
01 Sep 1973
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examine the effects of individual expertise on gaining behavioral social power and find that the operationalization of expertise used (ingroup versus alone or autonomous) affected the relationship of expertise and social power.
Abstract: A study was designed to examine the effects of individual expertise on gaining behavioral social power. Major findings were as follows. 1) The operationalization of expertise used (ingroup versus alone or autonomous) affected the relationship of expertise and social power. 2) Expertise effects were weaker in spontaneously interacting groups as compared to cyclically interacting groups. 3) Sex differences were significant. 4) Differential participation was a much stronger correlate of social power than any measure of expertise used. 5) Perception of demonstrable expertise varied dramatically by sex and communication pattern. Some results indicate the need for a reevaluation of the concept of expert power, and of its value in explaining the development of group power structures.

7 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, 90 African and 81 White Rhodesian teacher-trainees matched for age and education were given the F-scale measure of personality, a measure of social distance toward outgroups and an anti-African measure (in the case ofthe whites) or an antiEuropean measure, since the African; were significantly less distant toward outgroup than the whites but were not less authoritarian (F-scale)and the correlation between the Fscale and social distance was not significant in either group, it was concluded that prejudice in this setting is not closely related to inner needs.
Abstract: To test the argument that prejudice is a reflection of inner needs (‘expressive’ theory) 90 African and 81 White Rhodesian teacher-trainees matched for age and education were given the F-scale measure of personality a measure of social distance toward outgroups and an anti-African measure (in the case ofthe whites) or an anti-European measure (in the case of the Africans), Since the African; were significantly less distant toward outgroup than the whites but were not less authoritarian (F-scale)and the correlation between the F-scale and social distance was not significant in either group, it was concluded that prejudice in this setting is not closely related to inner needs. An explanation for the obtained findings is given in terms of social factors and cultural norms.

5 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: For example, this article pointed out that social group workers might be modifying a particular type of group, and whether the "product" of a social group worker might be different from a natural group.
Abstract: 60 Efforts to construct a theory of social group work have fallen short because, among other things, they have not recognized that the social group-work group is artificial. They have always taken it for granted that the group—almost any group—is a natural phenomenon that "just grows" by itself. They have never stopped to consider whether social group workers might be cre ating a particular type of group, and whether the "product" of social group workers might be different from a natural group. This, in part, is why small-group theory, social psychology, and group dynamics have had so little to contribute to the practice and theory of social group work. It is true that social psychology attempts to ex plain groups in both natural situations and artificially generated ones, but so far it has never come to grips with the empir ical gestalt composed of a social group worker mindful of certan values (those of the agency) and a collection of individuals who are in a special relationship with the worker and with whom the worker is try ing to form a group. This is the totality that would have to be accounted for in

4 citations