Sociology Chapter 5: Groups And Organizations

Front 1

social group

Back 1

a collection of people who interact with each other and have certain feelings of unity (sorority)

Front 2

social aggregate

Back 2

just a number of people who happen to be in one place but do not interact with each other (line at a store)

Front 3

social category

Back 3

a number of people who have something in common but who neither interact with one another nor gather in one place (men)

Front 4

in-group

Back 4

the group to which an individual is strongly tied as a member (Pi Beta Phi)

Front 5

out-group

Back 5

the group of which an individual is not a member (Gamma Phi Beta)

Front 6

Three characteristics of a cohesive in-group

Back 6

1. use of symbols such as names, slogans, dress, or badges to identify themselves so that they will be distinguishable from the out-group
2. view themselves in terms of positive stereotypes and the out-group in terms of negative stereotypes
3. inclined to compete or clash with the out-group

Front 7

reference group

Back 7

a group that is used as the frame of reference for evaluating one's own behavior (an in-group can become a reference group)

Front 8

primary group

Back 8

individuals interact informally, relate to each other as whole persons, and enjoy their relationship for its own sake (sorority, family, etc)

Front 9

secondary group

Back 9

individuals don't know each other personally and may have little face-to-face interaction. If they interact they do so formally and relate to each other only in terms of particular roles for certain practical purposes. (Salesclerks and customers)

Front 10

Three types of leaders

Back 10

1. Instrumental leaders
2. Expressive leaders
3. Laissez-faire leaders

Front 11

instrumental leaders

Back 11

those who achieve their groups goal by getting others to focus on task performance. (Also known as autocratic leaders.) "Let's get to work! We're getting off-track!" This kind of leadership can get the group to move toward a goal but it often rubs people the wrong way. (stereotypical CEO)Most people tend to not like them. Most effective.

Front 12

expressive leaders

Back 12

achieve group harmony by making others feel good. (Also known as democratic leaders.) More concerned with members' feelings, making sure everyone is happy, so that cohesiveness can reign in the group. Partnership between leader and followers (People's Organization) More effective.

Front 13

laissez-faire leader

Back 13

lets others work more or less on their own; it is widely assumed that people, especially those with much education or special skill, will perform well if left relatively alone with a minimum of direction, instruction, or supervision from below. However, this means little or no social support. Least effective.

Front 14

idiosyncrasy credit

Back 14

the privilege that allows leaders to leaders to deviate from their groups' norms or, by extension, society's norms. (Bill Clinton's affair.)

Front 15

Solomon Asch

Back 15

conducted classic short line-long line experiment to study social pressure to conform

Front 16

social group

Back 16

a collection of people who interact with each other and have certain feelings of unity (sorority)

Front 17

social aggregate

Back 17

just a number of people who happen to be in one place but do not interact with each other (line at a store)

Front 18

social category

Back 18

a number of people who have something in common but who neither interact with one another nor gather in one place (men)

Front 19

in-group

Back 19

the group to which an individual is strongly tied as a member (Pi Beta Phi)

Front 20

out-group

Back 20

the group of which an individual is not a member (Gamma Phi Beta)

Front 21

Three characteristics of a cohesive in-group

Back 21

1. use of symbols such as names, slogans, dress, or badges to identify themselves so that they will be distinguishable from the out-group
2. view themselves in terms of positive stereotypes and the out-group in terms of negative stereotypes
3. inclined to compete or clash with the out-group

Front 22

reference group

Back 22

a group that is used as the frame of reference for evaluating one's own behavior (an in-group can become a reference group)

Front 23

primary group

Back 23

individuals interact informally, relate to each other as whole persons, and enjoy their relationship for its own sake (sorority, family, etc)

Front 24

secondary group

Back 24

individuals don't know each other personally and may have little face-to-face interaction. If they interact they do so formally and relate to each other only in terms of particular roles for certain practical purposes. (Salesclerks and customers)

Front 25

Three types of leaders

Back 25

1. Instrumental leaders
2. Expressive leaders
3. Laissez-faire leaders

Front 26

instrumental leaders

Back 26

those who achieve their groups goal by getting others to focus on task performance. (Also known as autocratic leaders.) "Let's get to work! We're getting off-track!" This kind of leadership can get the group to move toward a goal but it often rubs people the wrong way. (stereotypical CEO)Most people tend to not like them. Most effective.

Front 27

expressive leaders

Back 27

achieve group harmony by making others feel good. (Also known as democratic leaders.) More concerned with members' feelings, making sure everyone is happy, so that cohesiveness can reign in the group. Partnership between leader and followers (People's Organization) More effective.

Front 28

laissez-faire leader

Back 28

lets others work more or less on their own; it is widely assumed that people, especially those with much education or special skill, will perform well if left relatively alone with a minimum of direction, instruction, or supervision from below. However, this means little or no social support. Least effective.

Front 29

idiosyncrasy credit

Back 29

the privilege that allows leaders to leaders to deviate from their groups' norms or, by extension, society's norms. (Bill Clinton's affair.)

Front 30

Solomon Asch

Back 30

conducted classic short line-long line experiment to study social pressure to conform. Nearly 1/3 changed their answer even though they knew that they were right and the group was wrong.