Essays
-
Bringing the Study of Street Gangs Back into the Mainstream - Short Jr., James F.
Criminology's evolution, from early roots in sociology through claims of autonomy and specialization within the field, has become more global in its reach. Study of street gangs, once imbedded in sociology, has become a specialized field within criminology and more closely identified with law enforcement and control. The immediacy of control concerns had the effect of virtually removing gangs as a focus of the basic social and behavioral sciences, an effect exacerbated by law enforcement's primary focus on individual gang members, thus obscuring the importance of historical, organizational, and group contexts and processes that are associated with gangs and their behavior. Historical research, network and group process analyses, and studies of genocide and human rights violations suggest that the study of gangs by mainstream social and behavioral sciences is important to these sciences as well as for better understanding of gangs. Examples from recent studies, including our research agenda, are provided as a basis for optimism in this regard. -
Creativity in Teams - Thompson, Leigh L.
Organizations want to be more creative, but improving creativity remains an elusive process. We examine the study of creativity in teams and groups beginning with the intuitive assertion that teams are more creative than individuals and review decades of research that suggest otherwise: Individuals are actually more creative than their groups. We then focus on the key cognitive and social factors that thwart team creativity, such as conformity pressure, and highlight techniques for improving the creative performance of groups, such as brainwriting (rather than brainstorming), quantity goals (versus quality goals), and rotating (rather than stable) membership. We conclude with paradoxical tactics for and consequences of improving creativity. -
Diversity in Groups - Fernandes, Catarina R.
Diversity has the potential to either disrupt group functioning or, conversely, be the source of collective creativity and insight. These two divergent perspectives pose a paradox that has held the attention of scholars for many years. In response, researchers have marshaled evidence to specify the conditions under which diversity leads to more positive outcomes and explain why it does so under these conditions. After describing these foundational perspectives and more recent work that addresses this paradox, we outline several promising directions for research in this domain. We encourage researchers to develop integrative theoretical explanations, use new technologies to gain insight into group processes, study diversity in the context of virtual interaction, and take advantage of opportunities for cross‐disciplinary research. -
Micro‐Cultures - Fine, Gary Alan
Although understanding the dynamics of culture through the examination of large‐scale social systems is important, culture is embedded in smaller systems as well. The exploration of micro‐cultures—also termed small group cultures or idiocultures—helps us to recognize that culture is cemented through the interaction of individuals with long‐term, ongoing relationships. Structure alone does not create social order, but requires a set of stable collective interpretations. But just as we examine how culture is organized through societies or institutions, we should see the role of culture in smaller units, including families, clubs, workgroups, and other gatherings. As a result, culture and meaning‐building emerges within group life and is spread through networks. Seeing culture as resulting from interaction emphasizes the role of talk and action as guarantors of social order and as building collective understanding. By focusing on micro‐cultures, social scientists emphasize the importance of the middle level of analysis between the self and structure: what has been termed the meso‐level of analysis. Micro‐cultures recognize that groups produce a self‐reflexive basis for the interaction order. Ultimately, social actors act in concert, producing shared lines of action and creating a tiny public that can then permit individuals to fit into larger social systems, including creating citizens within nation‐states.