The history of group psychology briefly explains the formation process of group psychology

Social psychology has been studying group issues for a long time, and early social psychology focused on the study of some large group problems such as nationality and the masses. In 1859, they founded the journal "Ethnopsychology and Linguistics" and published their article "Preface to Ethnopsychology", arguing that the task of social psychology is to understand the nature of the national spirit from the psychological aspect and to reveal the laws of national spiritual activity. Wundt developed the idea of ethnopsychology and proposed that ethnopsychology should adopt a method different from physiological psychology as an experimental science, that is, to study the problems of ethnopsychology by analyzing cultural products - language, mythology, customs, art, etc., and published the 10-volume collection of "Ethnopsychology" in 1900.

In 1908, Mai Dugu published "Introduction to Social Psychology", putting forward the theory of social behavior instinct, which explained people's group formation problem by saying that people are born with group instinct. Some of the ideas put forward by these early scholars, such as imitation, the disappearance of individuality, and the radicalization of the masses, still have a certain influence in social psychology until now.

After the First World War, experimental methods entered social psychology, causing group research in social psychology to shift to small group problems, and group psychology became small group psychology. The research on small group issues can be roughly summarized into several aspects: social promotion and social inhibition, conformity, group cohesion and its measurement, group leadership issues, group thinking, group decision-making, group extremes, etc.

The representative of the sociological school in small group studies is Mayo. On the basis of Hawthorne's experiments, he proposed the theory of interpersonal relations. This research direction mainly analyzes the two types of group structures in small groups, formal structure and informal structure, and reveals the significance of the interrelationship between these two types of group structures in group management.

The process of forming a group psychology can be divided into the following stages: Aggregation stage: In this stage, individuals come together to face a common goal, event, or problem.

This may arise due to shared interests, values, experiences, or needs. Formative stage: As the gathered individuals begin to form groups, they develop a shared sense of identity and identity.

This sense of identity and identity can be expressed through shared goals, values, norms, and codes of conduct. Normative stage: Once a group is formed, individuals in the group begin to follow some common norms and codes of conduct.

These norms and codes of conduct can be explicit, such as rules and regulations, or implicit, such as shared patterns of behavior and expectations within the group. Influencing stage: In a group, the behavior and attitudes of individuals are often influenced by other members.

This can be achieved through social pressure, information sharing, opinion leadership, or groupthink. Individuals tend to adapt to the dominant perceptions and behaviors in the group. Differentiation stage:

Individuals in a group may begin to diverge into different subgroups, forming different factions or groups. This may be due to different values, interests, or goals. The differentiation stage may lead to internal conflict and competition.

Dissolution stage: The formation and development of groups is not permanent, they may dissolve or transform into other forms at some point in time. The dissolution phase may be caused by goals being achieved, loss of interest by the individual, departure of members, or other external factors.

In general, the formation process of group psychology is a dynamic and complex process, which involves the interaction between individuals, the sense of identity and the coordination of behavior. By understanding the formation process of group psychology, we can better understand the characteristics and mechanisms of group behavior and decision-making.

Group psychology belongs to social psychology, which mainly studies the occurrence and change of psychology and behavior of individuals and groups in social interaction, and the research content includes group communication structure, group norms, racial prejudice and aggressive behavior, customs and culture. Group psychology belongs to social psychology, social psychology mainly involves the study of psychology and behavior related to individuals, the study of social psychology has two orientations, the first is a social psychologist from psychology, the second is a psychologist from sociology, the content of the study mainly includes the definition of the concept of group, group classification, group norms, group cohesion, herd behavior, etc., and group psychology mainly includes group classification, group norms, group cohesion, herd behavior, etc.

The above is roughly the group defined by Le Pen in "The Rabble", and I will share some of my thoughts below.

The definition of psychological group refers to people who have a common psychological goal or psychological appeal within a certain period of time. The prerequisite for having a common psychological goal or appeal is that their goal or appeal is not met, so they will have these psychological goals or demands. The external conditions that cause this unsatisfactory are the events or speeches defined above.

That is, when an external factor causes a certain group of people to fail to meet or threaten their intended goals, they form a group.

At the same time, this psychological appeal is often unconscious. And this event really triggers this state of unconsciousness. There is an example on the Internet, for example, that the crowd at the train station does not belong to a psychological group.

But when a terrorist incident occurs at the station, this group of people who escape can form a group, that is, at this time, the survival needs of this group of people are infinitely amplified because of the terrorist incident, so during this time, this group of people has a common psychological appeal, that is, "to live", so a group is formed.

So why can't the people who work together in a company be called a group? Because in the work, although everyone's common goal is to do a good job in the project within the team, this group in the traditional sense is composed of individuals with a fully detailed division of labor, and the goals of each individual are actually different from the goals of the group. Just like the crowd at the train station in front of them, they take the train as a means to go to different places or even just enjoy the feeling of taking the train, so everyone's goals are not the same.

In the same way, work at work is only a means, his goal is to get money to survive, and people will be paid accordingly when they work normally, and his goal can be satisfied, so this psychological appeal is extremely small, and it is replaced by other demands in the life of each person. But when this real psychological appeal, that is, the goal of "getting enough money to survive", is destroyed, his lowest psychological appeal is stimulated. At this time, this group of people can be called a group.

This is why when a company is in the stage of bankruptcy or layoffs, employees sometimes combine autonomously, because at this time their goal of survival is challenged, so it also stimulates their psychological appeal.

So I personally think that judging if a group of people who have gathered together is a group? Or even if people are brought together through a virtual network of states, do they constitute a group? Does they have the most fundamental psychological appeal in common, and can this psychological appeal be met at present?

When this demand is not satisfied, such a group of people who gather together through real places or virtual worlds is a psychological group.