THE EFFECTS OF GROUP INTERACTION ON SOCIOMETRIC STATUS,

SELF-CONCEPT, AND GROUP PERCEPTIONS OF

NURSING PERSONNEL

APPROVED

Graduate Committee:

Major Professor

\^1 Minor Professor

Committee Member

Committee Member

Dean of thj&% School of Education

Dean of \f;he Graduate School

Woodard, Barbara C., The Effects of Group Interaction on

Sociometric Status. Self-Concept. and Group Perceptions of

Nursing Personnel. Doctor of Education (Counseling and

Personnel Administration), August, 1971, 120 pp., 25 tables,

bibliography, 57 titles.

The problem of this study was to determine whether group

interaction can bring about change in sociometric status,

self-concept, and perceived group characteristics with respect

to nursing personnel.

This study had four purposes:

1. To determine whether sociometrically chosen nursing

personnel could function effectively as group leaders.

2. To determine whether there was a relationship

between sociometric status and self-concept.

3. To determine whether group interaction would affect

the sociometric status and self-concept.

4. To determine whether group interaction would produce

changes in certain perceived group characteristics.

This study involved four experimental groups and one

control group from a large metropolitan hospital. The experi-

mental groups were intact groups selected randomly from

thirty-four intact groups. These four experimental groups

were studied separately and also were combined to form a

total experimental group. Four intact groups were randomly

choscn l.o comprise l.hc conl.ro! group. Thore were forty-six

subjects in the four experimental groups and forty-seven

subjects in the control group.

Each experimental group met once each week for a period

of twelve weeks for the purpose of conducting ward confer-

ences (group interaction) in order to discuss how to improve

patient care and to deal with any special hospital-related

problems.

A sociometric questionnaire, the Tennessee Self-Concept

Seale. and the Group Dimensions Description questionnaire

were administered to all of the subjects one week preceding

the first group interaction session and readministered one

week following the last group session.

A Pearson product-moment correlation was obtained, for

both pretest and post-test data, between sociometric status

indices and self-concept scores. The analysis of covariance

technique was used to compare the experimental groups with

the control group to determine whether group interaction

significantly changed the sociometric status, self-concept,

and perceived group characteristics of the subjects in the

study. The .05 level of significance was chosen as the

level at which the research hypotheses would either be

rejected or retained.

The pretest and post-test correlation coefficients were

not sufficient to indicate a significant relationship between

sociometric status and self-concept.

In the analyses of covariance, significant F-ratios

indicating that in some instances group interaction increased

sociometric status among group members were revealed for two

of the experimental groups and the total experimental group.

The computed F-ratios were not sufficient to support the

hypothesis that group interaction would significantly improve

the self-concept of group members.

Significant F-ratios were found for some of the experi-

mental groups which indicated that group interaction can

significantly increase the perceived group characteristics

of Intimacy, Permeability, Stability, and Viscidity among

group members.

The computed F-ratios were not large enough to indicate

that group interaction would significantly increase the per-

ceived group characteristics of Autonomy, Hedonic Tone,

Homogeneity, Participation, Polarization, and Potency among

group members.

The F-ratios were not sufficient to support the hypoth-

esis that group interaction would significantly decrease the

perceived group characteristics of Control and Stratification.

One significant F-ratio was found for one experimental group,thus

indicating that group interaction could significantly decrease

the perceived group characteristic of Flexibility among group

members.

It was concluded that group interaction with sociomet-

rically chosen group leaders can bring about changes in

4

sociometric status and some perceived group characteristics,

but this technique does not appear to change the self-concept

of group members.

THE EFFECTS OF GROUP INTERACTION ON SOCIOMETRIC STATUS,

SELF-CONCEPT, AND GROUP PERCEPTIONS OF

NURSING PERSONNEL

DISSERTATION

Presented to the Graduate Council of the

North Texas State University in Partial

Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree of

DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

By

Barbara Chesney Woodard, B. S., M. A,

Denton, Texas

August, 1971

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF TABLES v

Chapter

I. INTRODUCTION 1

Statement of the Problem Purpose of the Study Hypotheses Background and Significance Definition of Terms Limitations of the Study Basic Assumptions Procedures for Collection of Data Procedures for Treatment of Data Summary

II. RELATED LITERATURE 22

Leadership Style Cohesion and Group Attraction Group Atmosphere Homogenei ty Group Structure Self-Concept Summary

III. PROCEDURES FOR OBTAINING AND TREATING DATA. . . 54

Organizational Structure Description of Subjects Data Collection Analysis of Data Statistical Treatment of Data Summary

IV. PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA 64

Hypothesis 1 Hypothesis 2 Hypothesis 3

i n

Hypothesis 4 Hypothesis f» Summary

V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . 107

Summary of Background and Purposes Summary of Methods and Procedures Review of Findings Conclusions Recommendati ons

BIBLIOGRAPHY 116

IV

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

I. Pretest and Post-test Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlation Coefficients for the Total Experimental Group on the Variable of Sociometric Status and Self-Concept 66

II. Pretest and Post-test Means, Standard Deviations, and Adjusted Means for the Experimental Groups and the Control Group for the Variable Sociometric Status 67

III. Analysis of Covariance for the Experimental Groups and the Control Group on the Variable Sociometric Status 69

IV. Pretest and Post-test Means, Standard Deviations, and Adjusted Means for the Experimental Groups and the Control Group for the Variable Self-Concept . . . . 70

V. Analysis of Covariance for the Experimental Groups and the Control Group for the Variable Self-Concept 72

VI. Pretest and Post-test Means, Standard Deviations, and Adjusted Means for Experimental Group I and the Control Group for the Variables Autonomy (A), Hedonic Tone (D), Homogeneity (E), Intimacy (F), Participation (G), Permeability (H), Polarization (I), Potency (J), Stability (K), and Viscidity (M) 74

VII. Analysis of Covariance for Experimental Group 1 and the Control Group for the Variables Autonomy (A), Hedonic Tone (D), Homogeneity (E), Intimacy (F), Participa-tion (G), Permeability (H), Polarization (I), Potency (J), Stability (K), and Viscidity (M) 75

VIII. Pretest and Post-test Means, Standard Deviations, and Adjusted Means for Experimental Group 2 and the Control Group for the Variables Autonomy (A), Hedonic Tone (D), Homogeneity (E), Intimacy (F), Participation (G), Permeability (H), Polarization (I), Potency (J), Stability (K), and Viscidity (M) 77

IX. Analysis of Covariance for Experimental Group 2 and the Control Group for the Variables Autonomy (A), Hedonic Tone (D), Homogeneity (E), Intimacy (F), Partici-pation (G), Permeability (H), Polariza-tion (I), Potency (J), Stability (K), and Viscidity (M) 79

X. Pretest and Post-test Means, Standard Deviations, and Adjusted Means for Experimental Group 3 and the Control Group for the Variables Autonomy (A), Hedonic Tone (D), Homogeneity (E), Intimacy (F), Participation (G), Permeability (H), Polarization (I), Potency (J), Stability (K), and Viscidity (M) 80

XI. Analysis of Covariance for Experimental Group 3 and the Control Group for the Variables Autonomy (A), Hedonic Tone (D), Homogeneity (E), Intimacy (F), Partici-pation (G), Permeability (H), Polariza-tion (I), Potency (J), Stability (K), and Viscidity (M) 82

XII. Pretest and Post-test Means, Standard Deviations, and Adjusted Means for Experimental Group 4 and the Control Group for the Variables Autonomy (A), Hedonic Tone (D), Homogeneity (E), Intimacy (F), Participation (G), Permeability (H), Polarization (I), Potency (J), Stability (K), and Viscidity (M) . 83

XIII. Analysis of Covariance for Experimental Group 4 and the Control Group for the Variables Autonomy (A), Hedonic Tone (D),

VI

XIV.

XV.

XVI

Homogeneity (E), Intimacy (F), Participation (G), Permeability (H), Polarization (I), Potency (J), Stability (K), and Viscidity (M). .

Pretest and Post-test Means, Standard Deviations, and Adjusted Means for the Four Combined Experimental Groups and the Control Group for the Variables Autonomy (A), Hedonic Tone (D), Homogeneity (E), Intimacy (F), Participation (G), Permeability (H), Polarization (I), Potency (J), Stability (K), and Viscidity (M)

XVII.

Analysis of Covariance for the Four Combined Experimental Groups and the Control Group for the Variables Autonomy (A), Hedonic Tone (D), Homogeneity (E), Intimacy (F), Participation (G), Permeability (H), Polarization (I), Potency (J), Stability (K), and Viscidity (M)

Pretest and Post-test Means, Standard Deviations, and Adjusted Means for Experimental Group 1 and the Control Group for the Variables Control (B), Flexibility (C), and Stratification (L) .

Analysis of Covariance for Experimental Group 1 and the Control Group for the Variables Control (B), Flexibility (C), and Stratification (L)

85

86

88

90

91

XVIII. Pretest and Post-test Means, Standard Deviations, and Adjusted Means for Experimental Group 2 and the Control Group for the Variables Control (B), Flexibility (C), and Stratification (L) . . 92

XIX. Analysis of Covariance for Experimental Group 2 and the Control Group for the Variables Control (B), Flexibility (C), and Stratification (L) 94

XX. Pretest and Post-test Means, Standard Deviations, and Adjusted Means for Experimental Group 3 and the Control Group for the Variables Control (B), Flexibility (C), and Stratification (L) 95

VI 1

XXI. Analysis of Covariance for Experimental Group 3 and the Control Group for the Variables Control (B), Flexibility (C), and Stratification (L) 97

XXII. Pretest and Post-test Means, Standard Deviations, and Adjusted Means for Experimental Group 4 and the Control Group for the Variables Control (B), Flexibility (C), and Stratification (L)

XXIII. Analysis of Covariance for Experimental Group 4 and the Control Group for the Variables Control (B), Flexibility (C), and Stratification (L)

98

99

XXIV. Pretest and Post-test Means, Standard Deviations, and Adjusted Means for the Four Combined Experimental Groups and the Control Group for the Variables Control (B), Flexibility (C), and Stratification (L) , 101

XXV. Analysis of Covariance for the Four Combined Experimental Groups and the Control Group for the Variables Control (B), Flexibility (C), and Stratification (L) 102

VI 1 1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This study is based upon a need to improve interpersonal

relationships among nursing personnel. Motivation for this

effort stemmed from the fact that since the early 1950's

American hospitals have experienced the major problem of

having an insufficient number of qualified hospital personnel.

The problem appears to be related to two major factors. The

first factor concerns the unavailability of qualified person-

nel: the demand is greater than the supply. The second

factor appears to be related to a very high turnover rate

in hospital personnel. Until 1957, empirical data were not

available to determine the magnitude of the problem. That

year, the American Hospital Association (11) conducted a

survey to establish the turnover rate in personnel. The

American Hospital Association also wanted to know whether there

was a relationship between the turnover rate in personnel and

the quality of care given to hospitalized patients. The high-

est personnel turnover rate appeared in hospitals that were

church affiliated and had a bed capacity of five hundred or

greater. The study also revealed that the nursing profession

has a greater turnover than any other primarily female occu-

pation. The high turnover rate in nursing has generated an

1

interest in determining the factors that contribute to this

problem. Several studies, mostly exploratory in nature,

have suggested many factors. One factor that appears con-

sistently is the lack of good interpersonal relationships

among nursing personnel.

Statement of the Problem

The problem of this study was to determine whether group

interaction can bring about change in sociometric status,

self-concept, and perceived group characteristics with respect

to nursing personnel.

Purposes of the Study

The purposes are outlined as follows:

1. To determine whether sociometrically chosen personnel

can function effectively as group leaders with respect to

nursing personnel.

2. To determine whether there is a relationship between

sociometric status and self-concept with respect to nursing

personnel.

3. To determine whether group interaction will affect

sociometric status and self-concept with regard to nursing

personnel.

4. To determine whether group interaction will produce

changes in perceived group characteristics with respect to

nursing personnel.

Hypotheses

To carry out the purposes of this study the following

hypotheses were formulated:

1. For the total experimental group (four combined

experimental groups) there would be a significant positive

relationship between sociometric status and self-concept.

2. Each experimental group would show a significantly

higher increase in sociometric status than would the control

group.

3. Each experimental group would show significantly

more improvement in self-concept than would the control

group.

4. Each experimental group would show a significantly

greater gain than would the members of the control group on

the following perceived group characteristics:

a. Autonomy b. Hedonic Tone c. Homogeneity d. Intimacy e. Participation f. Permeability g. Polarization h. Potency i. Stability

j. Viscidity

5. Each experimental group would show a significantly

greater decrease than would the control group on the fol-

lowing perceived group characteristics:

a. Control b. Flexibility c. Stratification

Background and Significance

The functioning or malfunctioning of group activities

is increasingly receiving recognition as one of society's

major concerns. Industries have realized the significance

of the relationship between productivity and interpersonal

relationships, and they have established training programs

that are designed to improve the skills of management in

dealing with human relations (4, pp. 3-5).

Research in nursing provides evidence that poor inter-

personal relationships exist among nurses and that the

malfunctioning of this group contributes to job dissatisfac-

tion and to high turnover rates in nursing personnel.

Laritz (10) investigated the reasons given by profes-

sional nurses for job termination. The data revealed multiple

reasons, but two reasons frequently given were (1) a dislike

for co-workers and (2) unsatisfactory working conditions.

In Bullock's study (3) on function, position, and job

satisfaction, nurses gave very broad and non-specific state-

ments regarding those aspects of their job that were satis-

fying. In contrast, nurses were very specific when they were

questioned about job dissatisfaction. Many commented that

poor social relationships existed among hospital personnel.

A related study was done by Margo and Lasky (12). The

researchers drew the conclusion that high turnover rates in

personnel were created, in part, by poor communications,

poorly defined job responsibility, and interpersonal tensions.

Tensions were attributable to feelings by nurses that they

could not accomplish the work that needed to be done and

to the inability of the nurses to accept the "shortcomings"

of their co-workers. The study indicated that nurses sought

a solution to their frustrations by terminating their posi-

tions.

Abdellah and Levine (1) investigated the relationships

between job satisfaction, staffing patterns, and length of

employment. The investigators reported the following

findings: (a) the greater the shortage of personnel, the

greater the number of complaints from personnel; (b) the

average tenure of nursing personnel was brief among all

types of nursing personnel, and over fifty percent were

employed in one job less than five years; (c) the median

length of employment for nursing administrators was less

than five years; (d) the average length of employment of

staff nurses was two years; and (e) the average length of

employment was one and one-half years for nursing aides and

orderlies.

Nahm (13) points out the significance of the positive

correlation between the degree of satisfaction within a

professional group and the quality of service that the

group can render to society. Faculty members in schools of

nursing have frequently noted that some students who seemed

highly motivated and enthusiastic at the time of admission

gradually changed their attitude and became disillusioned

with the nursing profession. In Nahm's study, student

nurses, according to their conception of nursing, associated

job satisfaction with a feeling of adequacy and competence.

Job dissatisfaction was associated with poor relationships

among faculty members, head nurses, and physicians. Students

expressed a desire to use their initiative in planning

patient care, as well as a desire to be able to express their

ideas and points of view.

Porter (14) states that the basic cause of friction

among personnel in nursing is poor interpersonal relation-

ships. Non-professional personnel, such as vocational

nurses, aides, and orderlies, frequently complain that they

are often made to feel inferior by the manner in which they

are given directions by professional registered nurses.

Professional registered nurses complain that they feel

inadequate in management skills involving human relations.

They state that they find themselves in a dilemma when they

attempt to resolve conflicts which arise among nursing

personne1.

As Porter (14, p. 42) points out, even though hospitals

are aware that poor interpersonal relationships exist, very

little research has been done to investigate the dynamics of

the relationships among nursing personnel. In view of the

dearth of research in nursing concerning group interpersonal

relationships, this present study appears appropriate in

that it deals with a specific technique for measuring the

f; I' f r«c l.i VP rif; s s of group interaction on the sociometric status,

self-concept, and the perceived group characteristics of

nursing personnel as opposed merely to comparing different

characteristics, feelings, and traits of group members in

nursing.

Definition of Terms

G r o u p . — A n aggregate of individuals who stand in certain

descriptive (observable) relation to one another and who

interact with one another in accord to established patterns

(4, p. 3).

Group interaction.—An exchange of ideas, opinions, and

feelings which occurs through group discussion (16, pp. 173-

174).

Choice status.—A sociometric concept determined by

dividing the number of choices an individual makes by the

total number of possible choices minus one (9, p. 559).

Self-concept.—The organized, consistent, conceptual

gestalt composed of the characteristics of the "I" or "me"

to others and the various aspects of life, together with

the values attached to these perceptions (15, p. 21).

Sociotelic.—Characterized by a group that is goal

oriented and may be heterogenous in respect to age, status,

and vocation. Membership is not by inclination, but is

derived through acting as a representative of some organi-

zation (8, p. 50).

a

Sociometric status.—A measure of person-to-person

responsiveness in which each group member renders a judgment

in regard to desirability of certain other members for a

specific purpose, activity, or relationship (16, p. 174).

Group characteristics.—The impression of, the percep-

tion of, or the knowledge about certain attitudes and beliefs

as viewed by group members with respect to the following

dimensions (7, p. 2).

1. Autonomy is the degree to which a group functions

independently of other groups and occupies an independent

position in society. It is reflected by the degree to which

a group determines its own activities, by its absence of

allegiance, deference and/or dependence relative to other

groups.

2. Control is the degree to which a group regulates its

behavior while they are functioning as group members. It is

reflected by the modifications which group membership imposes

on complete freedom of individual behavior and by the amount

of intensity of group-derived government.

3. Flexibility is the degree to which a group's activ-

ities are marked by informal procedures rather than an adher-

ence to established procedures. It is reflected by the

extent to which duties of members are free from specification

through custom, tradition, written rules, regulations, codes

of procedures, or even unwritten but clearly prescribed ways

of behaving.

4. Iledonic Tone is the degree to which group membership

is accompanied by a general feeling of pleasantness or agree-

ableness. It is reflected by the frequency of laughter,

conviviality, pleasant anticipation of group meetings, and

by the absence of griping and complaining.

5. Homogeneity is the degree to which members of a

group are similar with respect to socially-relevant char-

acteristics. It is reflected by relative uniformity of

members with respect to age, sex, race, socio-economic status,

interests, attitudes, and habits.

6. Intimacy is the degree to which members of a group

are mutually acquainted with one another and are familiar

with the most personal details of one another's lives. It

is reflected by the nature of topics discussed by members,

by modes of greeting, forms of address, and by interactions

which presuppose a knowledge of the probable reaction of

others under widely different circumstances, as well as by

the extent and type of knowledge each member has about other

members of the group.

7. Participation is the degree to which members of a

group apply time and effort to group activities. It is

reflected by the number and kinds of duties members perform,

by voluntary assumption of non-assigned duties, and by the

amount of time spent in group activities.

8. Permeability is the degree to which a group permits

ready access to membership. It is reflected by absence of

10

entrance requirements of various kinds and by the degree

to which membership is solicited.

9. Polarization is the degree to which a group is

oriented and works toward a single goal which is clear and

specific to all members.

10. Potency is the degree to which a group has primary

significance for its members. It is reflected by the kind

of needs which a group is satisfying or has the potentiality

of satisfying by the extent of readjustment which would be

required of members should the group fail; and by the degree

to which a group has meaning to members with reference to

their central values.

11. Stability is the degree to which a group persists

over a period of time with essentially the same character-

istics. It is reflected by the rate of membership turnover,

by frequency of reorganization, and by constancy of group

s i ze.

12. Stratification is the degree to which a group orders

its members into status hierarchies. It is reflected by

differential distribution of power, privileges, obligations,

and duties, and by asymmetrical patterns of differential

behavior among members.

13. Viscidity is the degree to which members of the

group function as a unit. It is reflected by absence of

dissension and personal conflict among members, by absence

of activities serving to advance only the interests of

11

individual group members, by the ability of the group to

resist disrupting forces, and by the belief on the part of

the members that the group does function as a unit.

Limitations of the Study

This study utilized randomly-chosen groups of personnel

in a large private general hospital. The personnel that

participated in this study consisted of a minimum of forty

subjects in four experimental groups and a minimum of forty

subjects in one control group. The period of the experi-

mental treatment was twelve weeks. The length of each group

interaction session was limited to forty-five minutes. No

attempt was made to examine differences in the results of

the study with regard to such variables as sex, age, and

work experience.

Basic Assumptions

According to Bergin (2), it is extremely difficult to

control all variables in an experimental group. Subjects

may come into contact with many intervening variables outside

of the experimental situation which could influence or con-

taminate the results. The assumption is therefore made

that both experimental and control subjects will be equally

vulnerable to such contacts which might affect them bene-

ficially or otherwise.

The investigator in this study has a professional

working relationship with all personnel in the department

12

of nursing. Il is assumed that any influence which might

result from the investigator's personality, skill, or

previous experience will affect all the variables being

studied to the same degree.

It is assumed that the instruments and techniques used

in the study are sufficiently valid and reliable.

Procedures for Collection of Data

Subi ects

From a population of 525 employees in the department of

nursing, there was a minimum of forty subjects in the experi-

mental groups and a minimum of forty subjects in the control

group. Intact groups of subjects were selected through a

random sampling procedure. Selection was accomplished by

compiling a master list of all divisions in nursing, number-

ing each division,and then using a table of random numbers

to select divisions, utilizing the day and evening work

shifts.

There was a total of eight groups selected, including

four experimental groups and four control groups. All of the

control groups were placed in one group consisting of forty-

seven subjects. The experimental group consisted of forty-

six subjects. The first group selected was an experimental

group and the second group selected was a control group,

until all of the groups were chosen. The four experimental

groups are designated as E-l, E-2, E-3, and E-4.

13

Each subject in both the experimental groups and the

control group was asked to give written responses to a

sociometric questionnaire, the Group Dimensions Descriptions

questionnaire, and the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale. Each

group was pretested one week preceding the experimental

treatment and post-tested one week following the experi-

mental treatment. Each experimental group met each week

for a period of twelve weeks to conduct ward conferences

(group interactions) to discuss how to improve patient care

and to deal with any special problems.

Instruments

Three instruments were used in this study. These were

a sociometric questionnaire, the Tennessee Self-Concept

Scale, and the Group Dimensions Descriptions question-

naire. \

Sociometric Questionnaire

This is a technique used to assess the sociometric

status of each member of a group (16, p. 173). Each subject

was required to list those members in the group with whom

he or she prefers to work. The sociometric questionnaire

was used as one of the criteria for measuring change. The

responses were tallied and each subject's choice status

was determined (9, p. 559). The sociometric questionnaire

stated, "From the list of names of people in your group

14

list those people with whom you prefer to work. You may

list as many as you desire."

Tennessee Se1f-Concept Seale

The Tennes see Self-Concept Seale (TSCS) consists of

100 self-descriptive items to which the subject responds by

choosing from one to five (completely false to completely

true) statements. These items consist of forty-five positive

statements and forty-five negative statements, plus ten

items which were taken from the L-scale of the MMPI and

used for the Self-Criticism Scale (6, p. 2).

In this scale ninety items are categorized to provide

two dimensions of self—an internal frame of reference and

an external frame of reference (6, p. 2).

The internal frame of reference refers to the following:

1. "This is what I am." This indicates the individual's

basic identity, what he is as he sees himself.

2. "This is how I perceive self." This indicates the

individual's satisfaction with the perceived self, how well

the individual accepts himself.

3. "This is how I behave." This score is derived from

those items that reveal the manner in which the individual

perceives his behavior.

The external frame of reference refers to

1. Physical Self.—How the individual views his body,

his health, and his attractiveness.

ir»

2. Moral-Klhica1 Self.--A description of the indi-

vidual's view of his moral worth, a "good" or "bad" rela-

tionship with God.

3. Personal Self.—The individual's sense of personal

worth, his adequacy as a person.

4. Family S e l f . — T h e individual's view and feeling of

his worth, adequacy, and value as a family member.

5. Social S e l f . — A n individual's sense of adequacy

and worth in his social interactions with other people.

According to Fitts (6, p. 17), the TSCS has "content

validity" and has a reliability of .80 to .89. A total

Positive "P" Score is derived from a raw score from the

dimensions described. Those who score high on "P" tend to

like themselves and have positive healthy feelings toward

themselves. A low score on "P" indicates inadequacy, lack

of self-confidence and, in general, an unhappy self. The

"P" score was used in this study as one of the criteria for

measuring change.

Group Dimensions Description

The Group Dimensions Descriptions (GDD), constructed by

John K. Hemphill (7, p. 2), is a questionnaire consisting of

150 statements about group characteristies or attributes.

The 150 statements are arranged to yield raw scores on

thirteen group dimensions. These dimensions are Autonomy,

Control, Flexibility, Hedonic Tone, Homogeneity, Intimacy,

16

Participation, Permeability, Polarization, Potency,

Stability, Stratification, and Viscidity.

The scores on these thirteen dimensions provide a

profile of an individual's orientation (perception and

attitude) toward a group.

The Group Dimensions Descriptions questionnaire may be

used either (a) to assess an individual group member's

particular orientation toward a group in which he is a

member or (b) to obtain a description of major dimensions

of a group as seen by its members.

The responses of an individual are scored to yield a

raw score for each of the thirteen dimensions. The raw

score for a dimension is the sum of the item scores (weights)

for that dimension. The means, standard deviations, and

reliability (internal consistency) vary with each dimension.

According to Hemphill (7) the internal consistency of each

dimension meets the minimum standards of reliability (.64

to .92).

The Group Dimensions Descriptions questionnaire is based

on "face validity," that is, valid descriptions made by

members of the same group about their attitudes and orienta-

tion to that group. Differences in perception of group

characteristics among members of the same group may be found

to have systematic relationships with the individual's

attributes, such as status within the group, length of mem-

bership, degree of participation, etc. (7, p. 34).

17

Several unpublished studios have been conducted using

the GDD as a measurement in an attempt to determine job

satisfaction, turnover rates, and productivity. These

studies seem to indicate that individuals who describe their

group as "lower" on Stratification and Control, and "higher"

on the Hedonic Tone, Viscidity, Participation, Potency, and

Polarization tend to be relatively well-satisfied with their

jobs. The question of cause and effect between perception

of group characteristics and job satisfaction cannot be

answered by these findings, but, according to Hemphill (7,

p. 41), an association between the dimension scores and

reports of job satisfaction is evident. The correlation

between GDD scores and turnover rate was not found to show a

statistically significant relationship. However, it is

Hemphill's opinion that groups lacking harmony have greater

turnover than those which are relatively harmonious. For

most natural groups it is extremely difficult to secure an

unambiguous criterion of group productivity, although there

is a tendency for the group dimensions of Hedonic Tone,

Viscidity, and Participation to be positively related to

group productivity. For the purpose of this study the GDD

questionnaire will be used as one of the criteria for

measuring change.

Procedures for Treatment of Data

The measurement instruments were administered to all

subjects in the experimental groups and the control group

18

one week prior to the first group interaction session, and

were readministered one week following the final group

interaction session.

The subject's pretest and post-test responses were

hand scored by the investigator, and then the data were

processed at North Texas Computer Center.

The tenability of hypothesis 1 was determined by a

Pearson product moment correlation. In hypotheses 2, 3, 4,

and 5, the analysis of covariance technique was used. All

hypotheses were tested at the .05 level of significance.

Summary

This study is based on a need to improve interpersonal

relationships among nursing personnel. In 1957 the American

Hospital Association conducted a survey to establish the

turnover rate in hospital personnel and reported that the

nursing profession has a greater turnover rate than any

other primarily female occupation.

Research in nursing provides evidence that poor inter-

personal relationships exist among nurses and that mal-

functioning of this group contributes to job dissatisfaction

and to high turnover rates in personnel.

The problem of this study was to determine whether

group interaction can bring about change in sociometric

status, self-concept, and perceived group characteristics

with respect to nursing personnel.

19

This study utilized randomly-chosen intact groups of

personnel in a large private hospital. There were forty-

six subjects in four experimental groups and forty-seven

subjects in one control group. Each experimental group met

once each week for a period of twelve weeks to conduct ward

conferences (interaction sessions) in order to discuss how

to improve patient care and deal with any special problems.

Three instruments were used in this study. These were

a sociometric questionnaire, the Tennessee Self-Concept

Scale, and the Group Dimensions Descriptions questionnaire.

These instruments were administered to all subjects one

week preceding the first group interaction session and were

readministered one week following the last group interaction

session. The subject's pretest and post-test responses were

hand scored by the investigator, and then the data were

processed at the North Texas Computer Center.

The tenability of hypothesis 1 was determined by a

Pearson product moment correlation. Hypotheses 2, 3, 4,

and 5 used the analysis of covariance technique. All

hypotheses were tested at the .05 level of confidence.

CHAPTER BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Abdellah, Faye C. and Eugene Levine, "Effects of Nurse Staffing on Satisfaction with Nursing Care," Hospital Monographs Series. No. 4, Chicago, 1958.

2. Bergin, Allen E., "Some Implications of Psychotherapy Research for Therapeutic Practice," Psychotherapy. Research. Selected Re search. edited by Gary E. Stollack, Bernard G. Guerney, Jr., and Meyer Rothberg, New York, Rand McNally and Co., 1966.

3. Bullock, Robert P., "Positions, Functions, and Job Satisfaction of Nurses in the Social System of a Modern Hospital," Nursing Research. 2 (June, 1953), 4-14.

4. Cartwright, D. and A. Zanders (editors), "Origin of Group Dynamics," Group Dynamics: Research and Theory. 3rd ed., New York, Harper and Row, 1968.

5. Coffey, Herbert S., "Socio and Psyche Group Process: Integrative Concepts," Perspective on the Group Process. edited by Gratton C. Kemp, Boston, Houghton Mifflin Co., 1964.

6. Fitts, William H., Tennessee Self-Concept Scale. Nash-ville, Tennessee, Counselor Recordings and Test, 1965.

7. Hemphill, John K., Group Dimensions: A, Manual for Measurement. Columbus, Ohio, Bureau of Business Research, 1967.

8. Johada, Marie, Morton Duetch, and Stuart W. Cook (editors), Re search Meth od s in Soc ia1 Relations. New York, Dryden Press, 1952, Vol. 2.

9. Kerlinger, Fred, Foundations of Behaviora1 Research. New York, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc., 1965.

10. Laritz, Willie, "Frequency of Occurrence of Certain Factors as Causes of Resignations of Nursing Personnel at a Selected Hospital," unpublished thesis, University of Texas, Austin, Texas, June, 1956.

20

21

11. Lovino, I'ltKjcnc, "Turnover Among Nursing Personnel in General Hospitals," Journal of the American Hospital Association. 31 (September, 1957), 51-53 and 158.

12. Margo, Joann S. and Julian J. Lasky, "A Work Survey Among Nurses," The American Journa1 of Nursing. 59 (April, 1959), 501-502.

13. Nahm, Helen, "Satisfaction with Nursing," Journal of Applied Psychology. 16 (August, 1948), 335-343.

14. Porter, Kathryn Ann, "A Study to Aid in Determining Some Basic Causes of Friction in the Nursing Service Personnel in X Hospital," unpublished thesis, Univer-sity of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, June, 1956.

15. Rogers, Carl, CIient-Centered Therapy. Boston, Houghton Mifflin Co., 1951.

16. Sundberg, Norman and Leona E. Tyler, "Assessing Development in Life Situations," Clinical Psychology. New York, Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1962.

CHAPTER II

RELATED LITERATURE

Scientists who are involved in the study of group be-

havior share a common interest in the understanding of the

dynamics of such question as these: Under what conditions

do groups function effectively and develop progressively?

How do groups affect the behavior, thinking, motivation,

and adjustments of individual members? What characteristics

of an individual are important determinants of the properties

of a group? Under what type of leadership does a group func-

tion more productively? Research has contributed to knowl-

edge by providing a better understanding of individual needs

and working groups (10, p. 4).

The related literature pertinent to this research is

presented as six concepts or properties which have been

identified (9, p. 91) as integral properties of group life.

These properties are (a) leadership style, (b) cohesion and

group attraction, (c) group atmosphere, (d) homogeneity,

(e) group structure, and (f) self-concept of group members.

Leadership Style

Leadership style has long been a topic of interest for

those involved in group work. While the style of leadership

22

23

has for some time been believed to influence group morale

and group effectiveness, it has only been through recent

research that the complexity of leadership has been realized,

The early studies of Lewin, Lippett, and White (8, p. 301)

provide evidence that the same group of people will react in

markedly different ways when under the influence of leaders

who behave differently.

Some concepts of leadership support the idea that a

true leader can exert more influence on a group and its

activities than can a group member. In contrast, Cattell

(14, pp. 161-184) proposes that any member can exert influ-

ence to the extent that the properties of the group are

modified by his presence. Cattell describes this kind of

group relationship as "syntality," and views this as a group

effort to accomplish the group goals.

Rowland and Scott (33, pp. 365-377) were disappointed

in the results of their study designed to determine the

relationship between the psychological attributes of effec-

tive leaders and work satisfaction among group members. The

implication was made that the effective leader in a social

organization achieves organizational goals through the

changed behavior of the working group, and in the process of

goal achievement, directly or indirectly, provides the group

members with job satisfaction. Among the attributes listed

by Rowland and Scott for an effective leader were (a) his

ability to influence his superiors; (b) his consideration

24

for the work group, (c) his ability to feel social sensi-

tivity to the group, and (d) the characteristics of; his

personality (manifest needs). Results of the study indi-

cated a positive relationship between the leader's ability

to influence his superiors and the group's performance, but

failed to show a relationship between the leader's social

sensitivity and job satisfaction in the group.

Cohesion and Group Attraction

According to Festinger (7, pp. 182-193), group cohesion

is a result of all forces influencing members to remain in

the group. These forces are determined by properties of

the group as well as characteristics of the members of the group.

According to Cartwright and Zander (9, p. 92), many

investigators equate the term cohesiveness with group attrac-

tion and focus mainly on forces which cause members to remain

in the group. Much of the literature concerning groups deals

with investigations on group attraction, group satisfaction,

and group membership.

Among the many possible factors that promote group

cohesion, four factors are documented in the literature (9,

pp. 91-109):

1. the ability of the group to retain members 2. the power of the group to influence members 3. the degree of security felt by the members 4. the degree of loyalty and participation by its

members

Attraction to a group is determined by an individual's par-

ticular needs. Generally, the more an individual expects to

25

have his needs satisfied through group membership and

participation, the greater will be his attraction to the

group (9, pp. 91-109).

Cartwright and Zander (6, p. 229) contend that the

needs of an individual that serve as basic motives for

attraction to a group will also serve as a basic motive

for interpersonal influence within the group.

Julian, Bishop, and Fiedler (21, pp. 321-327) hypoth-

esize that improved interpersonal relationships bring about

an increase in group cohesion. This leads to more accept-

ance, trust, and confidence among members. Consequently,

each member develops a sense of security and personal worth.

Darley and Berscheid (16, pp. 29-39) state that while

many theories support the belief that personal contact and

group interaction increase the likelihood that group members

will find each other more acceptable, the researchers do not

agree with the nature of the processes which mediate inter-

personal interaction and attraction. According to Darley

and Berscheid, attempts to shed light on the nature of the

interaction process generally have been focused upon the

examination of the concomitants of interaction. One theory

hypothesizes that interpersonal interaction provides the

opportunity for the discovery of mutual interests, goals,

and values. Through the discovery of these similarities,

the attraction for others increases. Another hypothesis

suggests that interaction provides the opportunity for

2(>

individuals to discover traits in others that are compli-

mentary to their own needs. Through this discovery an

attraction is established. Darley and Berscheid contend

that the bringing together of people in a common discus-

sion, or the collaboration of people on a common task, may

suffice to create a unit relationship.

Darley and Berscheid (16, pp. 29-39) believe that in a

situation where the individual perceives a unit relation-

ship existing between himself and a person whom he dislikes,

the individual will, most likely, deny that a connection has

been formed between them and a certain imbalance will result.

If future contact is necessary, balance can be restored by

the occurrence of an interesting phenomenon. The phenomenon

is that rather than acquiring a liking for the person, the

individual alters his perception of the disliked person.

This alteration in perception is usually in the direction of

perceiving the disliked person as being more competent than

he seemed previously in contributing to the group's efforts

to achieve group goals. Research in World War II supports

this hypothesis. White soldiers who were in the same company

with Negroes were likely to perceive the Negroes as good

soldiers, but they did not desire to have their companionship

when on leave. This phenomenon has been interpreted as an

indication that individuals will make the fewest cognitive

changes necessary to restore balance after a unit relation-

ship has been established. Darley and Berscheid suggest that

27

in applying this unit-relationship theory to the problem of

breaking down barriers in a group, the group should be brought

together with a minimum of friction. The inevitability of

the contact should be stressed to avoid the possibility of

groups trying to prevent the contact by resisting.

Weinstein and Crowder (38, pp. 383-391) conducted an

investigation on the effects of positive and negative infor-

mation on perception. These researchers state that an

individual's perception of a stranger can be influenced by

receiving outside information, and that perception formation

is usually pulled in the direction of the outside information.

Cohesion can be measured in terms of the group's ability

to influence its members. According to Cartwright and Zander

(11, pp. 215-223) interpersonal power has two properties.

The first concerns the agent which possesses the valued

resource, and the second concerns the values of the individ-

ual that serve as a motive to be influenced. An influential

act establishes a relationship between the resources of the

agent and the motive base of the individual. Interpersonal

power resources usually refer to wealth, prestige, position,

skill, information, physical strength, and intangible "ego

needs," such as recognition, acceptance, respect, affection,

and sense of accomplishment. If a person with interpersonal

power wishes to accomplish some objective that requires

changing an individual's beliefs, attitudes, or behavior, he

may be expected to perform acts that will bring about the

28

desired changes. If the assumption is made that people

frequently seek objectives which require the exertion of

influence, then there should be a relationship between the

possession of interpersonal power and the exercise of

influence.

Zander, Cohen, and Stotland (11, p. 218) investigated

the role relationship between psychiatric social workers and

psychologists. The results of this study revealed a .80 to

.89 correlation between the possession of interpersonal power

and the frequency of exercising power to influence others.

Kelman, French, and Raven (11, p. 223) state that the

simplest form of influence is that in which an individual

conforms because he seeks rewards and his responses are

instrumental in obtaining the rewards. These researchers

make the assumption that as the individual's needs for

rewards increase, his willingness to comply with the influ-

ential act will also increase. Therefore, in a situation

where an individual seeks social acceptance, his behavior

should be highly conforming.

Zander and Curtis (42, pp. 63-74) compared social

influence based on attraction and coercion. The results of

their study indicated that individuals internalized the

proposed standards of the group under the conditions of

attraction, but not under coercion. Attraction served as

a motivation for individuals to adopt the standards of the

group and to use these standards as their personal level of

29

aspiration. A second factor reported in this study revealed

that under conditions of attraction, individual? experienced

an intense feeling of failure if they were not able to per-

form at the level of the group's expectations. This did not

appear to occur under conditions of coercion.

According to Kelman (23, pp. 51-60), there are three

mechanisms which involve attitude change. He refers to these

mechanisms as compliance, identification, and internaliza-

tion. Each mechanism is characterized by a distinctive set

of antecedent conditions. Given the proper set of conditions,

influence will take one of three forms:

1. To the extent that influence is based on control, conformity will take the form of compliance.

2. To the extent that influence is based on attrac-tion, conformity will take the form of identifica-tion.

3. To the extent that influence is based on credi-bility, conformity will take the form of interna 1i zati on.

In a related study, Dittes and Kelley (17, pp. 100-107)

placed subjects in an experimental situation in which they

experienced different degrees of acceptance from the group

members, and then an assessment was made of the subject's

participation, attitude, and conformity in relation to the

different degrees of acceptance. The results of the study

indicated contrasting patterns of conformity. Subjects who

had received somewhat less than complete acceptance, but

perceived the possibility of obtaining status, demonstrated

a high degree of conformity. This finding was interpreted

as an indication that the subjects had a strong attraction

30

to the group and hoped to achieve status by conforming.

Those subjects who had received the lowest degree of accept-

ance and perceived the possibility of total rejection,

demonstrated a high degree of conformity, but only in a

public situation. This finding seemed to indicate th&t,

although subjects had lost most of their positive motivation

to conform (as indicated by their privately low value of

membership), they were still concerned about negative conse-

quences accompanying rejection. They therefore demonstrated

a high degree of conformity in public.

Wolfe (39, pp. 400-410) studied the relationship between

perception and evaluation to determine whether changes per-

ceived in behavior would affect the evaluation of the !person

and his behavior. Wolfe's data indicated that when there are

perceived changes in an individual's behavior, causality is

an important determinant in evaluating the person and his

behavior. When the perception of behavior change is

accompanied by the inference that the change was due to

external causes, observers were unwilling to give credit

for an increase in positively valued behavior. Observers

who were given a minimal amount of information prior to the

introduction of behavior change were more willing to alter

their evaluations. A conclusion was drawn that individuals

who have firmly established an impression of another person

are more inclined to infer that external causes precipitate

behavior changes. Wolfe accounts for this phenomenon as a

31

method llio human organism utilizes in order to maintain a

reasonably constant social world.

Utilizing Heider's balance theory, Festinger's cogni-

tive theory, and Osgood and Tannenbaum's congruity theory,

Wright (40, pp. 199-211) investigated the relative effec-

tiveness of direct versus indirect influence. All of these

theories hypothesize that the interrelationship of the sub-

ject and his communicator is in a state of balance if their

relationship is positive. If a negative relationship exists,

imbalance occurs, and the perceiving subject experiences

tension, strain, or, in general, a feeling of discomfort.

Direct influence occurs when the communicator informs the

subject that they disagree, but that they should agree. If

the subject likes his communicator, such communication will

create an imbalance and the subject will have to change in

order to restore balance. Indirect influence does not

attempt to persuade the subject overtly. Communications

are delivered in such a manner that, as far as the subject

is concerned, the communicator has neither the interest nor

the intent to persuade or bring about a change in the sub-

ject's behavior. Wright's study indicates that positive and

negative relationships can be created. Wright found, however,

a greater variability in the negative responses than in the

positive responses. This finding seems to indicate that the

communication designed to create a negative relationship had

less impact on subjects than positive communication, or that

32

some of the subjects might have been reluctant to admit that

they disliked their communicator by giving him an unfavorable

ra I J rig .

Group Atmosphere

Cartwright (5, p. 381) has this to say about groups and

group atmosphere:

To change the behavior of individuals, it may be necessary to change the standards of the group, its style of leadership, its emotional atmosphere, or its stratification into cliques and hierarchies. Even though the goal may be to change the behavior of individuals, the target of change becomes the group.

Influence by ecological control can be observed in

almost any kind of social setting. Investigations concerning

the dynamics of group interaction have determined that an

individual's beliefs, attitudes, and values can be funda-

mentally shaped by the group to which he belongs (5, pp. 381-

393).

The fact that beliefs, attitudes, values, and behavior

of individuals can be determined, in part, by the immediate

social and physical environment makes it possible to bring

about changes in an individual by changing the individual's

environment rather than the individual himself. This kind of

indirect influence, exercised without the consent or knowl-

edge of the individual, is sometimes labeled manipulation

(5, pp. 381-393).

33

Steiner (34, pp. 230-235) states that rather than

measuring accuracy, we often manipulate accuracy. This

happens because it is at times much easier to manipulate a

variable than it is to measure the variable. As an illus-

tration, Steiner points out that the caveman manipulated

temperatures five thousand years before man was able to

measure temperature with a thermometer. Manipulation of

people is often thought to be undesirable by those involved

in the behavioral sciences. In Steiner's words, "We who

work with interpersonal perceptions often choose not to

manipulate people; instead, we want to take people as they

come and measure their perceptions without manipulation"

(34, p. 234).

Pepitone (31, pp. 537-564) explored the effects of

group atmosphere to determine the relationship between an

individual's perception of his position in a group and the

degree to which he participates in group activities. Cer-

tain group members were told that their jobs were more

important in the group than other jobs. In reality, all

members had identical work. The results of the experiment

revealed that those members who believed that they had

important jobs developed more responsibility and were more

willing to devote time and energy to group tasks.

Pepitone's findings were supported by the study of

Pepinsky e_t aJL (30, pp. 47-54). Paid participants, pre-

tending to be regular members, systematically approved or

34

rejected the comments made by group members. Results indi-

cated that members exerted more leadership in groups with

an accepting atmosphere than in groups with a rejecting

atmosphere.

Jones (20, pp. 150-161) attempted to maintain the char-

acteristics of a natural group discussion and at the same

time endeavored to control the values and degree of knowledge

among the members' interpersonal evaluations. The purpose of

this study was to determine the effects of these two vari-

ables on the talking behavior, ratings of others, and the

self appraisal of individual members. The valance of the

evaluative feedback was manipulated in three separate situa-

tions: (a) the individual knew the group's appraisal of

his acts, (b) the individual knew the group's appraisal of

only his peer's acts, and (c) the individual had complete

knowledge of the group's appraisal of both his and his

peer's acts. The results of this study indicated that both

valence and the degree of knowledge affect the activity and

participation of group members. Talking behavior was related

to interpersonal evaluations. As the positiveness of inter-

personal evaluations increased, group members were inclined

to talk more but say less. In both complete and self-

feedback, high members as compared to low members made more

frequent contributions, but less favorable ratings than their

peers. One explanation given for this finding was that

talking behavior increased because the members hoped to gain

35

acceptance from their peers. When the individual received

d i s a p p r o v a l , as in the case of low m e m b e r s , the m e m b e r s

attempted to increase their a c c e p t a b i l i t y by only offering

their most astute o b s e r v a t i o n s . Jones concluded that the

e v a l u a t i o n s an individual receives from his peers will

influence the individual's e v a l u a t i o n of his peers.

According to Lippitt ejt a_l. (26, pp. 37-64), group

m e m b e r s are more likely to accept direct a t t e m p t s to influ-

ence their b e h a v i o r when the "attempt to i n f l u e n c e " is

initiated by an individual who is a high power figure.

Group m e m b e r s also tend to imitate the b e h a v i o r of those to

whom they have attributed power. In a study i n v e s t i g a t i n g

group r e l a t i o n s h i p s among children, the results of the study

indicated that group m e m b e r s receive behavioral cues from

fellow group m e m b e r s that c o m m u n i c a t e to them their relative

power position in the group. Individuals perceive that they

are either "looked up to" or "looked down on" and behave

toward the group in relation to their p e r c e p t i o n of their

position in the group.

Steiner (34, pp. 2 3 0 - 2 3 5 ) discussed the r e l a t i o n s h i p

between i n t e r p e r s o n a l perception and group i n t e r a c t i o n .

According to Steiner, one p o p u l a r h y p o t h e s i s states that if

an individual accurately p e r c e i v e s and u n d e r s t a n d s the

m o t i v e s , p r e f e r e n c e s , and intentions of his a s s o c i a t e s , he

should be able to "get a l o n g " better than he would if his

p e r c e p t i o n s and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s were less a c c u r a t e . A c c u r a t e

36

perceptions should enable the individual to gear his behav-

ior to be compatible with the behavior of his associates,

thereby creating a productive and harmonious relationship.

Beer (3, pp. 209-222) investigated the relationship

between the need satisfaction of group members and the

ability of the group to reach its goals. Using a group

of female clerical workers as subjects, Beer attempted to

determine whether there was a difference in need satisfac-

tion for workers in routine jobs as compared with workers in

jobs with more complexity. Maslow's need hierarchy was

used as a criterion to assess need satisfaction. According

to Beer, the usual assumption made regarding female employees

is that they are not interested in work involvement or

intrinsic need satisfaction. Management often makes this

assumption because females are usually secondary wage

earners and are not career oriented. Contrary to this

belief, Beer discovered that the most important needs for

female clerical workers were self-actualization, autonomy,

and social needs. The findings of this study suggest that

women tend to rank "type of work" as the most important

factor in a job. The results of the study did not reveal

a significant difference between the perceived opportunity

for need satisfaction and actual need satisfaction (need

deficiency). Beer concluded that the need to develop one's

potentiality is inherent in the person and not in the job.

37

Metzner and Mann (28, pp. 467-485) investigated the

relationship between employee attitudes and absentee rates.

Using white and blue collar workers as subjects, these

researchers found job satisfaction to be inversely related

to absentee rates. Men in white collar jobs, on the aver-

age, were absent one day for every six months. These men

expressed greater job satisfaction than did those men who

were absent four or more days every six months. The absentee

rate for blue-collar workers appeared to be directly related

to the workers' feeling a "sense of belonging" and pride.

Men who had low absentee rates expressed a greater feeling

of team spirit and friendliness. There was a significant

inverse relationship between group cohesiveness and absentee-

ism. The relationship between absenteeism and employee

attitudes appeared to be quite different in women. Absentee

rates were not accompanied by a consistent expression of

favorable and unfavorable attitudes. Even in extreme

absenteeism there was not a significant difference in atti-

tudes. The researchers believed that this occurred because

the measurement of attitude scale was inadequate, or because

absenteeism for women is determined by factors other than

job satisfaction.

Homogene i ty

Cartwright and Zander (12, p. 139) contend that when a

group of people are exposed to the same environment, the

group will tend to display a homogeneity in beliefs,

38

attitudes, values, and behavior. The group assumes only

one "correct" description of the situation. Individuals

who perceive the environment differently from other members

experience conflict between themselves and the group. The

individual then is placed in the position of either accept-

ing his perception or accepting the perception of the group.

Cartwright and Zander (6, p. 229) believe that highly cohe-

sive group similarities occur as a result of group pressure

for uniformity, or because of a selective process of recruiting

group members who are similar in their beliefs, attitudes, and

values.

Asch (1) studied the relationship between the percep-

tions of an individual and those of the group. Asch found in

an experimental setting that naive subjects would change their

opinions when confronted with a perceptual conflict in order

to conform with a general consensus.

Cartwright (5, pp. 388-390) emphasizes four principles

which he believes are important in determining homogeneity:

1. If a group is to be used effectively as a medium of change, those members who are to be changed, and those members exerting influence to change, must have a strong sense of identity to the group.

2. In attempts to change attitudes, values, or behavior, the more relevant they are to the pur-pose of the group, the more influence the group can exert upon the members.

3. The greater the prestige of a group member in the eyes of the other members, the greater the influ-ence he will be able to exert.

4. Efforts to change individuals to deviate from the group norm will encounter strong resistance.

39

Group Structure

Cartwright and Zander (13, p. 486) state that it is

almost impossible to describe what happens in a group with-

out using terms to indicate the "place" members hold in

relation to one another. Such terms as position, rank,

status, and role refer to the fact that members in a group

can be identified in relation to each other, and that each

member can be located in the group according to some cri-

terion of placement. In fulfilling roles, Cartwright and

Zander believe that an occupant of a particular position is

subjected to "role expectations" from other members, and

that if the occupant of a role is to be successful, he must

engage in actions which are appropriate to the role. Coombs

and Syngg (15, p. 44) used the term role to mean "the selec-

tion by the individual from his perceptual field of those

goals, techniques, or ways of behaving that seem appropriate

for the kind of person he feels himself to be." Similarly,

Stogdill (11, p. 219) states that "the occupants of a posi-

tion engage in specific influence attempts in order to

conform to the expectations that others attach to the role."

Linton (25) defines a role as simply a collection of rights

and duties. When the individual puts the rights and duties

into effect, he is performing a role.

Research involving working groups and organizations

indicates that individuals base decisions to accept roles on

four considerations (11, p. 219):

40

1. the net advantage of the person performing the role 2. the conscquence for the group 3. the subjective probability that the individual will

be successful in his performance

4. the prospect of being rewarded for role fulfillment

One way to assess group structure and determine group

relationships is to investigate the sociometric status of

group members through sociometric techniques.

Morino (29, p. 11) defines sociometry as "a process of

classification which is calculated to bring individuals

together who are capable of harmonious interpersonal rela-

tionships and thus create a social group which can function

at a maximum efficiency and with a minimum of disruptive

tendencies and processes."

Van Zelt's study (37, pp. 175-185) supports the value

of sociometry in working groups. This study deals with two

groups, carpenters and bricklayers. The results of the study

indicate that the productivity of the group greatly improved

following the sociometric procedure that permitted the

workers to select their preferred work partner. Van Zelt

contends that sociometric procedures permit the worker to

examine his interests and needs, and they help him to deter-

mine his social structure within the group. Attitudes,

values, and interpersonal relationships that exist in groups

become realistic and take on meaning.

Koslin e_t a_l. (24, pp. 64-75) conducted a study based

on Sherif and Havland's social judgment theory. The social

41

judgment theory states that individuals in a group develop

a frame of reference for evaluating the behavior and per-

formance of co-workers on tasks of central importance to

the group. In addition, this frame of reference is utilized

when members predict the expected performance of other members

in the group. In turn, an individual's expected performance

places the individual within the group hierarchy. According

to sociological findings concerning natural groups, it is

assumed that "high and low" status positions are correlated

with "good and bad" performance. Koslin's study supports

the social judgment theory. In it there was significant

evidence to support the idea that a relationship existed

between an individual's sociological status and the psycho-

logical correlates of social status. The results of the

study demonstrated a stable set of expectations for members

placed in a "high-low" status position as compared with

members who are placed in a "middle" status position.

Self-Concept

Rogers (32), Jourard (22), and Coombs and Snygg (15)

have pioneered much of the work relative to the self-concept

theory.

Coombs and Snygg's (15) self-theory implies that

behavior is a function, not of the external events, but of the

individual's perception of the external events. Using this

frame of reference, Coombs and Snygg contend that an indi-

vidual's behavior is a result of his perception of himself

42

in relation to his world. Perceptions are formed through

the individual's previous intereaction experiences with his

world, and especially through his interpersonal relation-

ships with other people. As the individual lives and

interacts, he forms a concept of himself, what he believes

about himself. These beliefs and self-concepts influence an

individual's behavior. Not only will an individual behave

in a manner consistent with his self-concept and perception,

but he will normally seek to strengthen and enhance this

self-image by resisting events or relationships which

threaten his image.

Bonney (4, p. 88) states that self-adequacy "in all of

its forms is intimately tied up with the whole syndrome of 1

behavior in intra-group identifications and interpersonal

affiliations." He continues with the statement that "an

individual's self-structure is not something that emerges

from within his own psyche; it is not innate; it is not some-

thing that is there to be discovered or released; rather, it

is 'created' by millions of interactions between the child's

constitutional potentials and responsive environment."

Fitts (18) states that self-theory postulates that

behavior changes are dependent upon self-concept change and

that self-concept change can be best accomplished when the

phenomenal self perceives a close relationship between itself

and the experience or the situation. It should be expected

that when success in an activity has little value to the

43

person, the success will have little value effect on the

individual's self-concept. In contrast, a new success in

an area that an individual values highly (especially if the

individual had a low self-concept previously) should produce

a positive effect on the individual's self-concept.

According to Simmons (35), if work has become a valued |

need of an individual's perceptual field, and if he is

constantly seeking his own perceptual adequacy, then he will

be the one most positively affected by successful participa-

tion in working groups. Conversely, the individual who does

not have a value for work will be less likely to perceive

this experience as an enhancement or fulfillment of self,

and he will be less affected by engaging in work. It is,

then, the former individual who will gain in self-esteem and

self-worth through work experiences rather than the latter.

Cartwright (5, p. 381) postulates that a healthy per-

sonality is reflected in those "individuals who have not

had their self-esteem undermined." The development of self-

esteem depends upon many experiences, but one important

factor is the individual's experience with success and failure.

Self-esteem does not develop solely as a result of success or

failure, but it depends upon the extent to which one or the

other is realized. Success and failure often determine an

individual's level of aspiration, and aspirations always

involve the individual's relationships in a group. Groups

set standards, and if members are to remain and be accepted

44

in a group, they must be able to meet the standards and per-

form appropriately. If an individual's capacity does not

permit him to meet the standards, he may feel that he has

failed, or he may feel that he is rejected, and withdraw

either physically or emotionally from the group. Conse-

quently, he may experience a loss of self-esteem.

Maehr e_t a_l. (27, pp. 353-357) studied the relative

significance!between peer evaluations and an individual's

self-concept. The conclusions drawn from the data were

1. If a significant person reacts in an approving manner toward some attribute of the subject, the subject's concept of that attribute will improve. Conversely, if a significant person reacts unfavorably to some attribute of the subject, the subject's concept of that attribute will depreciate.

2. Approval and disapproval produce different degrees of change in different individuals.

3. There is a gradient effect from specifically approving or disapproving attributes in relation to the relevancy or irrelevancy to behavior.

Gregory and Jacobs (19, pp. 121-126) report the findings

of a study in which they used psychiatric patients as sub-

jects. The study was designed to determine whether or not

work experiences had an affect on changing the self-concept

of individuals. These researchers expressed the belief,

It is the change in self-concept . . . that is the active therapeutic agent in the E.W.P. (Member Employee Work Program). By learning to see himself differently, he acted differently. His subsequent actions stimulated a more positive type of reaction from those he came into contact with, which in turn contributed to change in self-concept.

45

Thus, these r e s e a r c h e r s contend that b e h a v i o r change is

concurrent with a subjective e v a l u a t i o n of self-concept

change.

In a similar study, Shumaker (36) reports that there

is a positive r e l a t i o n s h i p between a subject's work per-

formance and his previous work e x p e r i e n c e . Using the

T e n n e s s e e S e l f - C o n c e p t Seale as an instrument for m easuring

changes in self-concept, the results of the study indicated

that significant changes in a positive d i r e c t i o n occurred in

areas of s e l f - r e g a r d , confidence, m o r a l e , and feeling of

w o r t h i n e s s in subjects who had previously had good work

e x p e r i e n c e s .

As a part of a research study to d e t e r m i n e the effec-

tiveness of group counseling for nursing students, Bell and

Fitts (2) sought to evaluate changes in the student's self-

concept and the student's stereotyped concept of a "typical

professional n u r s e . " Bell and Fitts found that, according

to results from the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale, all of the

students studied were average or better in terms of self-

concept and mental health. The e x p e r i m e n t a l groups showed

g r e a t e r changes in increased capacity for s e l f - c r i t i c i s m ,

less v a r i a b i l i t y in s e l f - p e r c e p t i o n , and more certainty

about self, than did the control group. H o w e v e r , the gains

were not statistically significant at the .05 level. The

investigation of the student's stereotyped concept of a

"typical p r o f e s s i o n a l n u r s e " revealed an interesting

46

phenomenon. The stereotyped concept was actually a measure

of the student's notion about the "typical professional

nurse's personal self-concept." The stereotyped concept

represented what the student believed that she should be or

should become in order to be a "professional" person. The

researchers expected upperclassmen who had considerable

contact with professional nurses to be more realistic in

the concepts of a professional nurse than the student nurses

who were starting their nursing education. The results of

the study did not support the researchers' expectations.

The more experienced student nurses did not lower their

concept of a "typical professional nurse." In fact, their

concept of a "typical professional nurse" was higher than

the concept of student nurses who were less experienced.

Bell and Fitts concluded that there is a universal tendency

for each individual student to present a concept of a

"typical professional nurse" which is considerably higher

than her own self-concept. This suggests that the measure-

ment of a "typical professional nurse" was probably closer

to each student's own ideal self than to an accurate per-

ception of a professional nurse (2).

Wylie (41), one of the major critics in research related

to changes in an individual's self-concept, states that it

is difficult to measure changes in self-concept, and that

research studies which purport that significant changes have

occurred usually lack the objective evidence to support the

47

findings. In contrast to Wylie's beliefs, and although most

se1f-theorists agree that an individual's self-concept is

slow to change, self-theorists contend that man continually

shifts, responds, and adjusts to different situations and

people. It is possible, through meaningful experiences and

even in traumatic situations, for sudden and dramatic changes

to occur in an individual's self-concept. Rogers (32) refers

to this as a reorganization of self.

Cartwright points out the change potential inherent in

groups in these words:

To begin with the most general proposition, we may state that the behavior, attitudes, beliefs, and values of an individual are all firmly grounded in the group to which he belongs. How aggressive or cooperative he is, how much self-respect and con-fidence he has, how energetic and productive his work is, what he aspires to, what he believes to be true and good, whom he loves or hates, and what beliefs and prejudices he h o l d s — a l l of these char-acteristics are highly determined by the individual's group memberships. In a real sense, they are properties of groups and of the relationships between people. Whether they change or resist change will, therefore, be greatly influenced by the nature of these groups. Attempts to change them must be concerned with the dynamics of groups (5, p. 387).

Summary

Scientists involved in the study of group behavior have

contributed to knowledge by providing a better understanding

of individual and group needs. Through research several

properties have been identified as being integral components

of group life. The related literature pertinent to this

48

research reviewed six properties that are known to influence

the relationships and activities of working groups. These

properties are (a) leadership style, (b) cohesion and group

attraction, (c) group atmosphere, (d) homogeneity, (e) group

structure, and (f) self-concept of group members.

Although the style of leadership has for some time been

recognized as being an influential factor in the morale and

effectiveness of groups, the early studies of Lewin, Lippett,

and White provide evidence that the same group of people

will react in markedly different ways when under the influ-

ence of leaders who behave differently. More recently,

Cattell proposes that any member can exert influence to the

extent that the properties of group are modified by his

pre sence.

Studies which have investigated group cohesion and

group attraction indicate that there is a relationship

between the ability of the group to retain its members and

the ability of the group to influence its members. Cartwright

states that the interpersonal power of a group has two

properties. The first concerns the agent which possesses the

valued resource, and second concerns the values of the

individual who is the recipient of the valued resource. If

the assumption is made that people frequently seek objectives

which require the exertion of influence, then there should be

a relationship between the possession of interpersonal power

and the exercise of influence. Kelman states that given the

40

proper set of conditions, influence will take one of three

forms: (a) compliance, (b) attraction, and (c) internaliza-

tion.

Group atmosphere, group homogeneity, group structure,

and the self-concept of group members are important deter-I

minants of individual and group behavior. Some theorists

believe that in order to change the behavior of individuals

it may be necessary to change the standards of the group.

Studies investigating the dynamics of group interaction have

determined that an individual's beliefs, attitudes, and

values can be shaped by the group in which he belongs.

Coombs and Snygg contend that an individual's behavior is

a result of his perception of himself in relation to his

world. Perceptions are formed through the individual's

previous interaction experiences, and especially through

his interpersonal relationships with other people. Fitts

states that self-theory postulates that behavior changes are

dependent upon self-concept change and that self-concept

can best be accomplished when the phenomenal self perceives

a close relationship between itself and the experience or

the situation.

The implications made in the current literature concern-

ing the dynamics of group life were incorporated in this

study to determine whether group interaction could bring

about change in sociometric status, self-concept, and per-

ceived group characteristic