Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Human Relations
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (5)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lindsay, J. S. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

On the Number and Size of Subgroups

John S. B. Lindsay

Townsville Hospitals Board, Townsville, N. Q. 4810, Australia

The fact that a group may subdivide into smaller subgroups is examined in the light of probability theory. It is argued that the largest number of ways in which any size group can divide into subgroups of different sizes (including the monad) is the likeliest variant to occur. Such "commonest" variants include both monads (individuals) and polyadic subgroups; and it is inferred that the coexistence of worlds constructed in an individual idiom and those constructed in a collective mode is a natural consequence. Recorded data relating to the biological individual in his family context, to the "casual" individual in informal groups, to solo and group medical practices, and to larger occupational and religious groups are found to be consistent with the probability hypothesis put forward.

Human Relations, Vol. 29, No. 12, 1103-1114 (1976)
DOI: 10.1177/001872677602901201
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 American Behavioral ScientistHome page
A. P. Hare
Group Size
American Behavioral Scientist, May 1, 1981; 24(5): 695 - 708.