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
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
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 Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sorrels, J. P.
Right arrow Articles by Myers, 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?

Comparison of Group and Family Dynamics

J. Paul Sorrels

Wayland Baptist University

Bettye Myers

Texas Woman's University

In an attempt to apply the concept of group dynamics to family dynamics, entire families performed a quality solution type task. The process utilized by these families was evaluated by a jury trained in group dynamics on the criteria used to evaluate nonfamily group functioning. A panel of family experts ranked the family solutions on the task. This ranking was correlated with group process ranking on 11 group dynamics characteristics derived from the literature. Analysis indicated four summary characteristics are unimportant or unobservable, two influenced families and groups oppositely, and the remaining characteristics were detrimental to both. The characteristics are examined by virtue of the literature supporting them in both family and group functioning. Explanations compatible with current family thought are offered for the results. Suggestions for future research are included.

Human Relations, Vol. 36, No. 5, 477-492 (1983)
DOI: 10.1177/001872678303600505


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?