Group Ecology

Physical Environments

The physical environments of groups have been especially interesting to researchers. One popular research area is crowding. The effects of crowding on groups are studied in residential areas, college dormitories, and prisons, as well as laboratories. As people feel more crowded, they exhibit greater stress, worse performance (especially on more complex tasks), and more negative social relations. These effects are believed to be mediated by several factors, including loss of control, cognitive overload, and behavioral constraints. Some researchers have found that groups, rather than being the reason why people feel crowded, can sometimes provide solutions to crowding problems. In a crowded dormitory, for example, a friendship group might form and “take over” several rooms or a lounge area. This could restore group members' sense of control, reduce their cognitive overload, and weaken some of the constraints on their behavior.

A related area of research involves groups that work in “exotic” environments, such as outer space, underground, underwater, or at the poles. These environments are generally dangerous, confining, and impoverished in terms of stimulation. Common responses by groups to such environments include increased cohesion, greater pressure on members to conform, and the development of strong leadership. Groups apparently adapt in these ways to eliminate or control any problems that are internal to the group, so that the group's external problems can be handled more effectively.

Another area of research on physical environments involves groups that work in factories or offices. Underlying this research is the assumption that working conditions affect job satisfaction, which in turn affects how productive workers are. Temperature, lighting, floor space, noise, and provisions for privacy have all been shown to affect workers, but individual reactions to such factors may well be shaped by groups. Judgments about working conditions are often made collectively, rather than individually. Several theorists, including Gerald Salancik and Jeffrey Pfeffer in a 1978 publication, have argued that various social processes can influence workers' opinions about whether their jobs are interesting, their salaries are adequate, and so forth. For example, members of work groups may call attention to some factors more than others, evaluate some factors more positively than others, “explain” why things are the way that they are now, or predict whether and when things might get better or worse. It would not be surprising, then, if judgments about the work environment were affected in these ways as well.

The computerization of offices has led researchers to study the impact of technology on workgroups. A wide variety of computer systems have been studied, including (a) simple word-processing or accounting programs; (b) complex collaborative writing/editing programs; (c) electronic mail, bulletin boards, and chat rooms; and (d) support systems for group decision making. E-mail has been studied most often. The evidence suggests e-mail can affect workgroups in several ways, such as reducing overall communication, equalizing participation levels, weakening status systems, emphasizing informational rather than normative influence, and encouraging deviance. There is little evidence that e-mail improves group productivity.

...