Thesis (Ph. D.)--Ohio State University, 1974. / Includes vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 363-372). Available online via OhioLINK's ETD Center

No description available.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Queensland, 2002. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.A.)--York University, 2000. Graduate Programme in Social Anthropology. / Typescript. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 142-147). Also available on the Internet. MODE OF ACCESS via web browser by entering the following URL: http://wwwlib.umi.com/cr/yorku/fullcit?pMQ59167.

Not available / text

No description available.

This study investigated the within-group differences in ice-time and experience with the team in task cohesion perceptions of college hockey players and their relationship with team performance success. One hundred and seventy-one male hockey players between the age of seventeen and twenty-two years, representing ten teams, answered the two task portions of the Group Environment Questionnaire, as well as a question concerning their feelings regarding the amount of ice-time received during games. The data was analysed using a 3 x 2 ANOVA for success by ice-time and success by experience with the team for each of the two measures of task cohesion. The results showed the more successful teams to be most cohesive, but significant (p $<$.05) within-group differences were only found among the veterans and rookies of the least successful teams. It was concluded that within-group differences in cohesion exist in teams of low levels of success, but that highly and moderately successful teams do not experience the phenomenon. Teams success may be the determinant of the existence of within-group differences in task cohesion.

No description available.

Adolescents (N=516) in a rural Midwest high school, grades 9-12, indicated the crowds to which they belong from a list of 10 crowds specified by 4 classes in the school (e.g., Jocks, Emo, Farmers, Smart Kids/Nerds), along with the crowd to which they belong "more than any other." Most of the students (76%) claimed to belong to more than one crowd. Two-step cluster analysis was used to identify patterns of crowd membership, resulting in 8 clusters of distinct, heterogeneous composition. Students were compared on S. E. Paulson's (1994) parenting scale and on J. T. Jost and E. P. Thompson's (2000) social dominance orientation scale. SDO differed significantly among the males in the different crowd clusters, but not the females. Male members of clusters with a majority of members belonging in the Smart Kids/Nerd crowd or who considered themselves "Just Normal" had lower SDO scores than members of clusters with few or no members in the Smart Kids/Nerd crowd. Both mother's and father's responsiveness significantly predicted adolescent's SDO scores after controlling for gender, which was higher among males than females in this adolescent sample. In combination, mother's and father's responsiveness and demandingness explained 12% of the variance in SDO scores. Adolescents who perceived their parents as more responsive had lower SDO scores than adolescents with less responsive parents, but parent responsiveness and demandingness were not related to crowd cluster membership. / Department of Educational Psychology

Objectives: The general problematic of social science research is located in individualized explanations of social and collectively based phenomena. This is due to methodological issues inherent in the way social research is conducted. Research on ingroup bias via the renowned minimal group studies is an exemplar of this general problem and is examined in this study. This research argued that explaining ingroup bias in terms of individuals’ psychological needs is insufficient. This is because the original paper and pencil test failed to account for the effects of social interaction and how the interaction unfolds over time. Consequently, the old problem of ingroup bias was revisited using a new technology: the Virtual Interaction Application (VIAPPL). Design: A within-subjects and between-groups experimental design was used. Methods: VIAPPL was used to replicate the original study but in a way that demonstrated how ingroup bias was produced in interaction over time. This was facilitated by the ‘Give and Get’ game, where participants allocated tokens to one another in a simulated game-like environment. A repeated measures ANOVA and social network analyses were used to analyse the data. Results: As predicted, 1) ingroup bias was found most likely to be manifest in social interaction characterised by group categorization, and 2) more ingroup bias was expressed when the group interaction is visible to those participating in the interaction. Ingroup bias did not amplify as the group interaction unfolded over time. However, there was evidence proving that ingroup bias is not static, as was previously thought. Instead, it changed by increasing and decreasing as the rounds of the game advanced. Furthermore, the investigation revealed that 1) participants distributed their tokens fairly when they acted with and without a group membership, 2) observing the interaction informed the way tokens were allocated in both individual and group conditions, and 3) reciprocity was not operant in the interaction. Conclusions: This study introduced a new framework for studies in the minimal group paradigm (MGP) that allowed participants to interact in a virtual environment and enabled both traditional ANOVA methods and social network analyses. By rendering social interaction visible in the MGP, this study moved beyond an individualized explanation of social interaction by offering a social explanation of the behaviours manifested. / Thesis (M.A.)-University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, 2014.