Group Dynamics:
Theory, Research, and Practice
Editorial
Division 49 of the American Psychological Association (APA),
Group Psychology and Group Psychotherapy, is launching a new
journal to deal with research, theory and practice in group
contexts. Titled Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice,
the journal seeks outstanding papers dealing with the
scientific study of group dynamics and the application of that
scientific understanding in applied settings. The Educational
Publishing Foundation, an imprint of the APA devoted to
interdisciplinary journals, will be our publisher.
Therapeutic applications that take place in a group setting (group
therapy) and the scientific field devoted to the analysis of
groups in general (group dynamics) have always been intertwined.
When practitioners first proposed group techniques in the early
decades of this century, they grounded their clinical work in the
psychology and social psychology of groups. Moreno's (1932)
method of psychodrama, for example, sprang from his studies of
the sociometric structures of small groups. When Freud
(1922) developed a rebuttal to some of the ideas offered by the
crowd theorist Le Bon (1895) his largely theoretical analysis
provided a foundation for conducting psychoanalysis in groups.
And Kurt Lewin (1936) might be recognized as both the founder of
the scientific field of group dynamics and the inventor of the
workshop and the skill-building seminar.
This shared ancestry, however, has yet to inform fully the
scientific analysis or groups or the therapeutic application of
change methods in group contexts. Bednar and Kaul (1978), after
systematically reviewing studies of interpersonal learning
groups, are positive about current group methods but negative
about the quality of research carried out in applied domains.
Klein (1983) notes that group therapy is insulated from the
social psychology of groups. When I recently reviewed a
collection of works dealing with applications of social
psychology to group therapy and mental health, I was forced to
conclude that "the bridge between social psychology and mental
health is still too weak to traverse" (Forsyth, 1993, p. 932).
This journal seeks to revitalize the link between the
scientific study of group dynamics and the application of that
scientific understanding in applied settings--particularly
those settings involving deliberate attempts to help
individuals achieved desired personal and interpersonal change.
To accomplish this goal we will publish the highest quality
theoretical, empirical, and practical articles dealing with
groups in general and therapeutic groups in particular.
Group Dynamics is founded on Lewin's concept of action
research. Lewin felt that social problems, including conflict,
leadership, and adjustment, should be solved scientifically for
there "is no hope of creating a better world without a deeper
scientific insight into the function of leadership and culture"
and other essentials of group life (Lewin, 1948, p. 113).
Lewin's action research argues against the traditional
distinction between basic and applied science by suggesting that
scientific understanding will occur most rapidly if researchers
and practitioners's efforts are unified. Extending Lewin's
unificationist view, we seek to strengthen the unity of group
psychology in terms of educational training experiences,
professional identity, shared methodological standards, the
evolution of discipline-spanning conceptual models of groups,
and shared metatheoretical and epistemological assumptions
about how our knowledge of groups should be expanded (see Forsyth
& Leary, 1991). This unified approach to the study of groups
defines the standards, topics, and bent of the journal.
Group dynamicists include both basic research scientists
and applications-oriented individuals who work with groups in
industrial, organizational, educational, judiciary, and
therapeutic contexts. We take as given, however, Kurt Lewin's
dictum: There is nothing so practical as a good theory. Even
when their pursuits are guided by primarily practical questions,
such as "Why, despite their heterogeneity in terms of purposes
and procedures, do groups promote physical and mental well-
being?," they must nonetheless develop a general theoretical
orientation that would be of interest to group dynamicists, in
general. Basic researchers, too, must develop theories and
conduct empirical studies that seek to account for phenomena
of interest to practitioners. Researchers are quick to remind
practitioners that a good theory is useful, but Lewin also
insisted that psychologists must strive to develop theories
that can be used to solve important social and psychological
problems. A manuscript's theoretical sufficiency will be of
paramount importance in the editorial decision-making
processes. We seek studies that add, unequivocally, to our
stock of knowledge about groups.
No one discipline holds the exclusive rights to the study
of groups. Scientists in such fields as psychology, sociology,
social psychology, anthropology, speech and communication,
political science, business, education, and psychiatry examine the
nature of groups, and Group Dynamics seeks articles from
scholars in all these fields. Indeed, we hope that in time the
field of group dynamics will become so unified that such
distinctions as field versus laboratory work or basic versus
applied research no longer arbitrarily influence our appraisal
of the work. We expect, however, that manuscripts will fall into
three categories: those dealing with social psychological
processes operating in groups, those dealing with groups in
organizations, and those dealing with groups as mechanisms for
achieving and sustaining psychological and physical well-being.
In the realm of social psychology, the journal welcomes
manuscripts dealing such topics as affiliation, communication,
decision-making, group socialization, intergroup relations,
norms, roles, and structure. In the realm of organization
behavior, we seek articles dealing with topics such as
management and leadership, productivity, organizational stress
and health, organizational development, and team building, and
team composition. We also welcome articles dealing with
health-related processes, broadly defined to include traditional
forms of group psychotherapy, self-help groups, groups that
provide individuals with social support, family dynamics, and
interpersonal learning groups. The journal therefore seeks
articles that examine groups in a range of contexts, including
ad hoc groups in experimental settings, therapy groups, naturally
forming friendship groups and cliques (e.g., gangs),
organizational units (e.g., performance teams), self-help
groups (e.g., AA), and learning groups (e.g., workshops).
The journal primarily publishes empirical analyses of group
processes: we take as a given that all conceptual analyses of
groups, no matter how intellectually alluring, must be tested
empirically. Group Dynamics also seeks theoretical, review,
critical, and practice papers that are outstanding in terms of
scholarship and significance for the field. All papers must
extend our understanding of groups significantly beyond our
current level of knowledge, and these contributions to the body
of knowledge must be highlighted in the articles. In keeping
with the spirit of action research, authors should discuss the
wider implications of their findings beyond the contexts they
study. Authors of papers dealing with primarily basic topics,
for example, should discuss the implications of their findings
for change-promoting groups. Authors of papers describing
innovative therapeutic practices should examine the theoretical
foundations and empirical findings that provide substantiation
for the techniques. The journal also encourages authors to
submit brief articles (reports) on topics that can be handled
briefly: for example, commentaries, reports of therapeutic
innovations that do not include empirical data pertaining to
their effectiveness, Division reports, or discussions of
training issues.
A Final Plea for United Action
The Journal, with its unabashedly eclectic methodological,
theoretical, and disciplinary editorial policy, hopes to
significantly advance our current knowledge of groups and their
dynamics. This approach recognizes that groups are studied by
a range of investigators in a host of different disciplines--
all of whom have very differing goals, pursuits, and paradigms.
We hope to synthesize these varying perspectives, however, in a
unified approach to the study of groups. Despite our many
differences in outlook, all students of groups recognize that
they are essential to human life. Through membership in groups
we define and confirm our values and beliefs and take on or
refine a social identity. When we face uncertain situations, in
groups we gain reassuring information about our problems and
security in companionship. In groups we learn about relations
with others, the type of impressions we make on others, and the
way we can relate with other more effectively. Given their
central importance, we must accept the charge of developing more
elaborate conceptualizations of groups that take into account
both their change-producing properties and their properties as
groups per se. We must take seriously the action researcher's
creed, and apply it to better understand groups:
Knowledge does not prosper,
When science is one-sided.
The basic and applied must be
United, not divided.
References
Bednar, R. L., & Kaul, T. (1978). Experiential group research:
Current perspectives. In S. Garfield and A. Bergin (Eds.),
Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change. New York:
Wiley.
Forsyth, D. R. (1993). Building a bridge between basic social
psychology and the study of mental health. Contemporary
Psychology, 38, 931-932.
Forsyth, D. R., & Leary, M. R. (1991). Metatheoretical and
epistemological issues. In C. R. Snyder & D. R. Forsyth
(Eds.), Handbook of social and clinical psychology: The
health perspective (pp. 757-773). New York: Pergamon.
Freud, S. (1922). Group psychology and the analysis of the ego.
London: Hogarth.
Klein, R. H. (1983). Group treatment approaches. In M.
Hersen, A. E., Kazdin, & A. S. Bellack (Eds.), The clinical
psychology handbook (pp. 593-610). New York: Pergamon.
Le Bon, G. (1895/1960). The crowd (translation of psychologie
des foules.). New York: The Viking Press.
Lewin, K. (1936). Principles of topological psychology. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Lewin, K. (1948). Resolving social conflicts: Selected papers
on group dynamics. New York: Harper.
Moreno, J. L. (1932). Who shall survive? Washington, DC:
Nervous and Mental Disease Publishing Co.
Return to Index
Return to Group Dynamics Home Page