Group cohesion is a topic that is studied across all spectrums of psychology, one more then the discipline of social psychology. For a team to be cohesive they must interact, play, and perform under one identity, or working for one common goal. The emphasis of cohesion in a team has been positively correlated, looking at certain relationships within a team, one can come to the realization that a team works like an engine, different compartments and systems working together to achieve the final goal. A team is based off of a series of interpersonal relationships, experienced through one on one interaction, and also through observing how others react with each other. A study done by de Jong, Gurseu, and Leenders (2014) examines the impact of
…show more content…
One example that is a great comparison to the social structure amongst sports team is the military. The military is an environment where group cohesion can be seen as life or death. Group cohesion amongst the military culture suggests that soldiers form social bonds and cooperate through shared practice of daily activities (Kirke, 2009). In the military there are four main factors that can be related to forming social bonds that are directly related to sports. The first being a formal command structure, this describes the rank in which soldiers follow, for example; Colonel, Major, Lieutenant, these can be seen in contrast to a coach, assistant coach, captain, and alternate captain, all the way down to regular players which can be similar to infantry soldiers (Kirke, 2009). Moving on, the second structure is informal structure, an unwritten code or conventions that are followed by soldiers, this can be something as not snitching on a fellow solider, or in contrast, in hockey an enforcer going after the star player instead of a fellow enforcer (Kirke, 2009). These rules are not written, but are universally known and followed by those they apply to. The third structure is loyalty or identity, which refers to the feeling of belonging, or companionship. This can be something such as a fellow soldier spending leisure time with a colleague or having dinner at the mess hall, or a player sitting beside one another in the mess hall or having drinks after a game (Kirke, 2009). This sense of belonging and companionship gives individuals a common entity to identify with and brings one another together (such as a common goal). Lastly, the functional structure of a group which refers to the actual functional understanding of a group’s identity and the individual’s role in that group (Kirke, 2009). For soldiers, it would be seen as acting “soldierly”, being tough and hard, and displaying honour, for an
One example that is a great comparison to the social structure amongst sports team is the military. The military is an environment where group cohesion can be seen as life or death. Group cohesion amongst the military culture suggests that soldiers form social bonds and cooperate through shared practice of daily activities (Kirke, 2009). In the military there are four main factors that can be related to forming social bonds that are directly related to sports. The first being a formal command structure, this describes the rank in which soldiers follow, for example; Colonel, Major, Lieutenant, these can be seen in contrast to a coach, assistant coach, captain, and alternate captain, all the way down to regular players which can be similar to infantry soldiers (Kirke, 2009). Moving on, the second structure is informal structure, an unwritten code or conventions that are followed by soldiers, this can be something as not snitching on a fellow solider, or in contrast, in hockey an enforcer going after the star player instead of a fellow enforcer (Kirke, 2009). These rules are not written, but are universally known and followed by those they apply to. The third structure is loyalty or identity, which refers to the feeling of belonging, or companionship. This can be something such as a fellow soldier spending leisure time with a colleague or having dinner at the mess hall, or a player sitting beside one another in the mess hall or having drinks after a game (Kirke, 2009). This sense of belonging and companionship gives individuals a common entity to identify with and brings one another together (such as a common goal). Lastly, the functional structure of a group which refers to the actual functional understanding of a group’s identity and the individual’s role in that group (Kirke, 2009). For soldiers, it would be seen as acting “soldierly”, being tough and hard, and displaying honour, for an