COMMUNITY PSYCHOLOGY :Psychological Sense of Community: Theory of McMillan & Chavis (1986)
Is there a community or sub-culture you feel as if you belong to?
Back home in Houston there is a group of artists and musicians who all lived in Montrose which is kind of the creative center of Houston in the inner city. Most of my friends are from that circle and continue to be as we all grow older. Even though many of us have left for more creative cities like NYC, SF, LA, Chicago, KC, Portland, and Seattle.
What elements give you that sense of belonging, be it physical or emotional?
Everyone is a creative in one sense or another. Everyone has the tools of their trade with them all of the time as identifiers. Notebooks, art supplies, musical instruments. They tend to nest in the same central location just a few coffee shops, galleries, and shops. An emotional sense that any of the people share is struggle. A creative life style is one thing but to purse it as a profession is a whole another challenge. Many of us share that challenge and revel in it when it succeeds and picks those back up when it doesn't.
The concept of "psychological sense of community," and proposed that it become the conceptual center for the psychology of community, asserting that psychological sense of community "is one of the major bases for self-definition"
They are suggesting that the psychological sense of the community you live in is the bases for your own self-definition.
The construct of Psychological Sense of Community is referred to as the "Sense of Community". The definition of Sense of Community is "Sense of Community is a feeling that members have of belonging, a feeling that members matter to one another and to the group, and a shared faith that members' needs will be met through their commitment to be together."
Sense of Community is composed of four different elements:
1. Membership:
The first aspect of Sense of Community is membership in that community. Reviewing relevant literature on particular dimensions of membership, McMillan & Chavis identified five attributes:
• a. Boundaries
• b. Emotional safety
• c. A sense of belonging and identification
• d. Personal investment
• e. A common symbol system
These elements of membership make that identification possible.
Boundaries: are marked by things like language, dress, and ritual, indicating who belongs and who does not. Especially in groups that have boundaries that are less defined. Those people outside of the circle are given lower regard or punished.
"While much sympathetic interest in and research on the deviant have been generated, group members' legitimate needs for boundaries to protect their intimate social connections have often been overlooked"
So the need to protect their social connections have been overlooked.
The other four attributes of membership are "emotional safety" (or, more broadly, security; willingness to reveal how one really feels), "a sense of belonging and identification" (expectation or faith that I will belong, and acceptance by the community), "personal investment" (cf., cognitive dissonance theorists), and "a common symbol system." Regarding this fifth attribute, the authors quote Nisbet & Perrin, asserting that:
The Four Other Attributes of Membership:
- Emotional Safety
- A Sense of Belonging and Identification
- Personal Investment
- A Common Symbol System
Understanding common symbol systems is a prerequisite to understanding community. "The symbol is to the social world what the cell is to the biotic world and the atom to the physical world.... The symbol is the beginning of the social world as we know it"
This is an amazing look at community regarding the importance of symbols in the social world and community. Symbols are the cogs in the machine of community.
"At the level of the neighborhood, for example, symbols might be found in its name, a landmark, a logo, or in architectural style; the integrative role of national symbols is mentioned, such as the flag, holidays, a national language; citing Jung"
Symbols are the beginning of a language that operates only within the community of any size. If a flag can represent a national language then the symbols of humanity as a whole are the rituals, ceremonies, rites of passages, forms of speech, and dess to indicate boundaries of who is or is not a member.
In regards to membership, placed greater emphasis on the "spirit" of community deriving from "the spark of friendship".
Influence:
Members of a group must feel empowered to have influence over what a group does (otherwise they would not be motivated to participate), and group cohesiveness depends upon the group having some influence over its members. The authors cite several studies that suggest that these two apparently contradictory forces can be at work simultaneously, and assert that: People who acknowledge that others' needs, values, and opinions matter to them are often the most influential group members, while those who always push to influence, try to dominate others, and ignore the wishes and opinions of others are often the least powerful members.
The article states that people within the group who are about others are often more influential because of the trust that is formed when that takes place. They have the best intrest of others in mind.
"This process [of bidirectional influence] occurs all at the same time because order, authority, and justice create the atmosphere for the exchange of power"
Integration and Fulfillment of Needs:
Needs are commonly referred to those things that are desired and values, but also might be part of what is desired and valued. Members of groups are often rewarded for participating in many different ways. Shared Values is the benefit of many people being members of a group.
"an acknowledged interdependence with others, a willingness to maintain this interdependence by giving to or doing for others what one expects from them."
Search for similarities as an essential dynamic of community development!
Shared Emotional Connection:
Summary statement on shared emotional connection includes the assertion that "it seems to be
the definitive element for true community"
They mention the role of shared history (participation in or at
least identification with it). In 1996 (p. 322) McMillan adds that "
shared history becomes the community's story symbolized in art" (in a very broad sense). McMillan & Chavis (1986) list seven important features of shared emotional connection, citing relevant research for each.
Its interesting to read these because we all act them out. Its like sneaking a peek behind the unspoken or gravely overlooked framework that we all work within.
• a. Contact hypothesis. Greater personal interaction increases the likelihood that people will become close.
• b. Quality of interaction.
• c. Closure to events. Ambiguous interaction and unresolved tasks inhibit group cohesiveness.
• d. Shared valent event hypothesis. Increased importance of a shared event (i.e., a crises) facilitates a group bond.
• e. Investment. Beyond boundary maintenance and cognitive dissonance, the community becomes more
important to someone who has given more time and energy to it.
• f. Effect of honor and humiliation on community members. Someone who has been rewarded in front of a community feels more attracted to that community, and if humiliated feels less attraction.
• g. Spiritual bond. The authors admit that this quality is difficult to describe, but maintain that it is "present to some degree in all communities" (p. 14), and give the example of the concept of "soul" in the formation of a national black community in the U.S.
Dynamics Within and Between the Elements
"circular, self-reinforcing way, with all conditions having both causes and
effects" (p. 15), giving examples of causal and reinforcing influences among the attributes.
Formula 1: Shared emotional connection = contact + high-quality interaction
Formula 2: High-quality interaction = (events with successful closure - ambiguity) x (event valence x sharedness of the event) + amount of honor given to members - amount of humiliation.
Dynamics between the elements are illustrated by the authors primarily through examples, as it is "difficult to describe [their] interworkings...in the abstract.
Example: (in the university setting)
Someone puts an announcement on the dormitory bulletin board about the formation of an intramural dormitory basketball team. People attend the organizational meeting as strangers out of their individual needs (integration and fulfillment of needs). The team is bound by place of residence (membership boundaries are set) and spends time
together in practice (the contact hypothesis). They play a game and win (successful shared valent event). While playing, members exert energy on behalf of the team (personal investment in the group). As the team continues to win, team members become recognized and congratulated (gaining honor and status for being members). Someone suggests that they all buy matching shirts and shoes (common symbols) and they do so (influence) (p. 16). In their conclusion section, McMillan & Chavis suggest ways in which a well-defined, empirically validated understanding of Sense of Community might help creators and planners of programs of various kinds, including the positive impact of a high-quality community on processes that might normally unfold in a one-on-one context or in a context where the community dimension is largely ignored.
