Primary and Secondary Groups

This article focuses on primary and secondary groups. These two types of groups differ in their main characteristics, the function they serve for group members, and the group members' qualitative experience of each. Understanding the role that primary and secondary groups play in social life is vital for all those interested in the sociology of social interaction. This article explores the sociology of primary and secondary groups in four parts: an overview of the main principles of primary and secondary groups; a discussion of Charles H. Cooley and the primary group concept; an exploration of the history of small group research; and a description of primary and secondary group studies, including research on primary and secondary group kin relations, public opinion making in primary and secondary groups, primary and secondary group relations with large formal organizations, and primary and secondary group boundaries and norms.

Keywords Collective Behavior; Congenial Primary Group; Cooley, Charles Horton; Primary Group; Secondary Group; Social Interaction

Social Interaction in Groups & Organizations > Primary & Secondary Groups

Overview

Sociologists divide and classify groups into primary and secondary groups. These two types of groups differ in their main characteristics, the function they serve for group members, and the group members' qualitative experience of each. Understanding the role that primary and secondary groups play in social life is vital for all those interested in the sociology of social interaction. This article explores the sociology of primary and secondary groups in four parts: an overview of the main principles of primary and secondary groups; a discussion of Charles Horton Cooley and the primary group concept; an exploration of the history of small group research; and a description of primary and secondary group studies, including research on primary and secondary group kin relations, public opinion making in primary and secondary groups, primary and secondary group relations with large formal organizations, and primary and secondary group boundaries and norms.

The Main Principles of Primary & Secondary Groups

Depending on the primary or secondary nature of a group, a group's norms, values, laws, boundaries, and roles may be rigid and official or flexible and casual. Primary groups are characterized by their small size, intimate relationships, and shared culture. Examples of primary groups include families, sports teams, hobby clubs, and close friendships. People tend to find emotional connection and psychological comfort in their primary group, which in turn has an influence on their opinions and identity. Individuals may belong to more than one primary group. Secondary groups are characterized by their large size, impersonal nature, and interchangeability of individual roles. Individuals almost always belong to multiple secondary groups.

Primary Group Characteristics

Primary group refers to small groups that last long enough to form emotional attachments between members, differentiated roles, and a group subculture. Examples of primary groups include informal work associations, families, gangs, or parent/child play-groups. Sociologist Charles Horton Cooley introduced the primary group concept in the early twentieth century. Primary groups describe the numbers of people who interact directly and intimately with each other, such as families, gangs, or friendly peer groups that are usually fairly small in membership. Primary groups are considered to have been the main social organization of traditional pre-industrial society. (In contrast, secondary groups are considered to be the main social organization of modern industrial society.) Primary groups are characterized and identified by their social-psychological dimensions, with member orientation toward other members and inter-member orientation as definitive elements. Primary groups require a unity or connection separate from any formal system or institution; it is often the emotional quality of the primary group relationship provides the necessary bond (Bates & Babchuck, 1961).

Secondary Group Characteristics

Secondary groups refer to groups of people who are not emotionally involved with one another but come together for a practical purpose such as a class, military exercise, or corporate work group. Secondary groups on a massive scale, such as religions, military and political groups, corporations, and factories, are referred to as associations. Secondary groups are characterized by their more formal and institutionalized nature. In some instances, secondary groups may contain multiple primary groups. For example, as members of secondary groups develop emotional ties with one another, primary groups form from these relationships. The primary and secondary nature of groups tends to affect the dynamics and decision-making abilities of the group.

Sociologists distinguish primary and secondary groups through the measurement of variables including the size of the group, the group's duration, frequency of member contact, age composition of group, and sex of members. Sociologists have found that the frequency of contact and hours of contact per week are strong predictors of intimate interactions and primary group status. Primary groups require significant auditory, visual, and associational contact and interactions to build familiarity and trust between members (Fischer, 1953).

Charles H. Cooley & the Primary Group Concept

Charles H. Cooley (1864–1929) was a sociologist committed to the study of social life and worked to understand the mental processes that result from social interaction. He believed that the fundamental facts of social life are mental, with individual and group behaviors existing as manifestations of mental phenomena. Cooley was an "arm chair sociologist" who based his ideas more on observations in daily life than objective research (Angell, 1930). The notion of a primary group was introduced in his book entitled Social Organization (1909) and the concept quickly became entrenched in sociological theories of human groups and classifications. Cooley's later book, entitled Social Process (1918), discusses the process of human life, personal aspects of social processes, degeneration, social factors in biological survival, group conflict, valuation, and intelligent processes. Cooley had strong views on the relation between organization and conflict and the opportunities inherent in culture and class relations (Holfe, 1920).

Cooley's primary group concept became a fundamental part of twentieth- century sociological thought (Lee, 1964). Cooley intended primary groups to mean those groups characterized by intimate association and cooperation and believed that secondary groups formed in response to the shift from agrarian to industrial societies. Primary groups, according to Cooley, are primary in nature because they play a fundamental role in the formation of their identity and ideals (Sherif, 1954). Ideals cited as part of primary group membership surrounds the presence of gregarious and sociable human beings. Cooley was particularly interested in the congenial primary group; a group consisting of members who maintain frequent, direct communication with one another for the sake of mutual enjoyment. Members of congenial primary groups tend to have sympathetic, positive feelings toward one another. Out of necessity, congenial primary groups tend to be limited in size. The addition of members changes the dynamics of the group and risks the growth of discord and animosity (Clow, 1919).

Small Group Research

Sociologists consider a group to be any number of people who interact with each other and share common expectations about each other's behavior. Sociological study of groups is part of sociologists’ larger concern for the connection between social structure and collective behavior. Sociological studies of primary and secondary groups are part of the small group research field. Small group research of primary and secondary groups tends to be divided into studies about group composition, group structure, and group process (McGrath, 1978). Research on the group character and composition of primary and secondary groups tends to focus on group size and member characteristics. Group members bring qualities and characteristics to the group that influence the group as a whole; such characteristics include biographical characteristics such as age, race, sex, and class; personality characteristics; abilities of members; attitude of members; and the social position and role of the member in the group. Research has shown that there is no set formula for forming an effective group based on member characteristics.

Communication & Friendship Networks

Research on the group structure and relations between individuals in primary and secondary groups tends to focus on communication networks and friendship networks. Studies of communication networks were popular in the 1940s and 1950s. In particular, the success of centralized and decentralized communication channels is of great interest to small group researchers. Centralized networks have been found to produce faster and more accurate communication. Friendship networks are studied to understand the interpersonal nature of interconnectedness and interpersonal relations in groups. Researchers have found that group cohesiveness is higher in friendship networks than non-friendship networks. Small group research also includes significant study of power and influence relations in groups. There are at least five bases of power in group relations including legitimate, referent, reward, coercive, and expert. Studies of power relations in primary and secondary groups provide insight on issues of leadership, conformity, group norms, and interpersonal conflict.

Research on group process and member behavior in primary and secondary groups tends to produce useful data for predicting group actions. Small group researchers study the interaction processes in groups to understand how groups function. All member characteristics and behaviors are mediated and interpreted through the group interaction process. Group processes are challenged by socioemotional and group maintenance problems.

A History of Social Interaction Research

In the early twentieth century, sociologists began to study social interaction as a means of understanding and predicting individual and group behavior. The basic unit of the two- and three-person group, commonly known as the primary group, became the focus of much sociological study. Sociologists felt that once they could understand how two- and three-person groups function, the small group theories and observations would be applicable to studies of large groups. Small group studies and social psychology of the early twentieth century occurred primarily in laboratory settings.

The Work of Georg Simmel

While Charles Horton Cooley developed the concept of the primary group, numerous sociologists, most notably Georg Simmel, had a strong influence on the development of primary and secondary group studies. Georg Simmel (1858–1918), a German sociologist, began the sociological study of the connections between group size and group actions. Simmel's work was used by sociologists interested in exploring the crucial differences between primary and secondary groups. Simmel's work on the differences between small primary groups (characterized by intense member involvement) and large secondary groups (characterized by member distance, aloofness, and segmentation) is representative of Simmel's position on the connections between individual freedoms and group structures (Coser, 1977). Simmel found that small primary and large secondary groups, characterized in part by differences in group size, tend to have different norms, values, laws, boundaries, and roles. Primary and secondary groups differ in their main characteristics, the function they serve for group members, and the group members’ qualitative experience of each. Simmel is considered to be the first influential sociologist to study the effect of group size on social life (Hare, 1952).

Georg Simmel was one of the first sociologists to recognize that the number of members in a group, whether that number is big or small, affects the group's character, success, quality, and experience. Simmel saw a connection between quantitative relationships and group processes and structural relationships. Simmel's work on group size exemplifies his intellectual standpoint on the structural determinants of social action (Coser, 1977). Over the course of his life, Simmel was concerned with the significance of numbers upon social life. Simmel studied group relations as part of a larger effort to understand larger social trends and believed that group size was directly related to specific manifestations and experiences of social life. Simmel found that the larger the group size, the higher the level of structural differentiation in the group. Structural differentiation refers to the specialized organs created by the group to promote and maintain the interests of the group (Levine, 1972).

1930s

In the 1930s, sociologists began to conduct small group studies in real-world settings. Sociologists studied families, gangs, playgroups, hobby groups, etc. Researchers found that sociocultural influences affected the human motivation necessary for forming primary and secondary groups. Thus, sociocultural influences cannot be studied independently of the motives or needs of the group members (Sherif, 1954). The concept of collective behavior, developed by sociologist Robert Park (1864–1944), shaped how sociologists studied individual and group action throughout the twentieth century. Collective behavior refers to spontaneous action and conduct that occurs outside of existing social structures, laws, conventions, and institutions (Beauregard, 1997).

1940s, 1950s, 1960s

In the 1940s, the crisis of war and economic depression in the United States and Europe pushed small group studies to focus on social phenomena with broad social consequences. In the 1950s, the small group research field returned to a theoretical focus on the connection between collective behavior and social life. Sociologists began to study how individuals and groups differ in their performance abilities. Research has focused on the support systems of primary groups and the success of brainstorming and problem solving in secondary groups. While small group research lost much of its prominence in the 1960s, possibly due to a lack of a strong supporting body of theory, research on families (a notable primary group) and social movements (a notably secondary group) has continued (McGrath, 1978).

Applications

Sociologists apply the sociological principles of primary and secondary groups to understand the nature of social interactions in society and the psychosocial importance of social interaction for the individual. For instance, sociological studies on primary and secondary group kin relations, public opinion-making in primary and secondary groups, primary and secondary group relations with large formal organizations, and primary and secondary group boundaries and norms, described below, illustrate how social organization influences individual and group behavior.

Case Study: Primary Group Structures in Hungary

Researchers E. Litwak and I. Szelyeni studied primary group structures in Hungary and the United States. Litwak and Szelyeni found that proximity of kin and occupation affected primary-group relationships. They concluded that technological development leads to new forms of primary group structure. New forms of technology make traditional primary groups harder to maintain but foster and facilitate the formation of new types of primary groups. New technologies, which facilitate rapid communication over distance, allow for the maintenance of contact between extended family kin, the continuation of neighborhood ties despite high rates of member turnover, and continued friendships despite separations caused by employment and education. New technology is associated with rapid primary group indoctrination as well as primary group maintenance. Researchers based their conclusions on data gathered in Hungary and the United States about kin, long-term commitments, friends, technology use, and heterogeneity (Litwak & Szelyeni, 1969).

Case Study: Primary Group Differentiation in Urban Ireland

Sociologist Gordon Michael undertook a study to replicate and extend the work of Litwak and Szelyeni on primary group structures in Hungary and the United States. Gordon Michael studied primary-group differentiation in urban Ireland. Michael interviewed 686 Irish women to discover their relations to primary kin, secondary kin, friends, and acquaintances. Overall, Michael's findings agreed with Litwak and Szelyeni. That said, there were some differences in the study. Michael found that occupational prestige negatively influenced kin usage and connection in and between primary groups (Gordon, 1977).

Group Influences & Public Opinion

Sociologists study how determinants of public opinion are related to primary group influences it was found that primary groups' interactions perform an essential function in the formation of public opinion. For example, researchers found that primary groups serve a reinforcement function during elections. The intimacy, sympathy, and mutual identification of primary groups reinforce bonds of personal trust and influence. Researchers find that interpersonal influence most often takes place most within the primary group. As such, political strategists pay careful attention to the influence of interpersonal communication on public opinion formation. Election campaigns recognize that the personal influence of primary groups is the primary mechanism of opinion change as opinion initiation and opinion leadership are common features of the groups. Complications in opinion can arise from active participation in two or more primary groups (Baur, 1960).

While sociologists have found that the primary group, its character and purpose, is an important determinant of its members' attitudes and opinions, critics assert that the primary group opinion making is not useful for public opinion research. Critics believe that correlations were made because the research that linked primary groups and opinion making was based on issues that were only of concern to the goals of the primary group. For example, primary groups may yield shared opinions such as the code of the gang, the attitudes of a military unit, or the loyalties of a family. Primary groups need shared opinions about matters related to the group but may support varying views on public issues ("Primary group influences," 1954).

Families & Formal Organizations

Sociologists study the relationship between the family (as a primary group) and large formal organizations. Research shows that the primary group of the family influences the formal organization in which it participates. For example, data gathered from cooperative farms in Romania illustrated the extent to which the introduction of the family work unit affected the functioning of the cooperative farm organization. Individual productivity on the cooperative farm was greater when people worked in family teams. Individuals on the cooperative farms also expressed a preference for working in family teams over working in randomly assigned groups (Cernea, 1975).

Boundaries

Sociologists study the similarities of boundaries and norms in individual and group norms. Primary and secondary groups are both defined by the boundaries between the members and nonmembers. Boundaries may be formally defined, such as members of a family or a police department, or they may be informal and flexible, such as a high school peer group. Boundaries between primary and secondary groups are often maintained by conflict, as illustrated in the work of Muzafer Sherif. In a study called the Robbers Cave experiment, Sherif explored group prejudice and boundary-making among a group of eleven-year-old white, lower-middle class boys. The boys were divided into two groups and taken to a Boy Scout camp at Robbers Cave State Park. The groups developed a rivalry that increased in hostility when they engaged in competition for a prize. When the two groups were threatened by a manufactured crisis involving the water supply, hostilities were replaced by cooperative problem-solving efforts. This study revealed how group loyalty contributes to boundaries between groups, how conflict increases boundaries, and how boundaries are diminished when groups unite against a common adversary. Sherif's study has influenced the understanding of group conflict and cooperation in primary and secondary groups (Fine, 2004).

Conclusion

In the final analysis, social groups, whether they are classified as primary or secondary, are not random aggregates of people who are in the same place at the same time. Primary and secondary groups are intentional social groupings. Primary group refers to small groups that last long enough to form emotional attachments between members, differentiated roles, and a group subculture. In contrast, secondary groups refer to groups of people who are not emotionally involved with one another but come together for a practical purpose such as a class, military exercise, or work project. Primary and secondary groups differ in their main characteristics, the function they serve for group members, and the group members' qualitative experience of each. Understanding the role that primary and secondary groups play in social life is vital to all those interested in the sociology of social interaction. The primary and secondary nature of groups tends to affect the dynamics, norms, values, laws, boundaries, roles and decision-making abilities of the group.

Terms & Concepts

Collective Behavior: Spontaneous social actions that occur outside of prevailing social structures and institutions.

Congenial Primary Group: A group consisting of members whom maintain frequent, direct communication with one another for the sake of mutual enjoyment.

Cooley, Charles Horton: The social scientist credited with developed the primary group concept.

Group: Any number of people who interact with each other and share common expectations about each other's behavior.

Leadership: The process by which one individual works to influence other group members to work toward the achievement of group goals.

Power: The ability to enforce one's will on others, even if this power is not exercised because the others raise no resistance.

Secondary Groups: Subgroups within a complex organized society that are created to perform a specific function.

Simmel, Georg: A German sociologist concerned with social structure and sociability.

Social Interaction: Social actions between individuals and groups.

Social Life: The relationships, trends, and belief systems that unite individuals and groups.

Society: A group of individuals united by values, norms, culture, or organizational affiliation.

Sociology: The scientific study of human social behavior, human association, and the results of social activities.

Bibliography

Angell, R. (1930). Cooley's heritage to social research. Social Forces, 8, 340-347. Retrieved July 29, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=13518077&site=ehost-live

Bates, A., & Babchuk, N. (1961).The primary group: A reappraisal. Sociological Quarterly, 2, 181-191.

Baur, E. (1960). Public opinion and the primary group. American Sociological Review, 25, 208-219. Retrieved July 29, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=12766785&site=ehost-live

Beauregard, R. (1997). Review of the reportage of urban culture: Robert Park and the Chicago School. Urban Studies, 34, 1916-1918.

Bonanno, A., & Esmaeli, B. (2012). Facial disfigurement, stigma, and cancer: Interaction between patients and members of secondary groups. Sociological Spectrum, 32, 138–156. Retrieved October 31, 2013 from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=71516934

Cernea, M. (1975). The large-scale formal organization and the family primary group. Journal of Marriage & Family, 37, 927-936. Retrieved July 29, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=5290682&site=ehost-live

Clow, F. (1919). Cooley's doctrine on primary groups. American Journal of Sociology, 25, 326-347.

Coser, L. (1977). Masters of sociological thought: Ideas in historical and social context. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Fine, G. (2004). Forgotten classic: The robbers cave experiment. Sociological Forum, 19, 663-666. Retrieved July 29, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=15809080&site=ehost-live

Fischer, P. (1953). An analysis of the primary group. Sociometry, 16, 272-276. Retrieved July 29, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=16798673&site=ehost-live

Gordon, M. (1977). Primary-group differentiation in Urban Ireland. Social Forces, 55, 743-752. Retrieved July 29, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=5291219&site=ehost-live

Hare, A. (1952). A study of interaction and consensus in different sized groups. American Sociological Review, 17, 261-267. Retrieved July 17, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=12786692&site=ehost-live

Holfe, A. (n.d.). General works, theory and its history. American Economic Review, 10, 567-572. Retrieved July 29, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=13053821&site=ehost-live

Jacobs, G. (2012). Charles Horton Cooley, pragmatist or belletrist? Symbolic Interaction, 35, 24–48. Retrieved October 31, 2013 from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=73908424

Lee, S. (1964). The primary group as Cooley defines it. Sociological Quarterly, 5, 23-34.

Levine, D. ed. (1972). Georg Simmel on individuality and social forms. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Litwak, E., & Szelenyi, I. (1969). Primary group structures and their functions: kin, neighbors, and friends. American Sociological Review, 34, 465-481. Retrieved July 29, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=12919700&site=ehost-live

McGrath, J. (1978). Small group research. The American Behavioral Scientist, 21, 651.

Primary group influences on public opinion. (1954). American Sociological Review, 19, 261-267. Retrieved July 29, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=12786652&site=ehost-live

Sherif, M. (1954). Sociocultural influences in small group research, Sociology & Social Research, 39, 1-10.

Siebold, G. L. (2011). Key questions and challenges to the standard model of military group cohesion. Armed Forces and Society, 37, 448–468. Retrieved October 31, 2013 from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=61767035

Suggested Reading

Hamilton, W. (1929). Charles Horton Cooley. Social Forces, 8, 183-187. Retrieved July 29, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=13545544&site=ehost-live

Johnson, D. (1973). The primary group: A handbook for analysis and field research. Contemporary Sociology, 2, 500-503. Retrieved July 29, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=13326851&site=ehost-live

Rabinowitz, J., Lazerwitz, B., & Kim, I. (1995). Changes in the influence of Jewish community size on primary group, religious, and Jewish communal involvement — 1971 and 1990. Sociology of Religion, 56, 417. Retrieved July 29, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=9512290935&site=ehost-live

Wiley, N. (2011). A Mead-Cooley merger. American Sociologist, 42(2/3), 168–186. Retrieved October 31, 2013 from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=61072190