Editing Socialization (section)

=== Group socialization ===
{{See also|Group dynamics}}
[[File:Duck Duck Goose.jpg|thumb|Group socialization]]
Group socialization is the theory that an individual's peer groups, rather than parental figures, become the primary influence on [[personality]] and behavior in adulthood.<ref name="J Harris">{{cite journal | last1 = Harris | first1 = J.R. | year = 1995 | title = Where is the child's environment? A group socialization theory of development | journal = Psychological Review | volume = 102 | issue = 3 | pages = 458–89 | doi= 10.1037/0033-295x.102.3.458 | s2cid = 349830 }}</ref> Parental behavior and the home environment has either no effect on the social development of children, or the effect varies significantly between children.<ref name="Maccoby">Maccoby, E.E. & Martin, J.A. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family: Parent-child interaction. In P.H. Mussen (Series Ed.) & E.M. Hetherington (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of Child Psychology: Vol. 4. Socialization, personality, and social development (4th ed., pp. 1–101). New York: Wiley.</ref> Adolescents spend more time with peers than with parents. Therefore, peer groups have stronger correlations with personality development than parental figures do.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Bester | first1 = G | year = 2007 | title = Personality development of the adolescent: peer group versus parents | journal = South African Journal of Education | volume = 27 | issue = 2 | pages = 177–90 }}</ref> For example, twin brothers with an identical genetic heritage  will differ in personality because they have different groups of friends, not necessarily because their parents raised them differently. Behavioral genetics suggest that up to fifty percent of the variance in adult personality is due to genetic differences.<ref>McGue, M., Bouchard, T.J. Jr., Iacono, W.G. & Lykken, D.T. (1993). Behavioral genetics of cognitive stability: A life-span perspectiveness. In R. Plominix & G.E. McClearn (Eds.), Nature, nurture, and psychology (pp. 59-76). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.</ref> The environment in which a child is raised accounts for only approximately ten percent in the variance of an adult's personality.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Plomin | first1 = R. | last2 = Daniels | first2 = D. | year = 1987 | title = Why are children in the same family so different from one another? | doi = 10.1017/s0140525x00055941 | journal = Behavioral and Brain Sciences | volume = 10 | issue = 3| pages = 1–16| pmid = 21807642 | pmc = 3147063 }} Reprinted in {{cite journal | pmc = 3147063 | pmid= 21807642 | doi= 10.1093/ije/dyq148 | volume= 40 | issue= 3 | title= Why are children in the same family so different from one another? | date= June 2011 | journal= Int J Epidemiol | pages= 563–82 | last1 = Plomin | first1 = R | last2 = Daniels | first2 = D}}</ref> As much as twenty percent of the variance is due to measurement error.<ref>Plomin, R. (1990). Nature and nurture: An introduction to human behavioral genetics. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.</ref> This suggests that only a very small part of an adult's personality is influenced by factors which parents control (i.e. the home environment). Harris grants that while siblings do not have identical experiences in the home environment (making it difficult to associate a definite figure to the variance of personality due to home environments), the variance found by current methods is so low that researchers should look elsewhere to try to account for the remaining variance.<ref name="J Harris"/> Harris also states that developing long-term personality characteristics away from the home environment would be evolutionarily beneficial because future success is more likely to depend on interactions with peers than on interactions with parents and siblings. Also, because of already existing genetic similarities with parents, developing personalities outside of childhood home environments would further diversify individuals, increasing their evolutionary success.<ref name="J Harris"/>

==== Stages ====

Individuals and groups change their evaluations of and commitments to each other over time. There is a predictable sequence of stages that occur as an individual transitions through a group: investigation, socialization, maintenance, resocialization, and remembrance. During each stage, the individual and the group evaluate each other, which leads to an increase or decrease in commitment to socialization. This socialization pushes the individual from prospective to new, full, marginal, and ex member.<ref>{{cite journal |last1= Moreland|first1= Richard L.|last2= Levine|first2= John M.|title= Socialization in Small Groups: Temporal Changes in Individual-Group Relations|journal=Advances in Experimental Social Psychology|date=1982|volume=15|pages=137–92|doi=10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60297-X|isbn= 978-0120152155}}</ref>

'''Stage 1: Investigation'''
This stage is marked by a cautious search for information. The individual compares groups in order to determine which one will fulfill their needs (''reconnaissance''), while the group estimates the value of the potential member ([[Recruitment (disambiguation)|''recruitment'']]). The end of this stage is marked by entry to the group, whereby the group asks the individual to join and they accept the offer.

'''Stage 2: Socialization'''
Now that the individual has moved from a prospective member to a new member, the recruit must accept the group's culture. At this stage, the individual accepts the group's norms, values, and perspectives (''assimilation''), and the group may adapt to fit the new member's needs (''accommodation''). The acceptance transition-point is then reached and the individual becomes a full member. However, this transition can be delayed if the individual or the group reacts negatively. For example, the individual may react cautiously or misinterpret other members' reactions in the belief that they will be treated differently as a newcomer.

'''Stage 3: Maintenance'''
During this stage, the individual and the group negotiate what contribution is expected of members (''role negotiation''). While many members remain in this stage until the end of their membership, some individuals may become dissatisfied with their role in the group or fail to meet the group's expectations (''divergence'').

'''Stage 4: Resocialization'''
If the divergence point is reached, the former full member takes on the role of a marginal member and must be resocialized. There are two possible outcomes of resocialization: the parties resolve their differences and the individual becomes a full member again (''convergence''), or the group and the individual part ways via expulsion or voluntary ''exit''.

'''Stage 5: Remembrance'''
In this stage, former members reminisce about their memories of the group and make sense of their recent departure. If the group reaches a consensus on their reasons for departure, conclusions about the overall experience of the group become part of the group's ''tradition''.