Editing Group dynamics (section)

===Types of groups===
{{Main|Types of social groups}}
Groups can vary drastically from one another. For example, three best friends who interact every day as well as a collection of people watching a movie in a theater both constitute a group. Past research has identified four basic types of groups which include, but are not limited to: primary groups, social groups, collective groups, and categories.<ref name=":2" /> It is important to define these four types of groups because they are intuitive to most lay people. For example, in an experiment,<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Lickel|first1=B|last2=Hamilton |first2= D. L.|last3=Wieczorkowska|first3=G|last4=Lewis|first4=A|last5=Sherman|first5=S. J.|last6=Uhles|first6=A. N.|title=Varieties of groups and the perception of group entitativity|journal=Journal of Personality and Social Psychology|date=2000|volume=78|issue=2|pages=223–246|doi=10.1037/0022-3514.78.2.223|pmid=10707331}}</ref> participants were asked to sort a number of groups into categories based on their own criteria. Examples of groups to be sorted were a sports team, a family, people at a bus stop and women. It was found that participants consistently sorted groups into four categories: intimacy groups, task groups, loose associations, and social categories. These categories are conceptually similar to the four basic types to be discussed. Therefore, it seems that individuals intuitively define aggregations of individuals in this way.

====Primary groups====
Primary groups are characterized by relatively small, long-lasting groups of individuals who share personally meaningful relationships. Since the members of these groups often interact face-to-face, they know each other very well and are unified. Individuals that are a part of primary groups consider the group to be an important part of their lives. Consequently, members strongly identify with their group, even without regular meetings.<ref name=":2" /> Cooley<ref name="Charles Scribner's Sons">{{cite book|last1=Cooley|first1=Charles|title=social organization: a study of the larger mind|date=1909|publisher=Charles Scribner's Sons|location=New York}}</ref> believed that primary groups were essential for integrating individuals into their society since this is often their first experience with a group. For example, individuals are born into a primary group, their family, which creates a foundation for them to base their future relationships. Individuals can be born into a primary group; however, primary groups can also form when individuals interact for extended periods of time in meaningful ways.<ref name=":2" /> Examples of primary groups include family, close friends, and gangs.

====Social groups====
A social group is characterized by a formally organized group of individuals who are not as emotionally involved with each other as those in a primary group. These groups tend to be larger, with shorter memberships compared to primary groups.<ref name=":2" /> Further, social groups do not have as stable memberships, since members are able to leave their social group and join new groups. The goals of social groups are often task-oriented as opposed to relationship-oriented.<ref name=":2" /> Examples of social groups include coworkers, clubs, and sports teams.

====Collectives====
Collectives are characterized by large groups of individuals who display similar actions or outlooks. They are loosely formed, spontaneous, and brief.<ref name=":2" /> Examples of collectives include a flash mob, an audience at a movie, and a crowd watching a building burn.

====Categories====
Categories are characterized by a collection of individuals who are similar in some way.<ref name=":2" /> Categories become groups when their similarities have social implications. For example, when people treat others differently because of certain aspects of their appearance or heritage, for example, this creates groups of different races.<ref name=":2" /> For this reason, categories can appear to be higher in entitativity and essentialism than primary, social, and collective groups. Entitativity is defined by Campbell<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Campbell|first1=D. T.|title=Common fate, similarity, and other indices of the status of aggregates of persons as social entities|journal=Systems Research and Behavioral Science|date=1958|volume= 3 |issue=1|pages=14–25|doi=10.1002/bs.3830030103}}</ref> as the extent to which collections of individuals are perceived to be a group. The degree of entitativity that a group has is influenced by whether a collection of individuals experience the same fate, display similarities, and are close in proximity. If individuals believe that a group is high in entitativity, then they are likely to believe that the group has unchanging characteristics that are essential to the group, known as essentialism.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Haslam|first1=N|last2=Rothschild |first2=L |last3=Ernst|first3=D|title=Are essentialist beliefs associated with prejudice?|journal=British Journal of Social Psychology|date= 2002|volume=41|issue=1|pages=87–100|doi=10.1348/014466602165072|pmid=11970776}}</ref> Examples of categories are New Yorkers, gamblers, and women.