Group myth as a socio-psychological phenomenon
Abstract
Along with collective and individual myths, there is the group myth, which stands for extended narratives of a group together with results of the group’s defense mechanisms’ actions in difficult social situations. A group myth emerges under certain socio-psychological conditions, such as history of a group is being reflected as a certain time interval of its development, sufficient to produce narratives about group’s own values, activity, achievements; demand for maintenance of group unity and identity of its members; need for providing of group functioning and management; existence of threats to group integrity with consequent group cohesion and reduction of social distance between its members; increased share of collective forms of decision making and behavior. Chances for a myth to arise increase in difficult social situations, especially crisis and traumatic ones, when a human being is helpless to operate within his/her usual framework, and information is perceived very uncritically. Historical group memory mainstreams in such situations, social problems are intended to be solved via the experience of previous generations, and a person’s ability to influence the course of events substantially diminishes. The latter results in a person’s readiness even to believe in unbelievable, if it helps to solve a problem. Following components could be distinguished when analyzing myth as a mean of group coping in difficult social situations: cognitive, which outline situational certainty for group members; emotional, intended to decrease members’ anxiety and uncertainty; instructional and regulatory ones for discipline, orienting group activity towards transformation and overcoming of obstacles from social reality. Reflection of difficult social situations by representatives of separate social and professional groups, implemented into products of group work, particularly group myth, makes a promising direction of psychological researches
References
[1] Selvini Palatstsoli, M., Boskolo, L., Chekkin, D., & Prata, D. (2010). Paradoks i kontrparadoks. Novaya model terapii semyi, vovlechennoy v shizofrenicheskoye vzaimodeystviye [Paradox and Counterparadox. A New Model of Family Therapy Involved in Schizophrenic Interaction]. Moscow: Kogito-tsentr (rus). 2.
[2] Ferreira, A. J. (1996). Family myths. Psychiatric Research Reports, (20), 186–191.
[3] Hornostay, P. P. (2007). Problema gruppovogo bessoznatelnogo v sotsialnoy psikhologii [The Problem of Group Unconscious in Social Psychology]. Naukovi studii iz sotsialnoi ta politychnoi psykholohii, 18 (21), 30–39 (rus).
[4] Marynkevych, S. M. (2014). Vyvchennia simeinykh mifiv, yikh funktsii ta kharakterystyk u suchasnykh psykholohichnykh doslidzhenniakh [Study of Family Myths, their Functions and Characteristics in Modern Psychological Research]. Filosofiia. Kultura. Zhyttia, (40), 170–178 (ukr).
[5] Yarotska, A. S. (2014). Fenomen hrupovoho mifu maloi hrupy yak kolektyvnoho subiekta [The Phenomenon of Group Myth of a Small Group as a Collective Subject]. Problemy suchasnoi psykholohii, (23), 746–753 (ukr).
[6] Fromm, E. (1992). Dusha cheloveka [Human Soul]. Moscow: Respublika (rus).
[7] Yung, K. G. (1996). Dusha i mif: shest arkhetipov [Soul and Myth: Six Archetypes]. (Transl. from English). Kyiv: Gosudarstvennaya biblioteka Ukrainy dlya yunoshestva (rus).
[8] Feinstein, D., & Krippner S. (2009). Personal Mythology: Using Ritual, Dreams, and Imagination to Discover Your Inner Story. Fulton: Energy Psychology Press.
[9] Lincoln, B. (1999). Theorizing Myth: Narrative, Ideology, and Scholarship. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
[10] Eliade, M. (2010). Aspekty mifa [Aspects of Myth]. (Transl. from French, 4-th ed.). Moscow: Akademicheskiy Proekt (rus).
[11] Rubinshteyn, S. L. (1989). Osnovy obshchey psikhologii [Basics of general psychology]. Vol. 1. Moscow: Pedagogika (rus).
[12] Hutsol, S. Yu. (2016). Psykholohichni osoblyvosti orhanizatsii syuzhetiv “mifolohichnoho typu” v konteksti naratyvnoho samoproektuvannya osobystosti [Psychological Peculiarities of the Organization of “Mythological Type” Stories in the Context of Narrative Self-Design of a Personality]. Visnyk NTUU “KPI”. Filosofiia. Psykholohiia. Pedahohika, (2), 38–44 (ukr).
[13] Romenets, V. A. (1995). Istoriia psykholohii XIX – pochatku XX stolittia [History of Psychology XIX – Early XX Century]. Kyiv: Vyshcha shkola (ukr).
[14] Smith, J. (2011). Psevdonauka i paranormalnyye yavleniya. Kriticheskiy vzglyad [Pseudoscience and Paranormal. Critical look]. Moscow: Alpina non-fikshn (rus).
[15] Doyl, A. Konan (2010). Istoriya spiritualizma [Spiritualism History]. Kharkiv: Klub Semeynogo Dosuga (rus).
[16] Magomed-Eminov, M. Sh. (2006). Ekstremalnaya psikhologiya [Extreme Psychology]. Vol. 2. Moscow: Psikhoanaliticheskaya assotsiatsiya (rus).
[17] Marycheva, A. V. (2007). Fantazmatychne funktsionuvannia sotsialnoi hrupy [Fantasmatic functioning of the social group]. Problemy politychnoi psykholohii ta yii rol u stanovlenni hromadianyna Ukrainskoi derzhavy, (5–6), 56–60 (ukr).