This article provides an examination of ego defense and their role in triggering people to lable another as deviant in a developing small group. Swanson's theory posits a relationship between the complexity of a social relationship and the complexity of ego defense when self and relationaship are threatened. Support was found for the purported relationship and showed that disparate levels of social interaction played a role in the decision to label(which in this study's instance was compounded by apparent racism).
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Blanck, R. , & Blanck, G. (1986). Beyond ego psychology: Developmental object relations theory. New York: Columbia University Press.
2.
Davis, L. E. (1985). Group work practice with ethnic minorities of color. In M. Sundel, P. Glasser, R. Sarri, & R. Vinter (Eds.), Individual change through small groups (pp. 324-343, 2nd ed.) New York: Free Press.
3.
Farrell, M. P. (1976). Patterns in the development of small groups. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 12, 523-542.
4.
Freud, A. (1966). The ego and the mechanisms of defense (rev. ed.). New York: International Universities Press. (Original work published 1937)
5.
Freud, S. (1962). The ego and the id (J. Riviere, Trans.). New York: Norton. (Original work published 1923)
6.
Freud, S. (1966). The complete introductory lectures in psychoanalysis. (J. Strachey, Trans.). New York: Norton. (Original works published 1917-1933)
7.
Gemmill, G. (1989). The dynamics of scapegoating in small groups. Small Group Behavior, 20, 406-418.
8.
Golembiewski, R. T. , & Blumberg, A. (eds.). (1970). Sensitivity training and the laboratory approach. Itasca, IL: Peacock.
9.
Hartmann, H. (1939). Ego psychology and the problem of adaptation. New York: International Universities Press.
10.
Katz, J. (1975). Essences as moral identities.American Journal of Sociology, 80, 1369-1390.
11.
Kelly, H. H. (1979). Personal relationships: Their structures and processes. Hillsdale, NJ: Eribaum.
12.
Kitsuse, J. (1962). Societal reaction to deviant behavior: Problems of theory and method. Social Problems, 9, 247-256.
13.
Lofland, J. (1969). Deviance and identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
14.
Mahler, M. , Pine, F., & Bergman, A. (1975). The psychological birth of the human infant. New York: Basic Books.
15.
Messe, L. A. , Stollak, G. E., Larson, R. W., & Michaels, G. Y. (1979). Interpersonal consequences of person perception in two social contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 369-379.
16.
Murata, K. (1982). Attribution processes in a mixed-motive interaction: The role of active observer's behavior. Behaviormetrika, 12, 47-61.
17.
Napier, A. , & Whitaker, C. (1978). The family crucible. New York: McGraw-Hill.
18.
Pfohl, S. J. (1985). Images of deviance and social control. New York: Harper & Row.
19.
Ridgeway, C. L. , Berger, J., & Smith, L. F. (1985). Nonverbal cues and status: An expectation states approach. American Journal of Sociology, 90, 955-978.
20.
Schur, E. (1984). Labeling women deviant: Gender, stigma, and social controLNew York: Random House.
21.
Swanson, G. (1988). Ego defenses and the legitimation of behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
22.
Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 62, 384-399.
23.
Vaillant, G. E. (1971). A theoretical hierarchy of adaptive mechanisms.Archives of General Psychiatry, 24, 107-118.
24.
Yarrow, M. , Schwartz, C., Murphy, H., & Deasy, L. (1955). The psychological meaning of mental illness in the family. Journal of Social Issues, 11, 12-24.
