Shouldn't this category be a sub-category of social psychology instead of a main category? Jaywin 04:53, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Good idea having this part of sociology and social psychology as well. We earlier decided to remove the Soc Processes from the Browsebars (at the top of each page) as I agreed with your idea that the Soc Processes should be a sub category. We also did something similar with experimental Psy, changing it to Cognitive, and moving some of the info over to Research methods. Its looking better and more trim now. Tom Michael Mostly Zen (talk) 23:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
Are group processes & social processes synonomous? Jason Bessey - Jaywin (talk) 00:05, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Not quite. Group processes would be a subcat of social Psy, as would social processes. Group processes would include things like group formation, groupthink, peer pressure, cults, things like that, social processes could be processes that involve just 2 people.
Whilst the definition of a social group is only 2 or more people, those people also have to consider themselves as part of a group for any social interaction to be considered group effects. E.g. We are 2 people interacting now, reading each others messages on the internet, but we are also part of the psychology wiki group. If we were in a bar, just talking between the two of us, and not about the wiki, it would be social interaction between 2 friends, rather than a group. Does that make sense? Social Psy is my worst Psy subject.