re-visioning sociometry

Thu Apr 17 08:37:15 CDT 2008

Adam, I have been writing for some time now (four years) on sociometry as interpersonal neurobiology, connecting the dots of Daniel J. Siegel's work (and others) to the process of interpersonal connection.  Many people have the mistaken idea that sociometry is selection of protagonists and don't go much further than that.  Protagonist selection, or the expression of choice is an outcome of that subjective process you mention.  Internal attunement occurs first, when we experience somatically and become mindful of the pull toward and pull away; then we decide whether to choose, reject, stay neutral, declare ourselves conflicted.  Linnea Carlson-Sabelli, PhD, TEP made the quantification of the data from the sociodynamic test (identifying the pulls) and the sociometric test (identifying the choices) possible with her doctoral thesis "Measuring Co-existing Opposites" in 1992.  What we now have the possibility to show in research and in action is the concretization of our and a group's choice processes in phase space (both/and) where the choices are embodied, visable, and meaningful in terms of both where dominance lies and where nearness and distance to centrality exists within a group at a given moment.

We also have ways to look at hierarchical structures and the degree of access people perceive they have to roles that have high value for him/her. This information clarifies the existence and dynamics of act hunger (or the degree to which it is sustained or abated)  the degree of  self-regulation present and available, and the presence of  co-regulation available in a group (cohesion).  Access to roles is central to skill development, enlarging ones repertoire for interpersonal relating, spontaneity. 

By paying attention to the degree of connection people experience, and involving ourselves in actions which decrease interpersonal stress and resolve rigid and chaotic patterns of interpersonal interaction, we assist in that transformation process which leads to healing of interpersonal wounds and fosters integration of those new ways of being. We grow further belief in ourself and others and trust we are necessary to one another and have become partners in health.  

Sociometrists attend to the group's belonging and from that people can emerge and be chosen for all sorts of roles. They can become protagonist, not because they cried, or manipulated, or watched how someone else got the role, and mimicked a similar issue but because the group members are attuned and the expression of desire for the role was felt and responded to "out of the reverberation" with the protagonist and with the reverberation with others.

The Sabelli's have written "all relationships are reciprocal" (and sociometry is what we use to sort out the degrees of that) and Daniel J. Siegel has written that "we are all neurally linked" .  Moreno knew that, called it tele, and even allowed for one-sided tele (empathy) which is what exists until both persons are able to attune (double) and find themselves to be truly in connection.  Ann Hale annehale at swva,net 
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Adam Blatner 
  To: list at grouptalkweb.org 
  Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 8:45 AM
  Subject: re-visioning sociometry

  Dear Colleagues,
       Building off my thesis that we might re-vision psychodrama as a larger enterprise, that of multi-dimensional communication; it occurred to me after giving that talk that sociometry is also a term for several categories or a larger category that I'll call "Quantifying Subjectivity"--- alas, a bit of a mouthful, but what else?
            My points include: 1. that sociometry as actually practiced  (e.g., using the spectrogram, the local-gram, choice techniques in selecting protagonist, etc.) tends most often to address dynamics that do not strictly measure anything--- so much for the sociometry--- and often do not measure tele specifically or the patterns of rapport within a group. (It might be argued that tele is indirectly involved, but that's the point---trying to make the phenomena fit the theory.)
           2. Rather, they (a) offer ways for people to estimate their own position or degree of involvement in a given criterion and (b) make this explicit, thus giving themselves and the group they're in better feedback. (c) Based on that feedback, they can also re-assess their own position and the group leader or others can proceed to make other decisions. 
           3. The estimate of one's own position, degrees of caring, preferences, and so forth speak to themes that may be personal and impersonal rather than inter-personal. 
                   It might not be called "tele" (in a technical sense) but people do have gradations of preference for all sorts of non-personal objects, situations, experiences.
                   Also, animals (even one-celled animals) may be recognized as having preferences and behaving or reacting to them. Some are inter-active---i.e., sexual attraction and mating behaviors--- and some are just preferring this environment, (e.g., cooler, moister) over that environment (e.g., hotter, dryer)

          4. All sentient beings may be considered to have a kind of subjectivity, interiority. (Indeed, a number of contemporary philosophers would attribute this to all particles in existence!)    This experiencing quality, however simple, unconscious (i.e., non-reflective), nevertheless partakes of a capacity for some discrimination and preference. So there may be a continuum of preference, with interpersonal preferences and reciprocity being discerned as somewhat more complex phenomena in the higher and more social animals. 

          5. The value of sociometry, it seems to me, involves less the ideal of outsiders measuring telic dynamics (e.g., sociologists doing research)--- I question the actual value of the many academic papers written in the 1940s-1960s, and among sociologists, they seem to have largely dropped it so that it is rarely mentioned in textbooks since 1970---; but rather, it is most valuable in sensitizing people to attend to their own patterns of preference, and to consider those patterns and dynamics in groups. The word "sensitization" is appropriate because most folks over-ride, deny, ignore these experiences, at least consciously. Moreno was correct in noting that they have a good deal of influence on unconscious individual and social behavior. Indeed, I've come to the provisional conclusion that sociometry (in its broadest sense) constitutes a depth psychology no less profound than the other types---Freudian, Jungian, etc. (It's not a complete psychology, but it does address very significant and often unconscious dynmamics.)

          Well, that's the unfolding idea, and I thought I'd invite input.  

  Adam Blatner, M.D.
     website: www.blatner.com/adam/   

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Grouptalk mailing list
  List at grouptalkweb.org
  http://grouptalkweb.org/mailman/listinfo/list_grouptalkweb.org

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG. 
  Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.0/1381 - Release Date: 4/16/2008 9:34 AM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://grouptalkweb.org/pipermail/list_grouptalkweb.org/attachments/20080417/d57cbb5c/attachment.html 