2014, Volume 6, Issue 1
Changes in the group’s social structure in mountain tourism
Gheorghe Lucaciu1, Marius Alin Marinau1, Mirela Stef1, Paul Florian Dragos1
1Geography, Tourism and Sport Faculty, Dep. of Physical Education, Sport and Physiotherapy, University of Oradea
Author for correspondence: Gheorghe Lucaciu; Geography, Tourism and Sport Faculty, Dep. of Physical Education, Sport and Physiotherapy, University of Oradea; email: ghita_lucaciu[at]yahoo.com
Background: Mountain tourism implies specific aspects in contrast to other components of physical
education and sport, by the vast scope and accessibility regardless of physical condition, age and skills or similarities with everyday life activities. We hypothesized that the joint activities, cooperation, interaction and direct communication with the natural and social environment will result in a better understanding of oneself and partners, placing the group structure on real bases, prompting avoidance of possible malfunctions in the subsequent group activity.
Material/Methods: Subjects of this sociological research were 48 first-year students, participating in “Mountain tourism and sport orientation” (26 males and 22 females), which applied a sociological survey. To achieve the research’e objectives, we used the following methods: a questionnaire, a statistical and mathematical method and a graphical method.
Results: In the most part, previous relationships of acceptance, empathy, trust, rejection or isolation were of the interpersonal type, motivation being that they had not previously – as a group or individually – experienced collaboration, mutual assistance, addiction group and so on. Experiences conducted in a common framework, adapted to everyday comfort, provide false opportunities for the knowledge of the self and one another. The ranking of desired partners would change significantly: the originally agreed out of ”top 10” instead came to be approved by other subjects (46, 48); a symmetrical aspect applies to unwanted partners, and, in fact, produced a reversal of the scale of values. An important aspect is the knowledge and recognition targeting
sociometric’s leadership, sense that we can say that the initial place 1, 2, 3 have become 7, 3 and 4 and the final places 1, 2, 3 won the original positions 9, 24 and 2.
Conclusions: Knowing the stage achieved in the formation of the group cohesion (through calculation of the cohesion index), before an important step for the group and some period thereafter, will show the effectiveness of the actions taken. Calculation of the index at different stages will reveal in which direction the group evolves: increasing cohesion, stagnant or in decline. The two investigative tools can be a strong support for knowing the socio-emotional bases of a group which usually escapes in direct observation, and especially provides the possibility of an action, an intervention in the group that takes into account the internal organization to enhance its functioning to improve group cohesion, and the establishment of a homogeneous team (an important aspect in sport or other activities with high complexity).
Key words: leadership, group, mountain tourism