Group Dynamics

Currently, the science of individual difference is confined to two scales of resolution. First, there is a literature of temperamental variation that is widespread across many species. These are differences which are based on commonalities of neurophysiology, such as variation in neurotransmitter regimes, which produce the convergence of, for instance, the individually variable trait Boldness-Extraversion in species ranging from humans to octopuses. This is the realm of individual variation captured by psychometrics such as the Big Five personality inventory and the Fisher Temperament Inventory. Second, there is a scale that is exclusive to humanity—measurements of phenomena which require factors like language and uniquely human social environments. This realm is measured by a large number of psychometrics, from Need for Closure to Right-Wing Authoritarianism.

Our Group Dynamics initiative is based on the premise that any given complex environment will generate unique realms of individual behavioral variation. In other words, the complex tangle of physiological, developmental, social, and other factors that inform the first two scales of psychographic resolution also produce individual variation with respect to, for instance, the bewildering complexity of the proliferating mythologies and novel frames of reference to be found on the contemporary internet, or the myriad sub-genres of minimalist electronic drone music one can access.

The work of this group is to develop ways to measure and predict this realm of variation—to develop high-resolution psychometrics. These are, in part, an effort to understand the dynamics of social and epistemological fragmentation currently underway. However, high-resolution psychometrics are also an attempt to allow unique individuals to find one another. This has profound consequences for efforts at responding to collective action problems. Doing so would have profound consequences for efforts at responding to collective action problems. It has become clear to those who have participated in political efforts to stop the collapse of the global ecosystem that our broad prompts for group engagement, such as “fighting climate change,” are inadequately selective. People who are deeply affected by the ecological crisis avoid the “environmental movement” because they (correctly) anticipate a meaningless spiral of internal critique and decisions which reflect specialized worldviews far more than they do strategic reasoning.

We are beginning this work with ourselves, assessing the value of the podcasts Fight Like An Animal and Metanoia as psychological filters engaging a distinct segment of the population. The audience of these media projects form the original participants of World Tree. We also employ an application process, involving both the use of extant psychometrics as well as developing a number of psychometric unique to World Tree. Therefore, we will refine our assumptions as we go, collecting data about what kinds of people turn out to get along in what ways and to fill what kinds of roles.

This group will also begin to psychographically and otherwise segment various populations and develop targeted messaging about other World Tree initiatives. For instance, with respect to the Regional Survival Strategies initiative, we might ask “How can we make an appeal to participation in this project framed in terms of the Jeffersonian, yeoman farmer conception of American democracy?” In broad terms, we will attempt to deconstruct the narratives that unite distinct segments of the population, formulate hypotheses about these sub-populations' psychologies and their fundamental frames of reference, and target messaging to those psychologies and within those frames. As we gain momentum, we may also provide consultations with other groups.