Group Styles as Mid-Level Operators: Situational Innovations in Shamanic Organizations

Abstract

This commentary on Stepan Kozlov’s article examines group styles as a type of middle-range operator—mechanisms that mediate between different social orders. The original concept of group style, proposed by Nina Eliasoph and Paul Lichterman, describes it as a filter through which groups adapt public culture in their interactions. However, I argue that their operationalisation of group style—through group boundaries, group ties, and rules of speech—leads to its conflation with group identity and structure, limiting its analytical potential, and creating conceptual problems. I propose an alternative approach, analysing group style through strategies for handling uncertainty and interactional breakdowns. Drawing on Tavory and Fine’s (2020) distinction between disruption for and disruption of, I examine two shamanic organisations with contrasting approaches to managing interactional disruptions. In one case, any interactional misalignment is perceived as a violation of order requiring immediate correction, while in the other, it is seen as a moment of potential transformation, enabling the reinterpretation of collective understandings and modifications of ritual practice. This analysis highlights a broader principle: middle-range operators not only mediate between different levels of social reality but also enable its transformation, linking microlevel interactions to cultural and institutional change. This perspective helps explain why some groups remain resistant to change while others utilise uncertainty as a resource for cultural innovation.