ABSTRACT
The group literature has long shown an interest in how it is that groups position themselves vis-à-vis one another. While this might be subsumed into a general discussion of population dynamics or maintenance, a particular facet of this general topic has proven irresistible to scholars, namely niche theory. Population-based theories, as applied to groups, rest on the basic idea that competition for scarce resources exists within the environment (which is conceived of as a closed system). At some point a population density level is reached where finite resources are stretched beyond what can sustain the existing population, and something has to give. It is at this point that population-based arguments turn to niche theory. In anticipation of competition, groups partition the resource space by creating a realized niche that avoids reliance on the same set of resources as other groups. When pushed up against case material the expectations are pretty clear: groups ought to be different. But can this broad expectation be fine-tuned or nuanced any further?
