Traditional sociological conceptions of human group development and early human group behavior are critiqued in light of anthropological, biological, and physiological data. The objective of the study was to identify shortcomings of sociological research when non-sociological data is consistently ignored. Review of sociological studies of human behavior indicates that sociologists generally do not use historical evidence as a basis of their assumptions and that they do not study non-human animals to explain human behavior. Further, sociologists have been consistently negligent in establishing a framework which is grounded in data on the origin of human group life. Specific inadequacies can be found in sociological studies of the cultural role of language; relationships between the developments of bipedalism, toolmaking, and communication; division of labor in hunting and gathering societies; and development of ritualistic and other specialized behaviors. The conclusion is that sociology will become a more valid academic discipline if sociologists integrate scientific data from other areas into their research. (DB)