Utility and limitations of the SHAPE-assisted intuitive decision-making procedure.

The SHAPE-assisted decision-making procedure (C. E. J. H?rtel & G. F. H?rtel, 1997) is examined. The model provides a simple strategy for making decisions under time pressure, stress, or cognitive load. The approach is useful under such conditions because it encourages decision makers to examine the problem, identify a preferred alternative, assess the alternative as time permits, take action, and evaluate the results. The model may be less appropriate for important decisions that are made under low levels of time pressure or stress, have nonintuitive solutions, require thorough consideration of alternatives, or involve low levels of expertise. Implications of the SHAPE model for future research and practice are considered. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Group cohesiveness and social loafing: Effects of a social interaction manipulation on individual motivation within groups.

Previous research has shown that individuals often engage in social loafing, exerting less effort on collective rather than individual tasks. However, nearly all of the prior research has examined noncohesive groups. An experiment was designed to test the hypothesis that social loafing can be reduced or eliminated among cohesive groups. Fifty-nine dyads discussed a controversial issue on which they agreed strongly (high cohesiveness), disagreed strongly (low cohesiveness), or disagreed mildly (control), then worked either coactively or collectively on an idea-generation task. Members of low-cohesiveness and control groups engaged in social loafing, whereas members of high-cohesiveness groups worked just as hard collectively as coactively. These findings are discussed in relation to S. J. Karau and K. D. Williams's (1993) Collective Effort Model of individual motivation in groups. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Individual differences in beliefs about groups.

The current research examined individual differences in peoples' positive versus negative beliefs about groups. Three studies were conducted to develop and validate a 16-item Beliefs About Groups (BAG) scale. Factor analyses in Studies 1 and 2 identified and replicated a 4-factor solution, with factors reflecting preferences for group versus individual work, positive group performance beliefs, negative group performance beliefs, and beliefs that others will work hard on group tasks. Study 2 also provided evidence for convergent and divergent validity, and explored relationships between the Big Five personality dimensions and group beliefs. Study 3 provided evidence for test–retest reliability. Across these 3 studies, the BAG scale had total score alphas ranging from .83 to .88. Implications of beliefs about groups for member motivation and group performance, as well as for future research and practice, are highlighted. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The effects of group cohesiveness on social loafing and social compensation.

Individuals often engage in social loafing, exerting less effort on collective rather than individual tasks. Two experiments tested the hypothesis that social loafing can be reduced or eliminated when individuals work in cohesive rather than noncohesive groups. In Experiment 1, secretarial students typed both individually and collectively in simulated word-processing pools composed of either friends or strangers. In Experiment 2, dyads composed of either friends or strangers worked either coactively or collectively on an idea-generation task. Both studies supported the group cohesiveness hypothesis. Experiment 2 also suggested that individuals tend to engage in social compensation when working with coworkers who are low in ability. These findings are discussed in relation to S. J. Karau and K. D. Williams's (1993) Collective Effort Model. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration.

Social loafing is the tendency for individuals to expend less effort when working collectively than when working individually. A meta-analysis of 78 studies demonstrates that social loafing is robust and generalizes across tasks and S populations. A large number of variables were found to moderate social loafing. Evaluation potential, expectations of co-worker performance, task meaningfulness, and culture had especially strong influence. These findings are interpreted in the light of a collective effort model that integrates elements of expectancy-value, social identity, and self-validation theories. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The importance of personality in students’ perceptions of the online learning experience

The current research examined the relationship between the Big Five personality dimensions and five specific types of online course impressions (engagement, value to career, overall evaluation, anxiety/frustration, and preference for online courses). Results revealed that conscientiousness was the most consistent predictor of an individual’s impressions of online courses. Specifically, conscientiousness was significantly related with each of the five online course impressions studied. In addition, agreeableness and openness were both positively related with the perceived value of online courses to one’s career. Work experience was positively associated with engagement, value to career, and overall evaluation, and negatively associated with anxiety/frustration. Undergraduates reported stronger preferences for online courses than did graduate students, and married students reported lower levels of anxiety/frustration with online courses. Results are interpreted with the intent of providing an enhanced understanding of the importance of personality in students’ impressions of the online learning experience.     

Effects of source expertise and physical distance on minority influence.

The treatment of source strength and immediacy distinguishes social impact theory from other theories of social influence. The present study examined the effects of source expertise (e.g., strength) and physical distance (i.e., immediacy) on minority influence. Groups (N?=?40), consisting of 2 naive research participants and 1 confederate who argued for a minority position, provided ratings for 40 hypothetical graduate school applicants. The confederate was seated either 4 ft (1.2192 m; high immediacy) or 10 ft (3.048 m; low immediacy) from the other group members and presented himself as either a senior who had recently applied to several graduate programs (high strength) or as a freshman (low strength). The confederate exerted more influence in the high-strength condition than in the low-strength condition, but only when immediacy was low. The implications of these findings for social impact theory and for future research and practice are considered. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)