Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Social loafing effects
Preventing social loafing
Social loafing effects
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Social loafing effects
Social loafing is the effect that people will exert less effort if they are working in a collective environment. Working in groups is an integral part of everyday life because it happens in almost every context whether it is sports teams, organizational groups, project groups and even juries. Therefore it is important to understand the underlying factors that influence this construct. The current research composed of 20 participants, investigated the social loafing effect of two working conditions: Coactive and Collective. It was hypothesized that collective groups would have significantly lower scores than coactive and the results supported this prediction strongly as there was a significant difference between the groups. These results have a strong implication that collective work teams are usually more prone to social loafing however; this could be minimized if certain factors such as interaction and complexity of the task were incorporated.
The extent to which Social Loafing occurs for participants completing a brainstorming task Coactively or Collectively
Social loafing is the effect of people exerting less effort when they are working collectively than when they are working coactively (Brickner et al., 1986). The effect of social loafing can occur in many contexts that can be reflected in tasks that require physical effort, cognitive effort and vigilance (Brickner et al., 1986). Létane (1979) suggested that social loafing is mediated by the equal distribution of effort and responsibility amongst a group task performance setting, thus participants held a mindset that they can “hide in the crowd” to avoid the blame for slacking off or even “blending in with the crowd” where they are unable to claim their credit of work. T...
... middle of paper ...
...y, 56, 934 – 941.
Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and
theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 681-706.
Latane, B., Williams, K. D., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many hands make light the work: The
causes and consequences of social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 822-832.
Robbins, T.L. (1995). Social loafing on cognitive tasks – An examination of the Sucker- effect. Journal of Business and Psychology, 9, 337 – 342.
Rowe, G. & Wright, G. (1999). The Delphi technique as a forecasting tool: issues and analysis. International Journal of Forecasting, 15, 353 – 375.
Weldon, E. & Gargano, G.M. (1988). Cognitive loafing: The effects of accountability and shared responsibility on cognitive effort. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 14, 159 – 171.
Ringelmann effect is where the productivity of a players performance can be lowered by as much as 50 percent Given the group becomes bigger. This is because they believe that others will compensate for you and also that your effort will make little difference to the team. In basketball it is noticeable when somebody's performance decreases as their team mates are covering and helping them more on defence. Social loafing is where members of a group do not put in 100% in a group or team. this will be because of some of situations which include loss of self belief and being anxious. once more in basketball you could inform someone who is social loafing as their defence as they may be continuously desiring help
Social Loafing is an important concept that can be identifiable in our day to day lives such as through school work, household chores, employment and even sporting activities. The current research investigated the effect of social loafing on collective and coactive conditions through an experiment which asked participants to complete a brainstorming task asking them to list as many ways to use a pencil as they could. The results indicated that social loafing was non-significant in both collective and coactive conditions. However, group work improved the amount of answers the participants had. The results have important effects for reducing or eliminating social loafing to ensure that the participants are accountable for their own activities regardless if in an individual setting or group. Karau & Williams (1993) formed the conceptual idea that participants performing a group task would identify aspects of social loafing and thus having group cohesiveness would eliminate participant loafing. Shepperd, Stephen, Wright and Rex (1989) also established the social loafing concept to be related to impression management. Impression management being a goal directed conscious or unconscious process in which participants attempt to influence the perception of others (Stephen, Wright and Rex, 1989). In another theoretical concept of social loafing, Kerr (1983) demonstrated the free rider effect by addressing the role of the “sucker” in experiment groups. In stating this, it is evident that the many concepts surrounding social loafing derive from the same fundamentals. Though there are conflicting views within social loafing, results from this experiment do not show a significant difference of social loafing between collective groups and coact...
A. Preventing "Groupthink" Psychology Today. 20 Apr. 2011. The. Psychology Today.
Long studied in the literature is the consistent relationship between cohesion and team performance (e.g., Beal et al., 2003; Gully et al., 2013; Mullen & Cooper, 1994). As the most studied emergent state (LePine et al., 2008), Festinger (1950) describes cohesion as, “the resultant forces which are acting on the members to stay in a group” (p. 274). The conceptualization of this emergent state includes two components known as task and social cohesion (Festinger, Schachter & Back, 1950). According to Festinger et al. (1950), task cohesion occurs when the accomplishment of tasks yields the achievement of important goals for both the individual and the collective whole. Task cohesion is a product of the necessity for individuals to work in groups
Stewart, G., Manz, C., & Sims, H., (1999). Teamwork and Group Dynamics. New York: Wiley. pp. 70- 125.
Groupthink: The Brainstorming Myth, written by Jonah Lehrer, explores the idea that true brainstorming (producing ideas with peers in the “absence of criticism and negative feedback” (Lehrer 2)) is less effective and produces fewer ideas than people who work alone and bring their ideas together at a later time. Lehrer implies that the presence of criticism and negative feedback is necessary when working in groups in order to generate ideas. He explains a study where teams of female undergraduates (each given one of three conditions) had to create as many solutions as they could that would reduce the traffic congestion in the San Francisco Bay Area. The team that was allowed to debate and criticize created more good ideas than the brainstorming
In criminology, looking at why individuals carry out wrongdoing is essential in the progressing open deliberation of how wrongdoing ought to be taken care of and anticipated. Numerous speculations have developed throughout the years, and they keep on being investigated, independently and in mix, as criminologists look for the best arrangements in at last diminishing sorts and levels of wrongdoing. Here is a wide review of some key theories and their helping of understanding crime.. Why do individuals take part in wrongdoing as told by strain theory ? They encounter strain or push, they get to be disturbed, and they once in awhile take part in wrongdoing accordingly.
Organizations use teamwork because it increases productivity. This concept was used in corporations as early as the 1920s, but it has become increasingly important in recent years as employ...
In David Wright’s “The Myths and Realities of Teamwork,” (Wright, D., 2013), he outlines six myths that are ubiquitous and perpetuated by many people. Here is a short examination of all six.
Business forecasting can be used in a wide variety of contexts, and by a wide variety of businesses. For example, effective forecasting can determine sales based on attendance at a trade show, or the customer demand for products and services (Business and Economic Forecasting, p.1). One of the most important assumptions of business forecasters is that the past acts as an important guide for the future. It is important to note that forecasters must consider a number of new information, including rapidly changing economic conditions and globalization, when creating business forecasts based on past sales.
Realizing that a group can become a high performance team is important. Accomplishing this goal is invaluable, advantageous and profitable. Once able to operate from a group to the high performing team is a great step into preparation into the big business world. Leaders and members must also realize not only how to accomplish this but that some problems will and can arise from different demographic characteristics and cultural diversity. That is if one is in such a group, which the probability would be quite high.
In the article, “Passing the Buck: Blaming Others is Contagious”, author, Jeanna Bryner does a beautiful job in exposing what seems to be a norm in today’s society, the finger-pointing game. Through a series of experiments conducted by Nathanael Fast and Larissa Tiedens of Stanford University, scientists now believe that the blame game is socially contagious; that bad behavior can spread just as well as good behavior. Mr. Fast believes that influential people could counteract finger-pointing by developing trustworthy behavior, leading to an enhanced work performance and more creative thinking.
The Importance of Group Work in Today's Organizations. It could be argued that in order to be successful, modern organisations must actively develop strong and cohesive work groups. Why do you need to be a member? Is it true that there is no room for the individual in today’s organisation? The rapid progression and improvement in information and communication technology has led to modern organisations finding new ways to work.
Working together with other people for an assignment can be a challenging task in some cases but luckily, I worked well with my group members. The decisions we made were anonymous although we paced ourselves individually when it came to completing our separate parts of the essay. As a group I believe that we connected well on an interpersonal level as all four of us were able to make alterations to any problem together . Furthermore, we did not give each other a chance to get angry at one another as we knew that this would only cause conflict that would disrupt our flow as a group. There was an equal divide in the amount of work that we all did; our contributions were fair and no one was lacking behind. In addition, my group members were great at keeping each other informed if one of us were not able to attend a group meeting; emails were sent out informing us what we missed and ideas that were formulated. Everyone in my group worked according to deadlines and in synchronization with each other; we did not have to nag anyone to complete work or wait on a member to complete their task.
Several experiments and researches have been conducted that have focused on how people behave in groups. The findings have revealed that groups affect peoples’ attitudes, behavior and perceptions. Groups are essential for personal life, as well as in work life.