Psychologists have had a long-standing interest in the construct of group cohesion. Yet, how this construct should be defined and measured -remains a controversial question. A central issue in the debate concerns the dimensionality of group cohesion. Recently, some researchers have adopted unidimensional models of this construct, whereas others have used multidimensional models of the same construct. In this study, the structure of the Gross (1957) Cohesiveness Scale, which is perhaps the most frequently used measure of group cohesiveness, was examined. Based on a critical review of the results of three empirical reports and reanalyses of the results of two of these studies, it was concluded that Gross' measure is unidimensional.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bentler, P. (1989). EQS Structural Equations Program Manual. Los Angeles: BMDP Statistical Software.
2.
Brown, R. L. (1986). A comparison of the LISREL and EQS programs for obtaining parameter estimates in confirmatory factor analysis studies. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 18, 382-388.
3.
Carron, A. V. (1982). Cohesiveness in sport groups: Interpretations and considerations. Journal of Sport Psychology, 4, 123-138.
4.
Drescher, S. , Burlingame, G., and Fuhriman, A. (1985). Cohesion: An odyssey in empirical understanding. Small Group Behavior, 16, 3-30.
5.
Evans, N. J. and Jarvis, P. A. (1980). Group cohesion: A review and reevaluation. Small Group Behavior, 11, 359-370.
6.
Festinger, L. , Schachter, S., and Back, K. (1950). Social pressures in informal groups: A study of human factors in housing. New York: Harper and Brothers.
7.
Goodman, P. S. , Ravlin, E., and Schminke, M. (1987). Understanding groups in organizations. In L. L. Cummings and B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 9, pp. 121-173). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
8.
Griffith, J. (1988). Measurement of group cohesion in U.S. army units. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 9, 149-171.
9.
Gross, E. F. (1957). An empirical study of the concepts of cohesive- ness and compatibility. Unpublished honors thesis. Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. (Copies available from: Photo- graphic Services, Room 90, Widener Library, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, U.S. 02138. Call number: HU 92.57.439. Lab. number: 5632).
10.
Guttman, L. (1944). A basis for scaling qualitative data. American Sociological Review, 9, 139-150.
11.
Guttman, L. (1947). The Cornell technique for scale and intensity analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 7, 247-279.
12.
Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30, 179-185.
13.
Johnson, M. E. and Fortman, J. B. (1988). Internal structure of the Gross Cohesiveness Scale. Small Group Behavior, 19, 146-152.
14.
Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 141-151.
15.
Longman, R. S. , Cota, A. A., Holden, R. R., and Fekken, G. C. (1989). A regression equation for the parallel analysis criterion in principal components analysis: Mean and 95th percentile eigenvalues. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 24, 59-69.
16.
Mudrack, P. E. (1989). Defining group cohesiveness: A legacy of confusion?Small Group Behavior, 20, 37-49.
17.
Piper, W. E. , Marrache, M., Lacroix, R., Richardsen, A. M., and Jones, B. D. (1983). Cohesion as a basic bond in groups. Human Relations, 36, 93-108.
18.
Stokes, J. P. (1983a). Components of group cohesion: Intermember attraction, instrumental value, and risk taking. Small Group Behavior, 14, 163-173.
19.
Stokes, J. P. (1983b). Toward an understanding of cohesion in personal change groups. International Journal of Group Psycho- therapy, 33, 449-467.
20.
Zwick, W. R. and Velicer, W. F. (1986). Comparison of five rules for determining the number of components to retain. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 432-442.
