This paper investigates the effects that different patterns of similarity among group members have on a group's performance on a problem-solving task. I discuss and test hypotheses on the effects of similarity on group performance derived from two literatures: balance theory and research on homophily. In an experiment I found that the relative balance of the pattern of similarity was more important in predicting how quickly groups establish norms of interaction and complete a task than how similar group members were to each other. Neither balance nor the degree of similarity had a significant effect on the quality of the groups' work. I conclude that groups with balanced similarity structures produce task solutions that approximate the quality of those from other groups, but they do so in significantly less time. That is, balanced groups are more efficient than unbalanced groups.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AronsonElliotCopeVernon. 1968. “My Enemy's Enemy is My Friend.”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology8: 8–12.
2.
BergerJoseph M.FisekHamitNormanRobertZelditchMorris. 1977. Status Characteristics and Social Interaction: An Expectation States Approach.New York: Elsevier.
3.
CarleyKathleen. 1991. “A Theory of Group Stability.”American Sociological Review56: 331–354.
4.
CartwrightDorwinHararyFrank. 1956. “Structural Balance: A Generalization of Heider's Theory.”Psychological Review63: 277–293.
5.
ChidambaramLakuBostromRobert. 1996. “Group Development (I): A Review and Synthesis of Development Models.”Group Decision and Negotiation6: 159–187.
6.
DavisJames. 1963. “Structural Balance, Mechanical Solidarity, and Interpersonal Relations.”American Journal of Sociology68: 444–462.
7.
DoreianPatrickKrackhardtDavid. 2001. “Pre-transitive Balance Mechanisms for Signed Networks.”Journal of Mathematical Sociology25 (1): 43–67.
8.
EysenckS. B. G.EysenckH. J.BarrettPaul. 1985. “A Revised Version of the Psychoticism Scale.”Personality and Individual Differences6 (1): 21–29.
9.
GersickConnie J. G.1988. “Time and Transition in Work Teams: Toward a New Mode of Group Development.”Academy of Management Journal31 (1): 9–41.
10.
GladsteinDeborah L.1984. “Groups in Context: A Model of Task Group Effectiveness.”Administrative Science Quarterly29: 499–517.
11.
HallJayWatsonW.H.. 1970. “The Effects of Normative Intervention on Group Decision-Making Performance.”Human Relations23: 299–317.
12.
HeiderFritz. 1946. “Attitudes and Cognitive Organization.”Journal of Psychology21: 107–112.
13.
HeiderFritz1953. “Sentiment.” Pp. 174–217 in The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley.
14.
IbarraHerminia. 1992. “Homophily and Differential Returns: Sex Differences in Network Structure and Access in an Advertising Firm.”Administrative Science Quarterly37: 422–447.
15.
IbarraHerminia. 1995. “Race, Opportunity and Diversity of Social Circles in Managerial Networks.”Academy of Management Review38: 673–703.
16.
KnokeDavid. 1990. Political Networks: The Structural Perspective.New York: Cambridge University Press.
17.
LaumannEdward O.PappiFranz Urban. 1973. “New Directions in the Study of Community Elites.”American Sociological Review38 (2): 212–230.
18.
LazarsfeldPaul F.MertonRobert K.. 1954. “Friendship as a Social Process: A Substantive and Methodological Analysis.” Pp. 18–66 in Freedom and Control in Modern Society, edited byBergerM.. New York: Van Nostrand.
19.
MarsdenPeter V.1987. “Core Discussion Networks of Americans.”American Sociological Review52: 122–313.
20.
McGrathJoseph. 1984. Groups: Interaction and Performance.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
21.
McPhersonMillerSmith-LovinLynnCookJames M.. 2001. “Birds of a Feather.”Annual Review of Sociology27: 415–444.
22.
OppKarl-Dieter. 1984. “Balance Theory: Progress and Stagnation of a Social Psychological Theory.”Philosophy of Social Science14: 27–49.
23.
PriestRobert F.SawyerJack. 1967. “Proximity and Peership: Bases of Balance in Interpersonal Attraction.”American Journal of Sociology72: 633–649.
24.
RichardsonHelen M.1940. “Community of Values as a Factor in Friendships in College and Adult Women.”Journal of Social Psychology11: 303–312.
25.
RogersEverett M.Lawrence KincaidD.. 1987. Communication Networks.New York: Free Press.
26.
ShellyRobert K.TroyerLisa. 2001. “Emergence and Completion of Structure in Initially Undefined and Partially Defined Groups.”Social Psychology Quarterly64 (4): 318–332.
27.
SorensonOlavStuartToby E.. 2001. “Syndication Networks and the Spatial Distribution of Venture Capital Investments.”American Journal of Sociology106 (6): 1546–1588.
28.
Sundstrom Eric and Associates. 1999. Supporting Work Team Effectiveness.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
29.
TheodorsonGeorge A.1953. “Elements in Progressive Development of Small Groups.”Social Forces31 (4): 311–320.
30.
TuckmanBruce W.1965. “Developmental Sequence in Small Groups.”Psychological Bulletin63 (6): 384–399.
31.
Van den BulteChristopheMoenaertRudy K.. 1998. “The Effects of R&D Team Co-Location on Communication Patterns among R&D, Marketing, and Manufacturing.”Management Science44 (11): S1–S18. Nicole Civettini is a graduate student in the Department of Sociology at the University of Iowa. Her research interests include group processes, the intersection of work and family, housework, and marriage and cohabitation. Her dissertation tests the applicability of theories of marriage to same-sex married and partnered couples.
