This study extends previous work reviewing the cohesion-performance relationship by using meta-analytic techniques to assess the effects of level of analysis and task interdependence on the cohesion-performance relationship. A totel of 51 effect sizes from 46 empirical studies were obtained for the meta-analytic integration. Results suggest that level of analysis and task interdependence moderate the cohesion-performance relationship. Implications of the findings for future research on group cohesion and performance are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BakemanR.HelmreichR. (1975). Cohesiveness and performance: Covariation and causality in an undersea environment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 77, 478–489.
2.
BallJ. R.CarronA. V. (1976). The influence of team cohesion and participation motivation upon performance success in intercollegiate ice hockey. Canadian Journal of Applied Sport Sciences, 7, 271–275.
3.
BettenhausenK. (1991). Five years of groups research: What we have learned and what needs to be addressed. Journal of Management, 17, 345–381.
4.
BirdA. M. (1977). Team structure and success as related to cohesiveness and leadership. Journal of Social Psychology, 103, 217–223.
5.
CarronA. (1982). Cohesiveness in sport groups: Interpretations and considerations. Journal of Sport Psychology, 4, 123–138.
6.
CarronA. (1988). Group dynamics in sports. Ontario, Canada: Spodym.
7.
CarronA.WidmeyerW.BrawleyL. (1985). The development of an instrument to assess cohesion in sport teams: The Group Environment Questionnaire. Journal of Sport Psychology, 7, 244–266.
8.
CartwrightD. (1968). The nature of group cohesiveness. In CartwrightD.ZanderA., (Eds.), Group dynamics: Research and theory (3rd ed.). New York: Harper & Row.
9.
CattellR. (1948). Concepts and methods in the measurement of group syntality. Psychological Review, 55,48–63.
10.
CohenD.WhitmyreJ. W.FunkW. H. (1960). Effect of group cohesiveness and training upon creative thinking. Journal of Applied Psychology, 44, 319–322.
11.
ColarelliS. M.BoosA. L. (1992). Sociometric and ability-based assignment to work groups: Some implications for personnel selection. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 187–196.
12.
DaileyR. C. (1978). Perceived group variables as moderators of the task characteristics-individual performance relationship. Journal of Management, 4, 69–80.
13.
DarleyJ. G.GrossN.MartinW. C. (1952). Studies of group behavior: Factors associated with the predictability of groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 36,396–403.
14.
DavisJ. (1969). Group performance. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
15.
DeepS.BassB.VaughanJ. (1967). Some effects on business gaming of previous quasi-T group affiliations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 51,426–431.
16.
DorfmanP. W.StephanW. G. (1984). The effects of group performance on cognitions, satisfaction, and behavior: A process model. Journal of Management, 10,173–192.
17.
EvansC. R.DionK. L. (1991). Group cohesion and performance: Ameta-analysis. Small Group Research, 22, 175–186.
18.
FandtP. M. (1991). The relationship of accountability and interdependent behavior to enhancing team consequences. Group and Organization Studies, 16, 300–312.
19.
FiedlerF. E. (1954). Assumed similarity measures as predictors of team effectiveness. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 49, 381–388.
20.
GekoskiN. (1952). Predicting group productivity. Personnel Psychology, 5, 281–292.
21.
GeorgeJ. M.BettenhausenK. (1990). Understanding prosocial behavior, sales performance, and turnover: A group-level analysis in a service context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75,698–709.
22.
GoodacreD. M. (1951). The use of a sociometric test as a predictor of combat unit effectiveness. Sociometry, 14, 148–152.
23.
GreeneC. (1989). Cohesion and productivity in work groups. Small Group Behavior, 20, 70–86.
24.
GullyS. MWhitneyD. J.DevineD. J. (1993, May). Bringing cohesion to group cohesion research: A literature review and meta-analysis. Paper presented at the eighth annual conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Francisco.
25.
HemphillJ. K.SechrestL. B. (1952). A comparison of three criteria of aircrew effectiveness in combat over Korea. Journal of Applied Psychology, 36, 323–327.
26.
HoibergA.PughW. (1978). Predicting Navy effectiveness: Expectations, motivation, personality, aptitude, and background variables. Personnel Psychology, 31, 841–852.
27.
HoogstratenJ.VoorstH. (1978). Group cohesion, task performance, and the experimenter expectancy effect. Human Relations, 31, 939–956.
28.
HunterJ.SchmidtF. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
29.
IndikB. (1968). The scope of the problem and some suggestions toward a solution. In IndikB. P.BerrienF. K. (Eds.), People, groups and organizations. New York: Teachers College Press.
30.
JaffeE.NebenzahlI. (1990). Group interaction and business game performance. Simulation & Gaming, 21, 133–146.
31.
JamesL. (1982). Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 219–229.
32.
JamesL. R.DemareeR. G.Wolf.G. (1984). Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 85–98.
33.
JohnsonM.FortmanJ. (1988). Internal structure of the Gross Cohesiveness Scale. Small Group Behavior, 19, 146–152.
34.
KellerR. T. (1986). Predictors of the performance of project groups in R and D organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 29,715–726.
35.
KeytonJ.SpringstonJ. (1990). Redefining cohesiveness in groups. Small Group Research, 21,234–254.
36.
KleinK.ChristiansenG. (1969). Group composition, group structure, and group effectiveness of basketball teams. In LoyJ. W.KenyonG. S. (Eds.), Sport, culture, and society: A reader on the sociology of sport (pp. 397–408). London: Macmillan.
37.
KleinK. J.DansereauRHallR. J. (1994). Levels issues in theory development, data collection, and analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 19, 195–229.
38.
KozlowskiS.HattrupK. (1992). A disagreement about within-group agreement: Disentangling issues of consistency versus consensus. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 161–167.
39.
LandersD. M.WilkinsonM. O.HatfieldB. D.BarberH. (1982). Causality and the cohesion-performance relationship. Journal of Sport Psychology, 4, 170–183.
40.
LevineJ. M.MorelandR. L. (1990). Progress in small group research. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 585–634.
41.
LittlepageG.CowartL.KerrB. (1989). Relationships between group environment scales and group performance and cohesion. Small Group Behavior, 20, 50–61.
42.
LottA.LottB. (1965). Group cohesiveness as interpersonal attraction: A review of relationships with antecedent and consequent variables. Psychological Bulletin, 64, 259–309.
43.
MelnickM. J.ChemersM. M. (1974). Effects of group structure on the success of basketball teams. Research Quarterly, 45, 1–8.
44.
MitchellT. R.SilverW. S. (1990). Individual and group goals when workers are interdependent: Effects on task strategies and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 185–193.
45.
MoosR.SpeismanJ. (1962). Group compatibility and productivity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 65, 190–196.
46.
MossholderK. W.BedeianA. G. (1983). Cross-level inference and organizational research: Perspectives on interpretation and application. Academy of Management Review, 8, 547–558.
47.
MudrackP. (1989a). Defining group cohesiveness: A legacy of confusion?Small Group Behavior, 20, 37–49.
48.
MudrackP. (1989b). Group cohesiveness and productivity: A closer look. Human Relations, 42, 771–785.
49.
MullenB.CopperC. (1994). The relation between group cohesiveness and performance: An integration. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 210–227.
50.
NorrisD.NiebuhrR. (1980). Group variables and gaming success. Simulation and Games, 11, 301–312.
51.
OrwinR. H. (1983). A fail-safe N for effect size in meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 8, 157–159.
52.
OstroffC. (1993). Comparing correlations based on individual-level and aggregated data. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 569–582.
53.
PiperW.MairacheM.LacroixR.RichardsenA.JonesB. (1983). Cohesion as a basic bond in groups. Human Relations, 32, 93–108.
54.
PodsakoffP. M.TodorW. D. (1985). Relationships between leader reward and punishment behavior and group processes and productivity. Journal of Management, 11,55–73.
55.
PuttiJ. M. (1985). Leader behavior and group characteristics in work improvement teams—The Asian context. Public Personnel Management, 14, 301–306.
56.
RobertsK. H.HulinC. L.RousseauD. M. (1978). Developing an interdisciplinary science of organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
57.
RobinsonW. S. (1950). Ecological correlations and the behavior of individuals. American Sociological Review, 15, 351–357.
58.
RosenthalR. (1979). The “file drawer problem” and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 638–641.
59.
RousseauD. M. (1985). Issues of level in organizational research: Multi-level and cross-level perspectives. In CummingsL. L.StawB. M. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 7, pp. 1–37), Greenwich, CT: JAI.
60.
SaavedraR.EarleyP.Van DyneL. (1993). Complex interdependence in task-performing groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78,61–72.
61.
SalasE.DickinsonT. L.ConverseS. A.TannenbaumS. I. (1992). Toward an understanding of team performance and training. In SwezeyR. W.SalasE. (Eds.), Teams: Their training and performance (pp. 3–29). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
62.
SchriesheimJ. (1980). The social context of leader-subordinate relations: An investigation of the effects of group cohesiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65,183–194.
63.
SeashoreS. E. (1954). Group cohesiveness in the industrial work group. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan.
64.
ShawM. E. (1971). Group dynamics. New York: McGraw-Hill.
65.
ShawM.ShawL. (1962). Some effects of sociometric grouping upon learning in a second-grade classroom. Journal of Social Psychology, 57,453–458.
66.
SheaG. P.GuzzoR. A. (1987). Groups as human resources. In RowlandK. M.FerrisG. R. (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 5, pp. 323–356). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
67.
SheridanJ. E. (1985). A catastrophe model of employee withdrawal leading to low job performance, high absenteeism, and job turnover during the first year of employment. Academy of Management Journal, 28, 88–109.
68.
SheridanJ.VredenburghD. J.AbelsonM. (1984). Contextual model of leadership influence in hospital units. Academy of Management Journal, 27, 57–78.
69.
SteelR. RShaneG. S.KennedyK. A. (1990). Effects of social-system factors on absenteeism, turnover, and job performance. Journal of Business and Psychology, 4, 423–430.
70.
StinsonJ. E.HellebrandtE. T. (1972). Group cohesiveness, productivity, and strength of formal leadership. Journal of Social Psychology, 87, 99–105.
71.
StogdillR. (1972). Group productivity, drive, and cohesiveness. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 8, 26–43.
72.
SundstromE.De MeuseK. P.FutrellD. (1990). Work teams: Applications and effectiveness. American Psychologist, 45,120–133.
73.
TerborgJ. R.CastoreCDeNinnoJ. A. (1976). A longitudinal field investigation of the impact of group composition on group performance and group cohesion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34,782–790.
74.
ThorndikeE. L. (1939). On the fallacy of imputing the correlations found for groups to the individuals or smaller groups composing them. American Journal of Psychology, 52, 122–124.
75.
TinsleyH.E.A.WeissD. J. (1975). Interrater reliability and agreement of subjective judgments. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 22, 358–376.
76.
TorranceE. P. (1955). Perception of group functioning as a predictor of group performance. Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 271–282.
77.
TzinerA.VardiY. (1983). Ability as a moderator between cohesiveness and tank crews performance. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 4137–143.
78.
WanousJ. P.SullivanS. E.MalinakJ. (1989). The role of judgment calls in meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 259–264.
79.
WidmeyerN.BrawleyL.CarronA. (1985). The measurement of cohesion in sport teams: The Group Environment Questionnaire. London, Ontario, Canada: Sports Dynamics.
80.
WidmeyerN.BrawleyL.CarronA. (1990). The effects of group size in sport. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 12, 177–190.
81.
WidmeyerN.BrawleyL.CarronA. (1992). Group dynamics in sport. In HornT. S. (Ed.), Advances in sport psychology (pp. 124–139). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
82.
WidmeyerW. N.MartensR. (1978). When cohesion predicts performance outcome in sport. Research Quarterly, 49, 372–380.
83.
WilliamsJ. M.HackerC. M. (1982). Causal relationships among cohesion, satisfaction, and performance in women’s intercollegiate field hockey teams. Journal of Sport Psychology, 4, 324–337.
84.
WilliamsJ.WidmeyerW. (1991). The cohesion-performance outcome relationship in a coaching sport. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 13, 364–371.
85.
WolfeJ.BoxT. (1988). Team cohesion effects on business game performance. Simulations and Games, 19, 82–98.
86.
ZaccaroS. (1991). Non-equivalent associations between forms of cohesiveness and group-related outcomes: Evidence for multidimensionality. Journal of Social Psychology, 131, 387–399.
87.
ZaccaroS.LoweC. (1988). Cohesiveness and performance on an additive task: Evidence for multidimensionality. Journal of Social Psychology, 128, 547–558.
88.
ZaccaroS.McCoyM. C. (1988). The effects of task and interpersonal cohesiveness on performance of a disjunctive group task. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 837–851.
89.
ZanderA. (1979). The psychology of group processes. Annual Review of Psychology, 30, 417–451.
