Six mixed-gender groups (ns = 3 to 5 each), comprised of either highly competitive (two groups), highly cooperative (two groups), or highly competitive and highly cooperative (two groups) individuals, participated. Participants first engaged in a cooperative problem-solving exercise and then completed an ill-structured problem, the Moon Survival Task, first on their own and then as a group. Analysis showed no differences in performance by individuals or groups; however, there was improvement in performance at the group level over the individual level, particularly for those individuals in the highly cooperative/highly competitive group. Findings do not support widely held assumptions about the utility of cooperativeness and detriment of competitiveness or of the possible advantage a cooperative rather than a competitive group may hold for women in particular.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AburdeneP., & NaisbittJ. (1992) Megatrends for women.New York: Villard Books.
2.
BottgerP. C., & YettonP. W. (1987) Improving group performance by training in individual problem-solving. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 651–657.
3.
CarnevaleP. J. D., & LawlerE. J. (1987) Time pressure and the development of integrative agreements in bilateral negotiations. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 30, 636–659.
4.
ClintonB. J., & TorranceE. P. (1986) S.E.A.M.: a training program for developing problem identification skills. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 20, 77–80.
5.
CronbachL. I. (1970) Essentials of psychological testing. (3rd ed.) New York: Harper & Row.
6.
DouglasT. (1983) Groups: understanding people gathered together.London: Tavistock.
7.
EaglyA. H., & JohnsonB. T. (1990) Gender and leadership style: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 233–256.
8.
FrankenR. E.HillR., & KiersteadJ. (1994) Sport interest as predicted by the personality measures of competitiveness, mastery, instrumentality, expressivity, and sensation seeking. Personality and Individual Differences, 17, 467–476.
9.
FrankenhaeuserM.LundbergU.FredriksonM.MelinB.TuomistoM.MyrstenA.HedmanM.Bergman-LosmanB., & WallinI. (1989) Stress on and off of the job as related to sex and occupational status in white-collar workers, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 10, 321–346.
10.
GeorgasJ. (1986) Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures with seventh-grade Greek children: problem-solving effectiveness and group interactions. The Journal of Social Psychology, 126, 227–236.
11.
GuzzoR. A., & SheaG. P. (1992) Group performance and intergroup relations in organizations. In DunnetteM. D. & HoughL. M. (Eds.), Handbook of industrial & organizational psychology. (2nd ed) Vol. 5. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Pp. 269–313.
12.
HowellD. C. (1987) Statistical methods for psychology. (2nd ed) Boston, MA: Duxbury.
13.
JacksonD. N. (1983) Personality Research Form.Goshen, NY: Research Psychologists Press.
14.
JamesN. L., & JohnsonD. W. (1983) The relationship between attitudes toward social interdependence and psychological health within three criminal populations. The Journal of Social Psychology, 121, 131–143
15.
JamesS. D., & JohnsonD. W. (1988) Social interdependence, psychological adjustment, and marital satisfaction in second marriages. The Journal of Social Psychology, 128, 287–303.
16.
JohnsonD. W., & JohnsonR. (1983) Social interdependence and perceived academic and personal support in the classroom. The Journal of Social Psychology, 120, 77–82.
17.
JohnsonD. W.JohnsonR., & AndersonD. (1983) Social interdependence and classroom climate. The Journal of Psychology, 114, 135–142.
18.
JohnsonD. W.JohnsonR. T.BuckmanL. A., & RichardsP. S. (1985) The effect of prolonged implementation of cooperative learning on social support within the classroom. The Journal of Psychology, 119, 405–411.
19.
JohnsonD. W.JohnsonR. T., & KroteeM. L. (1986) The relation between social interdependence and psychological health on the 1980 U.S. Olympic Ice Hockey team. The Journal of Psychology, 120, 279–291.
20.
JohnsonD. W., & Norem-HebeisenA. (1977) Attitudes toward interdependence among persons and psychological health. Psychological Reports, 40, 843–850.
21.
JosephsR. A.MarkusH. R., & TafarodiR. W. (1992) Gender and self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 391–402.
22.
KohnA. (1986) How to succeed without even vying. Psychology Today, 20(9), 22–28.
23.
LeavittH. J. (1975) Suppose we took groups seriously…. In CassE. L. & ZimmerF. G. (Eds.), Man and work in society.New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Pp. 67–77.
24.
Lipman-BlumenJ. (1992) Connective leadership: female leadership styles in the 21st-century workplace. Sociological Perspectives, 35, 183–203.
25.
Lipman-BlumenJ.Handley-IsaksenA., & LeavtttH. J. (1983) Achieving styles in men and women: a model, an instrument, and some findings. In SpenceJ. T. (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives.San Francisco, CA: Freeman. Pp. 147–204.
26.
MojàC. A. (1992) Cooperativeness and competitiveness among pupils in southern Italy. Psychological Reports, 70, 99–105.
27.
MorrisonA. M., & Von GlinowM. A. (1990) Women and minorities in management. American Psychologist, 45, 200–208.
28.
NaisbittJ., & AburdeneP. (1990) Megatrends 2000: ten new directions for the 1990's.New York: Avon.
29.
PfeifferJ. W., & JonesJ. E. (Eds.) (1969) A handbook of structured experiences for human relations training.Iowa City, IA: University Associates Press. Pp. 52–57.
30.
RogosaD.BrandtD., & ZimowskiM. (1982) A growth curve approach to the measurement of change. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 726–748.
31.
ShanteauJ. (1988) Psychological characteristics and strategies of expert decision makers. Acta Psychologica, 68, 203–215.
32.
SpenceJ. T., & HelmreichR. L. (1983) Achievement-related motives and behaviors. In SpenceJ. T. (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives.San Francisco, CA: Freeman. Pp. 7–74.
33.
StingleS. F., & CookH. (1985) Age and sex differences in the cooperative and noncooperative behavior of pairs of American children. The Journal of Psychology, 119, 335–345.
34.
SundstromE.DeMeuseK. P., & FutrellD. (1990) Work teams: applications and effectiveness. American Psychologist, 45, 120–133.
