In field settings group members (often) show effort gains instead of social loafing

IF 10.1 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
J. Hüffmeier, Guido Hertel, Ann-Kathrin Torka, Christoph Nohe, Stefan Krumm
{"title":"In field settings group members (often) show effort gains instead of social loafing","authors":"J. Hüffmeier, Guido Hertel, Ann-Kathrin Torka, Christoph Nohe, Stefan Krumm","doi":"10.1080/10463283.2021.1959125","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Although group work has the potential to both reduce and increase the effort expenditure of its members, effort losses (i.e., reduced effort in group- versus individual work) have long been perceived as (nearly) inevitable in Social Psychology. This notion was elicited, accompanied, and bolstered by (i) pessimistic theorising on group productivity, and (ii) the primary use of laboratory experiments to study effort expenditure in groups. In this contribution, we adopt a more optimistic theoretical perspective. We review a series of consecutive field and vignette studies showing that individuals often work harder in groups than alone (i.e., effort gains in groups). We show that effort gains in groups are robust and can be reliably observed under various theoretically derived conditions. We also illustrate that effort gains in groups cannot be explained by various alternative explanations, and illuminate underlying mechanisms and moderators of effort gains in groups in field settings. We conclude our review by elaborating on the relevance of our findings for current theorising, the motivating design of group work, and new directions in the study of effort expenditure during group work.","PeriodicalId":47582,"journal":{"name":"European Review of Social Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":10.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Review of Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2021.1959125","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

ABSTRACT Although group work has the potential to both reduce and increase the effort expenditure of its members, effort losses (i.e., reduced effort in group- versus individual work) have long been perceived as (nearly) inevitable in Social Psychology. This notion was elicited, accompanied, and bolstered by (i) pessimistic theorising on group productivity, and (ii) the primary use of laboratory experiments to study effort expenditure in groups. In this contribution, we adopt a more optimistic theoretical perspective. We review a series of consecutive field and vignette studies showing that individuals often work harder in groups than alone (i.e., effort gains in groups). We show that effort gains in groups are robust and can be reliably observed under various theoretically derived conditions. We also illustrate that effort gains in groups cannot be explained by various alternative explanations, and illuminate underlying mechanisms and moderators of effort gains in groups in field settings. We conclude our review by elaborating on the relevance of our findings for current theorising, the motivating design of group work, and new directions in the study of effort expenditure during group work.
在现场环境中,小组成员(经常)表现出努力的收获,而不是社交上的懒散
虽然群体工作有可能减少或增加成员的努力支出,但努力损失(即群体工作相对于个人工作的努力减少)在社会心理学中一直被认为是(几乎)不可避免的。这一概念是由以下因素引出、伴随并支持的:(1)对群体生产力的悲观理论,以及(2)主要使用实验室实验来研究群体的努力支出。在这篇文章中,我们采用了更为乐观的理论视角。我们回顾了一系列连续的实地和小插曲研究,表明个体在团队中通常比单独工作更努力(即,团队中的努力收益)。我们证明了群体中的努力增益是稳健的,并且可以在各种理论推导的条件下可靠地观察到。我们还说明了群体中的努力收益不能用各种替代解释来解释,并阐明了在现场设置中群体努力收益的潜在机制和调节因素。最后,我们详细阐述了我们的研究结果与当前的理论化、小组工作的激励设计以及小组工作中努力支出研究的新方向的相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
15.30
自引率
2.80%
发文量
6
期刊介绍: The "European Review of Social Psychology (ERSP)" is a distinguished international journal that operates under the patronage of the European Association of Social Psychology. It serves as a platform for comprehensive, theory-driven reviews that cover the broad spectrum of social psychology. The journal is open to submissions from authors worldwide and is guided by a prestigious international editorial board. ERSP is particularly interested in publishing reviews that reflect the author's own research program, as demonstrated by their publications in leading peer-reviewed journals. The journal values theoretical contributions that are grounded in a substantial empirical foundation, situating the research within the broader context of existing literature and offering a synthesis that goes beyond the individual articles. In addition to these in-depth reviews, ERSP also welcomes conventional reviews and meta-analyses, further enriching the journal's offerings. By focusing on high-quality, evidence-based research, ERSP contributes significantly to the advancement of knowledge in social psychology and fosters a deeper understanding of human social behavior across cultures and societies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信