Lecture 21: Group Processes

Question 1

Group vs Team

Answer 1

• Group = ‘two or more people who interact with, and exert mutual influence on each other’
• Team = ‘any group of people who must interact with each other to accomplish shared objectives’

Question 2

Interactive and co-active sports

Answer 2

• Interactive sports = much interaction e.g. volleybal

- Co-active sports = little interaction e.g. horse riding

Question 3

Group productivity

Answer 3

• Productivity = potential productivity - losses to faulty group processes -> motivation losses (co-active sports) & co-ordination losses (interactive sports)

Question 4

Team development

Answer 4

1. Forming
2. Storming (interpersonal conflict to establish roles)
3. Norming (hostility replaced by solidarity + cooperation)
4. Performing
   - Linear theory = groups move progressively through stages
   - Group roles
   - Group norms = level of performance, pattern of behaviour or belief
   = can be formally established or informally developed by group
   = social norms, task-related norms

Question 5

Group roles

Answer 5

• Informal roles e.g. organiser, comedian, optimist etc.
  = evolve from interaction among team members
• Formal roles e.g. coach. defenders, midfield
  = set of behaviours required or expected of the person occupying a certain position in the group
• Role clarity & role acceptance -> reduce losses due to ‘faulty’ group processes

Question 6

Team cohesion

Answer 6

• ‘A dynamic process reflected in tendency for a group to stick together and remain united in pursuit of its instrumental objectives and/or for satisfaction of member affective needs’
• Social cohesion = ‘interpersonal attraction’ between team members
• Task cohesion = extent that team members work together to obtain a common instrumental goal

Question 7

Building team cohesion

Answer 7

• E.g. motivational speech or team outing

Question 8

Cohesion-performance relationship

Answer 8

• Cohesion -> performance (and vice versa)
• How can this be investigated? = observational/correlational studies
  = experimental studies

Question 9

A meta-analysis (Carron et al. 2002) = cohesion & performance

Answer 9

• Sports teams only
• 46 Studies
• 10,000 athletes and 1000 teams
• Effect sizes (Cohen D): = overall 0.65
  = correlational studies 0.69
  = experimental studies 0.41
  = interactive teams 0.66
  = coactive teams -.77
  = women 0.95
  = men 0.56
  (Cohen’s D: 0.2-0.5 small/0.5-0.8 mod., >0.8 large

Question 10

Meta-analysis results continued

Answer 10

Referred 0.73
Non published 0.51
Task cohesion 0.61
Social cohesion 0.70
Cohesion -> performance 0.57
Performance -> cohesion 0.69
Performance -> task cohesion 0.64
Performance -> social cohesion 0.71
Task cohesion -> performance 0.51
Social cohesion -> performance 0.60

Question 11

Outcome of meta-analysis

Answer 11

• Task cohesion and social cohesion are related to better performance
  = in both interactive & co-active teams
  = relation stranger for women teams

Question 12

Cohesion-Performance: underlying mechanisms

Answer 12

1) Cohesion -> performance
- Better cooperation
- More effort + persistence
- More support - compensate for each other weaker points
2) Performance-> cohesion
- Self efficacy and team efficacy (need for competence)
- Positive emotions (‘feel good’) -> attract to team