Using consensus as a criterion for groupness: Implications for the cohesion-group succes relationship

Albert V. Carron, Lawrence R. Brawley, Steven R. Bray, Mark A. Eys, Kim D. Dorsch, Paul A. Estabrooks, Craig R. Hall, James Hardy, Heather Hausenblas, Ralph Madison, David M. Paskevich, Michelle M. Patterson, Harry Prapavessis, Kevin S. Spink, Peter C. Terry

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to examine how the exclusion of teams failing to meet varying statistical criteria for consensus on cohesiveness influences the magnitude of the cohesion-team success relationship. The index of agreement was calculated for 78 teams (N = 1,000 athletes) that had completed the Group Environment Questionnaire. Results showed that excluding teams because they fail to satisfy various criteria for consensus leads to changes in the magnitude of the cohesion-team success relationship. The magnitude of the relationship between team success and the individual attractions to group-task manifestation of cohesion showed progressive decreases as criteria required to demonstrate consensus became more stringent. Conversely, the magnitude of the relationship between team success and the group integration-task and group integration-social manifestations of cohesion showed progressive increases as criteria required to demonstrate consensus became more stringent. The results are discussed in terms of their relationship to group dynamics theory and practice.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)466-491
Number of pages26
JournalSmall Group Research
Volume35
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2004

Fingerprint

Athletes
Surveys and Questionnaires

Keywords

  • Consensus
  • Group environment questionnaire
  • Index of agreement
  • Sport teams
  • Task type
  • Team performance

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Psychology
  • Applied Psychology

Cite this

Using consensus as a criterion for groupness : Implications for the cohesion-group succes relationship. / Carron, Albert V.; Brawley, Lawrence R.; Bray, Steven R.; Eys, Mark A.; Dorsch, Kim D.; Estabrooks, Paul A.; Hall, Craig R.; Hardy, James; Hausenblas, Heather; Madison, Ralph; Paskevich, David M.; Patterson, Michelle M.; Prapavessis, Harry; Spink, Kevin S.; Terry, Peter C.

In: Small Group Research, Vol. 35, No. 4, 01.08.2004, p. 466-491.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Carron, AV, Brawley, LR, Bray, SR, Eys, MA, Dorsch, KD, Estabrooks, PA, Hall, CR, Hardy, J, Hausenblas, H, Madison, R, Paskevich, DM, Patterson, MM, Prapavessis, H, Spink, KS & Terry, PC 2004, 'Using consensus as a criterion for groupness: Implications for the cohesion-group succes relationship', Small Group Research, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 466-491. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496404263923
Carron, Albert V. ; Brawley, Lawrence R. ; Bray, Steven R. ; Eys, Mark A. ; Dorsch, Kim D. ; Estabrooks, Paul A. ; Hall, Craig R. ; Hardy, James ; Hausenblas, Heather ; Madison, Ralph ; Paskevich, David M. ; Patterson, Michelle M. ; Prapavessis, Harry ; Spink, Kevin S. ; Terry, Peter C. / Using consensus as a criterion for groupness : Implications for the cohesion-group succes relationship. In: Small Group Research. 2004 ; Vol. 35, No. 4. pp. 466-491.
@article{25c618558dae4acbb85e05179c08c261,
title = "Using consensus as a criterion for groupness: Implications for the cohesion-group succes relationship",
abstract = "The purpose of the study was to examine how the exclusion of teams failing to meet varying statistical criteria for consensus on cohesiveness influences the magnitude of the cohesion-team success relationship. The index of agreement was calculated for 78 teams (N = 1,000 athletes) that had completed the Group Environment Questionnaire. Results showed that excluding teams because they fail to satisfy various criteria for consensus leads to changes in the magnitude of the cohesion-team success relationship. The magnitude of the relationship between team success and the individual attractions to group-task manifestation of cohesion showed progressive decreases as criteria required to demonstrate consensus became more stringent. Conversely, the magnitude of the relationship between team success and the group integration-task and group integration-social manifestations of cohesion showed progressive increases as criteria required to demonstrate consensus became more stringent. The results are discussed in terms of their relationship to group dynamics theory and practice.",
keywords = "Consensus, Group environment questionnaire, Index of agreement, Sport teams, Task type, Team performance",
author = "Carron, {Albert V.} and Brawley, {Lawrence R.} and Bray, {Steven R.} and Eys, {Mark A.} and Dorsch, {Kim D.} and Estabrooks, {Paul A.} and Hall, {Craig R.} and James Hardy and Heather Hausenblas and Ralph Madison and Paskevich, {David M.} and Patterson, {Michelle M.} and Harry Prapavessis and Spink, {Kevin S.} and Terry, {Peter C.}",
year = "2004",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1046496404263923",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "35",
pages = "466--491",
journal = "Small Group Research",
issn = "1046-4964",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Using consensus as a criterion for groupness

T2 - Implications for the cohesion-group succes relationship

AU - Carron, Albert V.

AU - Brawley, Lawrence R.

AU - Bray, Steven R.

AU - Eys, Mark A.

AU - Dorsch, Kim D.

AU - Estabrooks, Paul A.

AU - Hall, Craig R.

AU - Hardy, James

AU - Hausenblas, Heather

AU - Madison, Ralph

AU - Paskevich, David M.

AU - Patterson, Michelle M.

AU - Prapavessis, Harry

AU - Spink, Kevin S.

AU - Terry, Peter C.

PY - 2004/8/1

Y1 - 2004/8/1

N2 - The purpose of the study was to examine how the exclusion of teams failing to meet varying statistical criteria for consensus on cohesiveness influences the magnitude of the cohesion-team success relationship. The index of agreement was calculated for 78 teams (N = 1,000 athletes) that had completed the Group Environment Questionnaire. Results showed that excluding teams because they fail to satisfy various criteria for consensus leads to changes in the magnitude of the cohesion-team success relationship. The magnitude of the relationship between team success and the individual attractions to group-task manifestation of cohesion showed progressive decreases as criteria required to demonstrate consensus became more stringent. Conversely, the magnitude of the relationship between team success and the group integration-task and group integration-social manifestations of cohesion showed progressive increases as criteria required to demonstrate consensus became more stringent. The results are discussed in terms of their relationship to group dynamics theory and practice.

AB - The purpose of the study was to examine how the exclusion of teams failing to meet varying statistical criteria for consensus on cohesiveness influences the magnitude of the cohesion-team success relationship. The index of agreement was calculated for 78 teams (N = 1,000 athletes) that had completed the Group Environment Questionnaire. Results showed that excluding teams because they fail to satisfy various criteria for consensus leads to changes in the magnitude of the cohesion-team success relationship. The magnitude of the relationship between team success and the individual attractions to group-task manifestation of cohesion showed progressive decreases as criteria required to demonstrate consensus became more stringent. Conversely, the magnitude of the relationship between team success and the group integration-task and group integration-social manifestations of cohesion showed progressive increases as criteria required to demonstrate consensus became more stringent. The results are discussed in terms of their relationship to group dynamics theory and practice.

KW - Consensus

KW - Group environment questionnaire

KW - Index of agreement

KW - Sport teams

KW - Task type

KW - Team performance

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=3342977146&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=3342977146&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1046496404263923

DO - 10.1177/1046496404263923

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:3342977146

VL - 35

SP - 466

EP - 491

JO - Small Group Research

JF - Small Group Research

SN - 1046-4964

IS - 4

ER -