Relative ability, paths of relevance, and influence in task-oriented groups

被引:22
|
作者
Foddy, M
Smithson, M
机构
[1] LA TROBE UNIV,MELBOURNE,VIC,AUSTRALIA
[2] JAMES COOK UNIV N QUEENSLAND,DEPT PSYCHOL & SOCIOL,TOWNSVILLE,QLD 4811,AUSTRALIA
关键词
D O I
10.2307/2787048
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
In task-oriented groups, people accept influence more from others whom they believe, on the basis of diffuse and specific status characteristics as well as prior performances, to have greater ability at the task. Past research has treated difference in ability as a binary variable (better or worse); it is not known whether magnitude of difference in performances translates into relative magnitude of inferred ability, and thence into degrees of differentiation in the status structure of decision-making groups. We conducted an experiment to examine the relative impact of three aspects of task performance on the inference of ability: absolute level of performance, relative performance (better/worse), and the degree of differences in performances by two group members. These variables then were used to predict acceptance of influence in a two-person decision task. Simple binary difference in ability explained 35 per cent of the variance in influence accepted. Degree of difference in ability significantly increased level of prediction particularly for subjects in the lower range of performance scores, thus supporting the claim that relative and absolute levels of performance create additional differences in expectations. Finally, we propose that a concept of ''graded status characteristics'' should be incorporated into status characteristics theory.
引用
收藏
页码:140 / 153
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Modeling task-oriented discussion groups
    Wilson, R
    [J]. USER MODELING 2003, PROCEEDINGS, 2003, 2702 : 248 - 257
  • [2] Assessment criteria for task-oriented groups
    Witte, EH
    Lecher, S
    [J]. GRUPPENDYNAMIK-ZEITSCHRIFT FUR ANGEWANDTE SOZIALPSYCHOLOGIE, 1998, 29 (03): : 313 - 325
  • [3] SENSE FOR COOPERATION IN TASK-ORIENTED GROUPS
    VANHEYMB.R
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGICA BELGICA, 1972, 12 (01) : 95 - 105
  • [4] POWER AND SATISFACTION IN TASK-ORIENTED GROUPS
    MULDER, M
    [J]. ACTA PSYCHOLOGICA, 1959, 16 (03) : 178 - +
  • [5] COMMUNICATION PATTERNS IN TASK-ORIENTED GROUPS
    BAVELAS, A
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 1950, 22 (06): : 723 - 730
  • [6] Improvement of performance in small task-oriented groups
    Hoyos, CG
    [J]. ZEITSCHRIFT FUR ARBEITS-UND ORGANISATIONSPSYCHOLOGIE, 2003, 47 (01): : 52 - 54
  • [7] Individual decision making in task-oriented groups
    Reia, Sandro M.
    Gomes, Paulo F.
    Fontanari, Jose F.
    [J]. EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL B, 2019, 92 (05):
  • [8] Individual decision making in task-oriented groups
    Sandro M. Reia
    Paulo F. Gomes
    José F. Fontanari
    [J]. The European Physical Journal B, 2019, 92
  • [9] SOCIAL LAW OF EFFECT FOR TASK-ORIENTED GROUPS
    DOREIAN, P
    [J]. US SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1979, 42 (03): : 222 - 231
  • [10] CREATIVE ABILITY OF TASK-ORIENTED VERSUS PERSON-ORIENTED LEADERS
    JACOBY, J
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CREATIVE BEHAVIOR, 1968, 2 (04): : 249 - 253