|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
The Role of Evaluation in Eliminating Social Loafing
Stephen G. Harkins
Northeastern University
Jeffrey M. Jackson
Fordham University
Comparability of performances within four-person groups was manipulated in a brainstorming task. Crossed with this manipulation of evaluation potential, participants' outputs either were individually identifiable or were pooled. Replicating previous social-loafing research (Latane, Williams, & Harkins, 1979), when outputs were identifiable, participants generated more uses than when their outputs were pooled. However, this difference emerged only when participants believed that their individual outputs could be evaluated through comparison with their co-workers' performances. When participants believed that their individual outputs were not comparable and thus could not be evaluated, there was no difference in the number of uses generated by participants whose outputs were identifiable and those whose outputs were pooled. These data suggest that to eliminate social loafing participants must feel not only that their outputs are individually identifiable as suggested by Williams, Harkins, and Latane (1981), but also that these outputs can be evaluated through comparison with the outputs of their co-workers.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 11, No. 4,
457-465 (1985)
DOI: 10.1177/0146167285114011
 CiteULike  Complore  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
S. Abele and M. Diehl
Finding Teammates Who Are Not Prone to Sucker and Free-Rider Effects: The Protestant Work Ethic as a Moderator of Motivation Losses in Group Performance
Group Processes Intergroup Relations,
January 1, 2008;
11(1):
39 - 54.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. M. Stark, J. D. Shaw, and M. K. Duffy
Preference for Group Work, Winning Orientation, and Social Loafing Behavior in Groups
Group Organization Management,
December 1, 2007;
32(6):
699 - 723.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. R. Fellenz
Toward Fairness in Assessing Student Groupwork: A Protocol for Peer Evaluation of Individual Contributions
Journal of Management Education,
August 1, 2006;
30(4):
570 - 591.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. D. Finn, G. M. Pannozzo, and C. M. Achilles
The "Why's" of Class Size: Student Behavior in Small Classes
Review of Educational Research,
January 1, 2003;
73(3):
321 - 368.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. S. Tindale and S. Sheffey
Shared Information, Cognitive Load, and Group Memory
Group Processes Intergroup Relations,
January 1, 2002;
5(1):
5 - 18.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Szymanski, J. Garczynski, and S. Harkins
The Contribution of the Potential for Evaluation to Coaction Effects
Group Processes Intergroup Relations,
July 1, 2000;
3(3):
269 - 283.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. R. Bacon, K. A. Stewart, and W. S. Silver
Lessons from the Best and Worst Student Team Experiences: How a Teacher can make the Difference
Journal of Management Education,
October 1, 1999;
23(5):
467 - 488.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Waung and T. S. Brice
The Effects of Conscientiousness and Opportunity to Caucus on Group Performance
Small Group Research,
October 1, 1998;
29(5):
624 - 634.
[Abstract]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. R. Bacon, K. A. Stewart, and S. Stewart-Belle
Exploring Predictors of Student Team Project Performance
Journal of Marketing Education,
April 1, 1998;
20(1):
63 - 71.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. G. CRUZ, F. J. BOSTER, and J. I. RODRIGUEZ
The Impact of Group Size and Proportion of Shared Information on the Exchange and Integration of Information in Groups
Communication Research,
June 1, 1997;
24(3):
291 - 313.
[Abstract]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. J. Sanna, K. J. Turley, and M. M. Mark
Expected Evaluation, Goals, and Performance Mood as Input
Pers Soc Psychol Bull,
April 1, 1996;
22(4):
323 - 335.
[Abstract]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. R. Comer
A Model of Social Loafing in Real Work Groups
Human Relations,
June 1, 1995;
48(6):
647 - 667.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. J. Sanna and P. A. Pusecker
Self-Efficacy, Valence of Self-Evaluation, and Performance
Pers Soc Psychol Bull,
February 1, 1994;
20(1):
82 - 92.
[Abstract]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. N. Scudder, R. T. Herschel, and M. D. Crossland
Test of a Model Linking Cognitive Motivation, Assessment of Alternatives, Decision Quality, and Group Process Satisfaction
Small Group Research,
February 1, 1994;
25(1):
57 - 82.
[Abstract]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. L Kerr and J. A. Stanfel
Role Schemata and Member Motivation in Task Groups
Pers Soc Psychol Bull,
August 1, 1993;
19(4):
432 - 442.
[Abstract]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Pavht
What (Little) We Know about Formal Group Discussion Procedures: A Review of Relevant Research
Small Group Research,
May 1, 1993;
24(2):
217 - 235.
[Abstract]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. S. Valacich, A. R. Dennis, and J. F. Nunamaker Jr.
Group Size and Anonymity Effects on Computer-Mediated Idea Generation
Small Group Research,
February 1, 1992;
23(1):
49 - 73.
[Abstract]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. E. Schnake
Equity in Effort: The "Sucker Effect" in Co-Acting Groups
Journal of Management,
March 1, 1991;
17(1):
41 - 55.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. T. Strong and R. E. Anderson
Free-Riding in Group Projects: Control Mechanisms and Preliminary Data
Journal of Marketing Education,
August 1, 1990;
12(2):
61 - 67.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Bartis, K. Szymanski, and S. G. Harkins
Evaluation and Performance: A Two-Edged Knife
Pers Soc Psychol Bull,
June 1, 1988;
14(2):
242 - 251.
[Abstract]
|
|
|
|
|
