Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Free Access - Register Here

Click here for free access to the SAGE eReference platform!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Shepperd, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by Taylor, K. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Shepperd, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by Taylor, K. M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 25, No. 9, 1147-1158 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/01461672992512008

Social Loafing and Expectancy-Value Theory

James A. Shepperd

University of Florida, shepperd{at}psych.ufl.edu

Kevin M. Taylor

University of Florida

Expectancy value theory holds that goal-directed behavior is a function of (a) expectations—the belief that performance depends on effort, (b) instrumentality—the belief that outcome depends on performance, and (c) outcome value—the value attached to achieving the outcome. The present research provides a direct test of two factors involved in the instrumentality component: the contingency between individual performance and group performance and the contingency between group performance and group outcome. Experiment 1 revealed that collective participants worked hard when they perceived a contingency between individual performance and group performance. Experiment 2 revealed that collective participants worked hard when they perceived a contingency between group performance and the group outcome. Taken together, the results confirm the importance of high instrumentality in eliminating social loafing.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Communication ResearchHome page
Hee Sun Park
The Effects of Shared Cognition on Group Satisfaction and Performance: Politeness and Efficiency in Group Interaction
Communication Research, February 1, 2008; 35(1): 88 - 108.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Group Processes Intergroup RelationsHome page
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]

Home page
 Journal of Management EducationHome page
J. Bailey, M. Sass, P. M. Swiercz, C. Seal, and D. C. Kayes
Teaching with and through Teams: Student-Written, Instructor-Facilitated Case Writing and the Signatory Code
Journal of Management Education, February 1, 2005; 29(1): 39 - 59.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of ManagementHome page
R. C. Liden, S. J. Wayne, R. A. Jaworski, and N. Bennett
Social Loafing: A Field Investigation
Journal of Management, April 1, 2004; 30(2): 285 - 304.
[Abstract] [PDF]