DOCSLIB.ORG

Group Cohesiveness and Group Productivity

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Group Cohesiveness and Group Productivity Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU Master's Theses Graduate College 6-1964 Group Cohesiveness and Group Productivity Michael M. Makedonsky Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses Part of the Psychology Commons Recommended Citation Makedonsky, Michael M., "Group Cohesiveness and Group Productivity" (1964). Master's Theses. 4083. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses/4083 This Masters Thesis-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. GROU COHSIVENESS AD:° GROU� PRODUCTIVITY by Michael M. Makedonsky Jr. thesis presented to the Faculty of the School of Graduate Studies in partial fulfillment of the Degree of Master of Arts Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan June 1964 - ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The writer wishes to express .sincere appreciation to Dr. John J. Jochem for his encouragement and helpful supervision throughout the entire research.project. Grateful aclm��ledgement is also extended to Dr. Esten J. Asher and Dr. Stanley M. Kuffel, who willingly consented to act as members on the thesis committee. My work benefited from the counsel of Dr. Alvin Zander and Dr. Lawrence Schwarz, who provided clarification in the theoretical area. Appreciation is extended to Mrs. David Larom far her valuable assistance in typing the manuscript. My thanks are also extended to the volunteer students without whose participation this thesis would not have been possible. Michael M. Makedonsky ii TABL OF CONTENTS PAGE Introduction .•••••••••••••.••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• l Method and Procedures ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 8 Results and Discussion ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••1 3 Suinrna.ry and Conclusion •••••••••••••••.•••.••••••••••••••••••••••17 Appendix•••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 20 References •••••••••••••••••••••••••.•.•••••••••.•••••••••••••••• 3.1 iii LIST OF TABLES_ PAGE Table 1. Comparison of Condition A and Condition Bon Mean Completion Times •••••••..•.••••••••.•••.•.••.•••••13 Table 2. Comparison of Condition A and Condition Bon Observed Behavior •••••••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1.4 Table 3. Comparison of Condition A and Condition Bon Group Evaluation Scale •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••15 iv GROUP COESIVNESS AD GOUP PRODCTIVITY Cartwright and Zander (1953) distinguish at least three differ­ ent meanings in their intuitive and operational descriptions of group cohesiveness: (a) attracti_on to the group, (b) morale, and (c) coordination of efforts of group members. Others have attempted to classify meanings of cohesiveness into two general categories. One category of definitions centers chiefly on particular aspects of group behavior or group process. Here, the meaning of cohesive­ 1 ness refers to 1sticking togetherness", productivity, task involve­ ment and good team work. A common observation is that members of a cohesive group display a feeling of 11we-ness" or "togetherness", 11 r mea..-:iing that they are more likely to talk in terms of "we" than 11 1 • The second category of definitions is concerned exclusively with the attractiveness of the group. Festinger, Schachter and Back (1950) define cohesiveness as the average resultant force act­ ing on members -with direction toward the group. Still others, like Libo (1953), try to present a more refined meaning of the concept. Li.bo suggestst:,9 units of analysis for the study of cohesiveness: the individual member and the group. Hence, an individual level of analysis and a group level of analysis. The attraction phenomenon in group dynamics is believed to be a function of the needs of the individual and the properties of the group. The valence of a group, when its goals are a source of grati­ fication, is equal to the strength of the need of the individual 1 2' times the probability that the group will satisfy his needs. The attractiveness of a group will be maintained as long as the needs of its members are met, but will be decreased if the gratification of needs is reduced. A group member will leave only when the forces driving him away from the group are greater than the sum of the forces attracting him to the group. According to Libo (19.53), the attractio. n phenomenon involves a personally meaningful individual-object relationship. By means of his separate units of analysis, he prefers to define cohesiveness in terms of attractiveness for the group as a collective body or ob­ ject as different from attractiveness for the individual member sepa­ rately. In his terms, "cohesiveness denotes the group's attractiveness for its membe:r-s, the resultant forces acting on all the memb.ers to re­ main in the group", and calls "the resultant of forces acting on each member to rei:nain in the group, attraction-to-group."' (Libo 1953, Chapter 1). ¼ short, group attractiveness is called cohesiveness and individual attractiveness is called attraction-to-group. 1 This writer feels that Libo s two units of analysis is redun­ dant, since the final measure of cohesiveness can be accomplished by the operation of converting individual attraction values to a total group value. His approach reflects a refinement in his research design rather than a new theoretical concept. In the present study, such fine distinction was not attempted because the group as a unit was seen as the object which possesses the quality of attraction. J Therefore, this study will not deal with the issue of attractiveness for subparts of the group, but rather will concern itself with the group as a whole. Thus, the person's relationship with the group·will involve only the question of valence of membership in the group. The basic method of producing differences in group attraction is to create certain perceptions and expectations about the nature or characteristics of the group to which the subject is assigned. Three general approaches have been identified by Libo: (a) the use of experimental instructions or suggestions, (b) the planned assign­ (c) ment of subjects to attractiveness, relevant activities, and the manipulation of group structure or process (Libo, 1953). Some experimental studies have utilized various combinations of these methods. Back (1951) for example, conducted a study in which attraction to the group was the major experimental variable. In creating low and high degrees of cohesiveness, he used instru� tions designated to manipulate group attractiveness. He used thre / / sources: the valence of the members, the valence of the group as\ a mediator of attractive tasks and the valence of the group a� provider of prestige. Back used student volunteers who participated in two-person discussion groups. Each volunteer completed a form that included some questions ostensibly designed to help in organizing congenial He referred to the imaginary results of his questionnair and stressed how well matched for congeniality the two persons in each strong attraction co ndition were. In the weak attraction con­ dition, the success of matching was made to appear less impressive. 4 The similarity between Back's use of experimental instructions and the Personality Evaluation Questionnaire used in the present. study is quite obvious. The emphasis of course in both studies was on creating an imaginary measure of congeniality. After Back, other experimenters have used instructions to create differing perceptions and expectations of group attractiveness. Some have used this method to study cohesiveness and group produc­ tivity. Schachter, Ellertson, McBride and Gregory (1962) studied the corr ti between coh oup_ v�· � � = y � I~ -~� ..� - - -·-- --• their study they used four combinations of cohesiveness and direction I of induction: (a) high cohesive, positive or speed induction, (b) \ low cohesive, positive induction, (c) high cohesive, negative or \~ slow-down induction, and (d) low cohesive, negative induct� The subjects used were female volunteers from undergraduate education and psychology classes. The subjects for any particular group were taken from different classes, so that they did not know one another. Each experimental group was made up of three people. There were 13 subjects in each of the high cohesive conditions, and 12 in each of the low cohesive conditions., making a total of So s�bjects in the entire study. The task used by Schachter et al was a cooperative production of cardboard checkerboard. There were supposedly three jobs to be done: cutting the cardboard, mounting and pasting it on heavier stock, and painting the boards through a stencil. One group mem­ ber was to be assigned to each of the jobs. Each member was as­ signed to_ different workroom. 5 Here, although all s::..b�ects ,,rere assigned to the job of cut­ ., ting, each girl was given tr:e impression that the other two members were painting and pasting. Individual members were allowed to com­ municate with one another only hy notes delivered by a messenger. All the notes were intercepted by the messenger who substi t:.uted notes from a standard prewritten set. The subject, however, be­ lieved that the notes she received were written by the other mem­ bers of the group. These notes furnished the means by which direc­ tion of induction was manipulated. The subject cut cardboard for 32 minutes. Then, each member was asked to fill out a questionnaire, after which she was
Load more

Recommended publications
  • When Do People Trust Their Social Groups?
    When Do People Trust Their Social Groups? Xiao Ma1y, Justin Cheng2, Shankar Iyer2, Mor Naaman1 {xiao,mor}@jacobs.cornell.edu,{jcheng,shankar94}@fb.com 1Jacobs Institute, Cornell Tech, 2Facebook y Work done while at Facebook. ABSTRACT 1 INTRODUCTION Trust facilitates cooperation and supports positive outcomes Trust contributes to the success of social groups by encour- in social groups, including member satisfaction, information aging people to interpret others’ actions and intentions fa- sharing, and task performance. Extensive prior research has vorably, thereby facilitating cooperation and a sense of com- examined individuals’ general propensity to trust, as well as munity [5, 22, 32, 54, 60, 76]. In groups, trust increases mem- the factors that contribute to their trust in specific groups. ber satisfaction and task performance [79], reduces con- Here, we build on past work to present a comprehensive flict [32, 79], and promotes effective response to crisis [52]. framework for predicting trust in groups. By surveying 6,383 Previous research has examined how different factors such Facebook Groups users about their trust attitudes and ex- as size [13, 21, 85], group cohesiveness [37], and activity [79] amining aggregated behavioral and demographic data for may impact people’s trust in their social groups, both on- these individuals, we show that (1) an individual’s propensity line [38] and offline [67]. However, previous studies tend to trust is associated with how they trust their groups, (2) to be small in scale, limited to specific contexts (e.g., online smaller, closed, older, more exclusive, or more homogeneous marketplaces), or only consider a specific type of group (e.g., groups are trusted more, and (3) a group’s overall friendship- organizations [18, 49]).
    [Show full text]
  • Group Cohesion: Relationships with Work Team Culture
    Psicothema 2009. Vol. 21, nº 1, pp. 97-104 ISSN 0214 - 9915 CODEN PSOTEG www.psicothema.com Copyright © 2009 Psicothema Group cohesion: Relationships with work team culture José C. Sánchez and Amaia Yurrebaso Universidad de Salamanca The aim of this study was to examine the relationships between group cohesion and the perceived culture and desired culture of work teams. Two separate studies were carried out with a time interval of one year. The first study had a sample of 50 work teams belonging to different organizations and the second study had a sample of 75 work teams. We used Lindell’s index of agreement to estimate the culture and cohesion variables. Multiple and hierarchical regression analysis in both studies confirmed our initial hypothesis, showing that perceived and desired culture were positively related to group cohesion, and that culture gap had a negative association with cohesion. To a lesser extent, control variables such as job tenure and gender had a positive relationship with cohesion. The implications of these results are discussed along with the importance of considering the group level as analysis. Cohesión grupal: relaciones con la cultura de los equipos de trabajo. El objetivo de este estudio fue examinar las relaciones entre cohesión grupal y la cultura percibida y deseada de los equipos de tra- bajo. Se realizaron dos estudios independientes con un intervalo de un año entre ambos. El primer es- tudio lo integraron 50 equipos de trabajo pertenecientes a diferentes organizaciones y el segundo estu- dio tuvo una muestra de 75 equipos de trabajo. Para estimar las variables de cultura y cohesión utilizamos el índice de acuerdo de Lindell.
    [Show full text]
  • Moral Rhetoric in Twitter: a Case Study of the U.S
    Moral Rhetoric in Twitter: A Case Study of the U.S. Federal Shutdown of 2013 Eyal Sagi ([email protected]) Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University Evanston, IL 60208 USA Morteza Dehghani ([email protected]) Brain Creativity Institute, University of Southern California Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA Abstract rhetoric is prevalent in political debates (e.g., Marietta, 2009). In this paper we apply a computational text analysis technique used for measuring moral rhetoric in text to analyze the moral Our investigation contributes to the general study of loadings of tweets. We focus our analysis on tweets regarding moral cognition by providing an alternative method for the 2013 federal government shutdown; a topic that was at the measuring moral concerns in a more naturalistic setting forefront of U.S. politics in late 2013. Our results demonstrate compared to self-report survey method and artificial that the positions of the members of the two major political paradigms used in traditional judgment and decision-making parties are mirrored by the positions taken by the Twitter experiments. communities that are aligned with them. We also analyze retweeting behavior by examining the differences in the moral Following Sagi and Dehghani (2013), we define moral loadings of intra-community and inter-community retweets. rhetoric as “the language used for advocating or taking a We find that retweets in our corpus favor rhetoric that moral stance towards an issue by invoking or making salient enhances the cohesion of the community, and emphasize various moral concerns”. Our analysis of moral rhetoric is content over moral rhetoric. We argue that the method grounded in Moral Foundations Theory (Graham et al., proposed in this paper contributes to the general study of 2013; Haidt & Joseph, 2004), which distinguishes between moral cognition and social behavior.
    [Show full text]
  • Group Cohesiveness in the Industrial Work Group
    Group Cohesiveness in the Industrial Work Group by STANLEY E. SEASHORE SURVEY RESEARCH CENTER INSTITUTE FOR SOCIAL RESEARCH UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN—ANN ARBOR 1954 The Institute for Social Research oi the University of Michigan is engaged in basic and applied research Ln the social sciences. The Institute has two main research units. The Survey Research Center is concerned with the Foreword application of sample survey methods to the study of eco• nomic behavior, human relations in organizations, and public attitudes and behavior in relation to public Issues. The Research Center for Group Dynamics studies the be• This Investigation Is one of a series conducted havior of people in groups. The research Is conducted ln within the Human Relations Program of the Survey Research industry, education, government and community life as well as in the laboratory, in an effort to discover the de• Center, Institute for Social Research. This program of research terminants of behavior, of group effectiveness and of human has as its aim the exploration of social and psychological fac• satisfactions. tors related to the effectiveness of organizations. The word Inquiries regarding the Institute and its research "program" is used with its full meaning and the study described program may be addressed to the Director of the Institute. here is but one in a sequence of closely related studies con• ducted over a span of seven years. I am particularly Indebted to Dr. Rensis Likert, Director of the Institute, and to Dr. Robert L. Kahn, Director of the Pro• gram, who provided the data for the study, encouraged the work, and made available the substantial resources, facilities and personal consultation needed for a study of this kind.
    [Show full text]
  • Cohesion in Online Groups
    Cohesion in online groups P. Rogers & M. Lea Dept. Psychology, University of Manchester, UK Abstract Groups are traditionally defined in terms of the interpersonal bonds that exist between group members and thus cohesion is based on the strength of those bonds. The transition of this definition of the group onto online groups leads to attempts to emulate face to face behaviour through presentation of group member pictures, video and detailed personal descriptions. However, this can be problematic due to reduced bandwidth and individual cues necessary for supporting interpersonal behaviour. A social identity approach to groups, in contrast, defines the group in terms of group members' cognitive representation of the group identity, rather than interpersonal bonds. From this perspective cohesion is defined in terms of the strength and salience of the group identity and is not dependent on the transference of interpersonal cues, or constrained by group size. Indeed, interpersonal information can act to the detriment of group cohesion. This counter-intuitive approach to cohesion in online groups has a number of implications in terms of group development and group behaviour in online groups. Two longitudinal field studies of computer-mediated collaborative learning groups investigated these issues. Cohesion in the groups was achieved through the application of this approach to both the design of the group tasks and communication environment, and results showed amongst other things, that cohesion was determined by identification with the group, and that this identification was associated with increased accountability, decreased conflict and, furthermore, positively influenced group productivity (measured by the group mark) through group member prototypicality.
    [Show full text]
  • How Cohesive Are You in Virtual Communities?
    International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences Vol. 10, No. 15, Youth and Community Wellbeing: Issues, Challenges and Opportunities for Empowerment V1. 2020, E-ISSN: 2222-6990 © 2020 HRMARS How Cohesive are You in Virtual Communities? Hamizah Sahharon, Jusang Bolong, Siti Zobidah Omar, Khairuddin Idris To Link this Article: http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v10-i15/8246 DOI:10.6007/IJARBSS/v10-i15/8246 Received: 27 September 2020, Revised: 18 October 2020, Accepted: 11 November 2020 Published Online: 27 November 2020 In-Text Citation: (Sahharon et al., 2020) To Cite this Article: Sahharon, H., Bolong, J., Omar, S. Z., & Idris, K. (2020). How Cohesive are You in Virtual Communities? International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 10(15), 233–252. Copyright: © 2020 The Author(s) Published by Human Resource Management Academic Research Society (www.hrmars.com) This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode Special Issue: Youth and Community Wellbeing: Issues, Challenges and Opportunities for Empowerment V1, 2020, Pg. 233 –252 http://hrmars.com/index.php/pages/detail/IJARBSS JOURNAL HOMEPAGE Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://hrmars.com/index.php/pages/detail/publication-ethics 233 International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • When Do People Trust Their Social Groups?
    When Do People Trust Their Social Groups? Xiao Ma1†, Justin Cheng2, Shankar Iyer2, Mor Naaman1 1Jacobs Institute, Cornell Tech, 2Facebook {xiao,mor}@jacobs.cornell.edu,{jcheng,shankar94}@fb.com ABSTRACT 1 INTRODUCTION Trust facilitates cooperation and supports positive outcomes Trust contributes to the success of social groups by encourag- in social groups, including member satisfaction, information ing people to interpret others’ actions and intentions favor- sharing, and task performance. Extensive prior research has ably, thereby facilitating cooperation and a sense of commu- examined individuals’ general propensity to trust, as well as nity [5, 22, 33, 55, 60, 74]. In groups, trust increases member the factors that contribute to their trust in specific groups. satisfaction, and task performance; reduces conflict [33, 77]; Here, we build on past work to present a comprehensive and promotes effective response to crisis [53]. framework for predicting trust in groups. By surveying 6,383 Previous research has examined how different factors such Facebook Groups users about their trust attitudes and ex- as size [13, 21, 83], group cohesiveness [38], and activity [77] amining aggregated behavioral and demographic data for may impact people’s trust in their social groups, both on- these individuals, we show that (1) an individual’s propen- line [39] and offline [67]. However, previous studies tend sity to trust is associated with how they trust their groups, to be small in scale, limited to specific contexts (e.g., online (2) groups that are smaller, closed, older, more exclusive or marketplaces), or only consider a specific type of group more homogeneous are trusted more, and (3) a group’s over- (e.g., organizations [18, 50]).
    [Show full text]
  • Incorporating Actor Variables in Statistical Network Models
    Beyond Homophily: Incorporating Actor Variables in Statistical Network Models Tom A.B. Snijders University of Groningen, University of Oxford Department of Sociology, Grote Rozenstraat 31, 9712TG Groningen, The Netherlands Alessandro Lomi University of Italian Switzerland, Lugano October 17, 2018 1 Beyond Homophily: Incorporating Actor Variables in Statistical Network Models Abstract We consider the specification of effects of numerical actor attributes, measured according to an interval level of measurement, in statistical models for directed social networks. A fundamental mechanism is ho- mophily or assortativity, where actors have a higher likelihood to be tied with others having similar values of the variable under study. But there are other mechanisms that may also play a role in how the at- tribute values of two actors influence the likelihood of a tie between them. We discuss three additional mechanisms: aspiration, defined as the tendency to send more ties to others having high values; what we call attachment conformity, defined by sending more ties to others whose values are close to what may be considered the `social norm'; and sociability, where those having higher values will tend to send more ties generally. These mechanisms may operate jointly, and then their effects will be confounded. We present a specification representing these effects simultaneously by a four-parameter quadratic function of the values of sender and receiver. Greater flexibility can be obtained by a five-parameter extension. We argue that empirical researchers often overlook the possibility that homophily may be confounded with these other mechanisms, and that for numerical actor attributes that have important effects on directed networks, these specifications may provide an improvement.
    [Show full text]
  • The Group-Member Mind Trade-Off: Attributing Mind to Groups Versus Group Members
    Research Article Psychological Science 23(1) 77 –85 The Group-Member Mind Trade-Off: © The Author(s) 2012 Reprints and permission: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Attributing Mind to Groups Versus DOI: 10.1177/0956797611423546 Group Members http://pss.sagepub.com Adam Waytz1 and Liane Young2 1Management and Organizations Department, Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, and 2Department of Psychology, Boston College Abstract People attribute minds to other individuals and make inferences about those individuals’ mental states to explain and predict their behavior. Little is known, however, about whether people also attribute minds to groups and believe that collectives, companies, and corporations can think, have intentions, and make plans. Even less is known about the consequences of these attributions for both groups and group members. We investigated the attribution of mind and responsibility to groups and group members, and we demonstrated that people make a trade-off: The more a group is attributed a group mind, the less members of that group are attributed individual minds. Groups that are judged to have more group mind are also judged to be more cohesive and responsible for their collective actions. These findings have important implications for how people perceive the minds of groups and group members, and for how attributions of mind influence attributions of responsibility to groups and group members. Keywords groups, theory of mind, mind attribution, morality, responsibility, law, social cognition, legal processes Received 3/3/11; Revision accepted 7/18/11 People recognize that others around them can think, have attributions of mind to the members of the same group.
    [Show full text]
  • European Union Politics
    European Union Politics http://eup.sagepub.com/ View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by DSpace at VU The Dimensionality of the EU Policy Space : The European Elections of 1999 Paul Pennings European Union Politics 2002 3: 59 DOI: 10.1177/1465116502003001004 The online version of this article can be found at: http://eup.sagepub.com/content/3/1/59 Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com Additional services and information for European Union Politics can be found at: Email Alerts: http://eup.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://eup.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: http://eup.sagepub.com/content/3/1/59.refs.html Downloaded from eup.sagepub.com at Vrije Universiteit 34820 on April 9, 2011 04 Pennings (jr/d) 1/2/02 9:00 am Page 59 European Union Politics The Dimensionality of the EU [1465-1165(200203)3:1] Volume 3 (1): 59–80: 021225 Policy Space Copyright© 2002 SAGE Publications The European Elections of 1999 London, Thousand Oaks CA, New Delhi Paul Pennings Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands ABSTRACT In any full-grown democracy, parties must confront voters with real choices that matter. The European Union is often said to be devoid of these choices owing to minor policy differences between parties. The manifestos issued at European Parliament elections by party groups are often perceived as being bland and indistinguishable from each other. How correct is this perception? In this article, the diversity of policy positions within and between the main European party groups is analyzed by means of the Euro- pean election manifestos of 1999.
    [Show full text]
  • The Relation Between Self-Efficacy and Group Cohesiveness Perceptions of Professional Men and Woman's Football Team (Ankara Province Example)
    Universal Journal of Management 8(2): 33-38, 2020 http://www.hrpub.org DOI: 10.13189/ujm.2020.080202 The Relation between Self-Efficacy and Group Cohesiveness Perceptions of Professional Men and Woman's Football Team (Ankara Province Example) Faruk Aydin1, Hakan Sunay2, Erdal Bal3, Erdem Ayyildiz2 1Faculty of Sport Sciences, Lokman Hekim University, Turkey 2Faculty of Sports Sciences, Ankara University, Turkey 3Faculty of Life Sciences, Health Sciences University, Turkey Received November 6, 2019; Revised December 28, 2019; Accepted December 30,2019; Copyright©2020 by authors, all rights reserved. Authors agree that this article remains permanently open access under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International License Abstract The Purpose of the study is to determine 1 . Introduction whether there is a meaningful difference between the self-efficacy and self-efficacy perceptions of the In our developing world, football has ceased to be a footballers (gender, marital status, age and education level game and has become an industry. In this industry, various etc.) according to their personal qualities. The sample of studies have been carried out to determine the group fit and the work consists of professional male and female soccer self-perception of the athletes in the teams. When the teams in Ankara. A total of 354 athletes from 10 male to 5 matches played on the team sports during the season are female soccer teams participated in the study. 128 female evaluated, it can be seen that the athletes who have soccer players and 226 male soccer players participated. discrepancies in the team at different times during the The majority of the athletes participating in the survey are season do not feel compatible with the group or do not between the ages of 19-23.
    [Show full text]
  • Testing Matching and Mirroring with Homophily in Onboarding Leadership Socialization Manuel Almendarez Walden University
    Walden University ScholarWorks Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Collection 2018 Testing Matching and Mirroring With Homophily in Onboarding Leadership Socialization Manuel Almendarez Walden University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations Part of the Business Administration, Management, and Operations Commons, Management Sciences and Quantitative Methods Commons, and the Organizational Behavior and Theory Commons This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Collection at ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Walden University College of Management and Technology This is to certify that the doctoral dissertation by Manuel Almendarez has been found to be complete and satisfactory in all respects, and that any and all revisions required by the review committee have been made. Review Committee Dr. Richard Schuttler, Committee Chairperson, Management Faculty Dr. Daphne Halkias, Committee Member, Management Faculty Dr. Jean Gordon, University Reviewer, Management Faculty Chief Academic Officer Eric Riedel, Ph.D. Walden University 2018 Abstract Testing Matching and Mirroring With Homophily in Onboarding Leadership Socialization by Manuel Almendarez MBA, University of Phoenix, 2007 BBA, Houston Baptist University, 2002 Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Leadership and Organizational Change Walden University February 2018 Abstract This study was designed to test the relationship between matching and mirroring (MM) and homophilous perceptions (PHM) in leadership socialization. Elevated PHM levels were hypothesized to affect workplace acceptance levels.
    [Show full text]