The Kohler Effect: Motivation Gains and Losses in Real Sports Groups
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263913136 The Kohler Effect: Motivation Gains and Losses in Real Sports Groups Article · November 2012 DOI: 10.1037/a0026887 CITATIONS READS 9 892 4 authors, including: Brandon Irwin Deborah Feltz Kansas State University Michigan State University 13 PUBLICATIONS 125 CITATIONS 182 PUBLICATIONS 4,897 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE All content following this page was uploaded by Brandon Irwin on 21 July 2014. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology © 2012 American Psychological Association 2012, Vol. 00, No. 00, 000–000 2157-3905/12/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0026887 The Köhler Effect: Motivation Gains and Losses in Real Sports Groups Kaitlynn A. Osborn and Brandon C. Irwin Nikolaus J. Skogsberg Michigan State University Northeastern University Deborah L. Feltz Michigan State University Two investigations aimed to document motivation gains and losses (the Köhler effect and social-loafing effects) in real-life group work. Specifically, using archival data, motivation changes were analyzed from individual to additive group competition in collegiate swim, and high school track and field relays. Results showed that inferior group members had significantly greater motivation gains than noninferior teammates in preliminary and final swim races. Motivation gains also were significantly higher in the final compared to the preliminary race. Similar results were replicated with the track and field athletes with the weakest member of the team showing larger difference scores from individual to group competition compared to middle-ranked and higher-ranked teammates. On the whole, both studies provide ecological support for the Köhler effect, and that inferior team members showed the greatest motivation gains. No significant differences were found to support social-loafing effects within the same groups, but performances of superior group members tended to be slower. Keywords: Köhler effect, social facilitation, social loafing The motivational influence of performance in theories are based on a cognitive view of moti- groups has been a heavily studied topic in social vation. Within this perspective, thoughts are psychology literature. This research has typically proposed as the antecedents in which motiva- focused on motivation losses in groups, with par- tion intensity and direction are derived (Rob- ticular interest in the phenomenon of social loaf- erts, 1992). The Köhler motivation gain effect ing, or the tendency for individuals to exert less and social compensation are two such phenom- effort when working in a group than when work- ena. Social compensation occurs when superior ing individually (Baron & Kerr, 2003; Karau & group members increase individual effort to Williams, 1993; Latane´, Williams, & Harkins, make up for the lack of ability or effort of 1979). However, more recently, the literature has less-capable group members in a highly valued shifted toward examining the opposite phenome- task (Williams & Karau, 1991). The Köhler non—motivation gains. effect occurs when less-capable group members The motivation literature is composed of a increase their efforts on group tasks, particu- variety of theories, and the majority of these larly in highly interdependent tasks. The current study seeks to investigate when motivation gains and losses occur from individual to group competition in real-world sports teams and if Kaitlynn A. Osborn, Brandon C. Irwin, and Deborah L. explanations for motivation gain or loss phe- Feltz, Department of Kinesiology, Michigan State Univer- nomena observed in basic social psychology sity; Nikolaus J. Skogsberg, Department of Psychology, Northeastern University. research can inform such an investigation. We thank Norbert Kerr for his insightful comments dur- The Köhler motivation gain effect occurs ing the preparation of this article. when less-capable individuals perform better Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed when performing a task with others, as com- to Kaitlynn A. Osborn, Department of Kinesiology, Michigan State University, 134 IM Sports Circle, East Lansing, MI pared to when performing a task individually 48824. E-mail: [email protected] (Baron & Kerr, 2003). First discovered by Otto 1 2 OSBORN, IRWIN, SKOGSBERG, AND FELTZ Köhler in the 1920s, there have been a variety ity in the successful completion of a group task of studies dedicated to examining this effect that motivates one to increase his or her efforts. (Kerr & MacCoun, 1985; Kerr, Messe´, Park, & In such a case, motivation gains should be Sambolec, 2005; Kerr & Sullaway, 1983; strongest in conjunctive tasks, meaning that a Weber & Hertel, 2007). For example Hertel, group’s performance will only be as strong as Kerr, and Messe´ (2000) used a motor persis- that of its weakest member (Hertel, Niemeyer, tence task in which participants held a metal bar & Clauss, 2008; Kerr et al., 2007). Thus, infe- at arm’s length for as long as possible. In the rior group members should exhibit the greatest group condition, partners held the bar over a increases in effort in group tasks, because the rope, so when one partner quit both partners had group’s performance will rely entirely on their to stop because the first arm to touch the rope performance. A second mechanism suggests stopped the timer. When participants performed that it is the opportunity for social comparison in both an individual and a group condition, less that elicits motivation gains. That is, in the capable participants held the bar longer in the presence of superior group members, inferior group condition than they did in the individual group members may (a) revise personal perfor- condition. The Köhler motivation gain effect mance goals upward or (b) make successful focuses on the effort of a task as a measure of competition his or her performance goal (Kerr motivation. Much of the literature reviewed in- et al., 2007). Either way, it is the opportunity for terprets performance differences as direct evi- social comparison that permits these processes dence of motivation gains or losses when such to occur. It is likely that both the social com- an inference cannot be assumed without direct parison and indispensability mechanisms are measurement of motivation. Motivation gains occurring simultaneously in group tasks, al- are inferred from performance differences, though the strongest motivation gains have been which, in turn, are inferred to be determined by found in conjunctive tasks, especially so for effort, and then inferred to be evidence of mo- women (Kerr et al., 2007; Weber & Hertel, tivation. Even though this may be seen as a 2007). Women have been found to focus on weakness, it is difficult to measure motivation relational aspects in groups more so than men, directly because it is a cognitive process. hence, this may be why women show more The motivation gain of the Köhler effect, motivation for conjunctive tasks. however, has shown to be task-dependent Several boundary conditions, when in place, (Weber & Hertel, 2007). Based on Steiner’s have produced the largest motivation gains. For task taxonomy (1972), there are at least three instance, it is important for group members to different types of tasks relevant for examining receive feedback about the group’s performance group motivation phenomena: conjunctive, co- (Seta, 1982). When knowledge of one’s partner active, and additive. A conjunctive task is one in is not available, the effect attenuates (Kerr et al., which the performance of the group is based on 2005). Second, the greatest increases in motiva- the weaker member’s performance. In a coact- tion occur when the weaker group member’s ive task, group members are performing the task performance is roughly 1.4 times lower than at the same time but their performances are other group members’ (Messe´, Hertel, Kerr, independent of each other. An additive task is Lount, & Park, 2002). If the discrepancy be- one in which the group’s performance is defined tween the weakest and most capable member is by the sum of the group members’ perfor- too large, motivation losses (or free-riding) has mances. Although Köhler motivation gains been found to occur (Hertel et al., 2008). In have been documented in additive and coactive addition, Feltz, Irwin, and Kerr (2011) recently tasks (which have many real-world and sports found that motivation attenuates as a result of team analogs), previous findings suggest that too high of a discrepancy. Finally, sex has been conjunctive group tasks, performed with mod- found to moderate motivation gains. Women erately superior partners, will result in the larg- have shown higher motivation gains under ad- est motivation gain for the weakest performing ditive task demands compared to coactive de- group member (Weber & Hertel, 2007). mands and even higher gains under conjunctive Two plausible explanations for the Köhler task demands. This suggests that, although a effect have been proposed (Kerr et al., 2007). group outcome is sufficient to produce motivation The first suggests that it is one’s indispensabil- gains in women, they are particularly sensitive to KOHLER EFFECT 3 conjunctive tasks demands, unlike men. Men have requires an equitable performance level from been shown to exhibit motivation gains when in- each member, social loafing is eliminated. formation is provided about a superior coworker When these different conditions, as outlined by (i.e., coactive tasks),