Effects Of Group Composition Research Articles

Individual Shifts and the Group-Shift Phenomenon

The effect of group composition on individual decisions was investigated by having nine 3-man groups discuss caution-oriented life dilemma items. Results indicated: (1) that there are individual changes in decision which are not reflected in an over-all group change; (2) stability of decisions is influenced by item orientation; (3) that majority position exerts disproportionate influence on group decisions; (4) that homogeneous groups do not shift; and (5) that conformity, compromise and attitude change effects are evident. Results were discussed in terms of their relevance to a number of theories.

Socio-bioenergetics and sexual dimorphism in primates

Socio-bioenergetics is presented as a practical method of estimating energy budgets of primates in a social context. Energy budgets are estimated on the basis of behavioral observations and a series of empirical formulae, which consider body weight, activity, and reproductive status. Data on a captive colony of Sykes' monkeys and baboons are incorporated as illustrations of the possible effects of group composition, body size, reproductive status, and activity patterns on energy requirements.

The Effect of Group Composition and Duration On Sensitivity Training

The Effect of Group Composition and Duration On Sensitivity Training

Group composition effects on risk taking1

Group composition effects on risk taking¹

Group composition and group performance of structured and unstructured tasks

Twelve 3-man groups performed on an unstructured problem-solving task and on a structured role-following task. Half of the groups contained more abstract members than concrete members, the other half the reverse. Some of the groups were homogeneous on both abstractness (Abs) and dominance (Dom), others were homogeneous on one and heterogeneous on the other, or heterogeneous on both. Groups of intermediate heterogeneity (homo-geneous: Abs; heterogeneous: Dom) performed most poorly on the structured task and best on the unstructured task while displaying the least amount of group structuring on both. Groups in which abstract subjects predominated outperformed groups predominantly of concrete subjects on the unstructured task; no differences occurred on the structured task. It was concluded that the effects of group composition are both additive and interactive, and are mediated by task demands as well.

Group Composition Models for Laboratory Design

The purpose of this paper is to develop a prescriptive model for the composition of groups to maximize the interpersonal exploration and learning of their members. Research, experience, and theory from several areas of inquiry are drawn upon to this end. A learning model is proposed in which interpersonal exploration and growth of the individual take place through (1) commitment to and expression of his preferred ways of perceiving and relating to others; (2) confrontation with perceptions and behaviors of others which stimulate; (3) exploration of meaningful alternatives to this individual's preferred style. Personal style and learning are considered in the light of research and experience. These suggest that the growth of persons who are relatively passive or inaccessible to their own emotions may be inhibited by the incompatibility between their personal styles and the learning model. The effects of group climate on the opportunity to follow the learning model are examined for persons of differing personal styles. It is proposed that the optimum group climate for learning provides both group support for one's current orientation and behavioral styles as well as confrontation with meaningful alternatives to one's preferred ways of operating. Group composition effects on member behavior and emotional climate are reviewed for evidence that it is feasible to manipulate the interpersonal environment by appropriate selection of group members. A model, the "multiplier effect," is proposed to account for the apparent ease with which group climate may be controlled in this way. An application of the theory and research to the control of group climate for the facilitation of learning is described, and the design implications of converging lines of theory, experience, and research are discussed.

A Technique for Analyzing the Effects of Group Composition

NEITHER problem we shall discuss nor its general solution is new. Indeed, germ of whole idea is contained in Durkheim's The Rules of Sociological Method.' The problem is this: Given data on individuals within specified aggregates (groups, counties, nations) what inferences can one make about nature of an effect at different levels of aggregation? Thus, for instance, finding that Catholic nations have lower suicide rates is consistent with any of following inferences: (1) Catholics are less likely to commit suicide regardless of religious composition of nation; (2) In countries with many Catholics, both Catholics and Protestants are less likely to commit suicide, but within a given country there is no religious difference in suicide; (3) Catholics are more likely to commit suicide than are Protestants, but both religions have lower suicide rates where there are many Catholics; (4) Regardless of country, Catholics have a constant suicide rate, but suicide rate for Protestants declines with proportion of Catholics. All these statements assert some sort of relationship between religion and suicide, but they differ widely in their substantive implications, because they differ in their assumptions about nature of effect at individual level (religious differences within a given nation) and group level (differences between persons of same religion in different nations). The statistical principle underlying these ambiguities has been recognized for some time. It has been stated negatively as the fallacy of ecological correlation. 2 Patricia Kendall and Paul F. Lazarsfeld, however, in analyzing methodological problems in The American Soldier, suggest that principle can lead to positive gains if data allow for simultaneous group and individual level analyses. They write: