Group Processes Pt2
Tasks in groups: The Ringelmann Effect
• Social loafing
o Ringelmann (1913, 1927) found that men pulling on a rope attached to a
dynamometer exerted less force than the number of people in the group
o (more detail in ppt)
• Reasons for the effect:
o Coordination loss: as group size inhibits movement, distraction and jostling
o Motivation loss: participants did not try as hard; less motivated
Social Loafing
• Ingham et al. (1974)
o Investigated this with 'real groups' and 'pseudo-groups' pulling on a rope;
participant blind-folded
▪ Real group: Groups of varying size
▪ Pseudo-group: Only one true participant, rest were
confederates who did not pull at all
• Latané et al. (1979) supported this through clapping, shouting, and cheering tasks
• Recorded amount of cheering/clapping noise made per person reduced by:
o 29% in 2-person groups
o 49% in 4-person groups
o 60% in 6-person groups
• Why do people loaf?
o Geen (1991)
▪ Output equity
• When people learn others are not pulling their
weight, they too can lose motivation and put less
effort in
▪ Evaluation apprehension
• Individuals only believe their efforts are being
judged when they perform alone; in groups, people
are not accountable
Impact of groups on performance
• How can we reduce social loafing?
o Identifiability: when people's individual contributions to a task can be
identified
o Individual responsibility: when people know they can make a unique
contribution to a task
• The collective effort model
o People put effort into a group task when:
▪ They believe their input will have an impact
▪ Completing the task is likley to bring them something they
value, which could include:
Tasks in groups: The Ringelmann Effect
• Social loafing
o Ringelmann (1913, 1927) found that men pulling on a rope attached to a
dynamometer exerted less force than the number of people in the group
o (more detail in ppt)
• Reasons for the effect:
o Coordination loss: as group size inhibits movement, distraction and jostling
o Motivation loss: participants did not try as hard; less motivated
Social Loafing
• Ingham et al. (1974)
o Investigated this with 'real groups' and 'pseudo-groups' pulling on a rope;
participant blind-folded
▪ Real group: Groups of varying size
▪ Pseudo-group: Only one true participant, rest were
confederates who did not pull at all
• Latané et al. (1979) supported this through clapping, shouting, and cheering tasks
• Recorded amount of cheering/clapping noise made per person reduced by:
o 29% in 2-person groups
o 49% in 4-person groups
o 60% in 6-person groups
• Why do people loaf?
o Geen (1991)
▪ Output equity
• When people learn others are not pulling their
weight, they too can lose motivation and put less
effort in
▪ Evaluation apprehension
• Individuals only believe their efforts are being
judged when they perform alone; in groups, people
are not accountable
Impact of groups on performance
• How can we reduce social loafing?
o Identifiability: when people's individual contributions to a task can be
identified
o Individual responsibility: when people know they can make a unique
contribution to a task
• The collective effort model
o People put effort into a group task when:
▪ They believe their input will have an impact
▪ Completing the task is likley to bring them something they
value, which could include:
