How Are We Similar? Group Level Entitativity in Work and Social Groups

IF 3 3区 心理学 Q2 MANAGEMENT Small Group Research Pub Date : 2022-08-25 DOI:10.1177/10464964221117483
Anita L. Blanchard, Andrew G. McBride, B. Ernst
{"title":"How Are We Similar? Group Level Entitativity in Work and Social Groups","authors":"Anita L. Blanchard, Andrew G. McBride, B. Ernst","doi":"10.1177/10464964221117483","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Entitativity is essential for individuals to experience a grouping of people as a “group.” However, entitativity is primarily studied at the individual level. If it is truly a fundamental component of group outcomes and processes, it should be considered a group-level construct. We establish that group members can share entitativity perceptions. We propose that entitativity develops in work and social groups through different self-categorization processes. Social groups can take advantage of top-down processes to establish similarity of goals and characteristics. Workgroups use both top-down and bottom-up processes with differing effects on these two forms of similarity. We propose that shared entitativity affects individual level attitudes and behavior. Results support our theoretical model. Shared entitativity explains between 2% and 11% of outcome variance in workgroups and 3% to 14% of the outcome variance in social groups. Shared similarity relates to shared entitativity differently for social and workgroups. Shared entitativity is theoretically and practically important for successful groups.","PeriodicalId":47912,"journal":{"name":"Small Group Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Small Group Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10464964221117483","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Entitativity is essential for individuals to experience a grouping of people as a “group.” However, entitativity is primarily studied at the individual level. If it is truly a fundamental component of group outcomes and processes, it should be considered a group-level construct. We establish that group members can share entitativity perceptions. We propose that entitativity develops in work and social groups through different self-categorization processes. Social groups can take advantage of top-down processes to establish similarity of goals and characteristics. Workgroups use both top-down and bottom-up processes with differing effects on these two forms of similarity. We propose that shared entitativity affects individual level attitudes and behavior. Results support our theoretical model. Shared entitativity explains between 2% and 11% of outcome variance in workgroups and 3% to 14% of the outcome variance in social groups. Shared similarity relates to shared entitativity differently for social and workgroups. Shared entitativity is theoretically and practically important for successful groups.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
我们有什么相似之处?工作和社会群体中的群体层次的实体性
实体性对于个体体验一群人作为一个“群体”是必不可少的。然而,实体性主要是在个人层面上研究的。如果它真的是群体结果和过程的基本组成部分,它应该被认为是一个群体层次的结构。我们确定群体成员可以共享实体感知。我们提出实体性在工作和社会群体中通过不同的自我分类过程发展。社会群体可以利用自上而下的过程来建立目标和特征的相似性。工作组使用自顶向下和自底向上的过程,对这两种形式的相似性有不同的影响。我们认为共享实体影响个人层面的态度和行为。结果支持我们的理论模型。在工作群体中,共有的实体性解释了2%到11%的结果差异,在社会群体中解释了3%到14%的结果差异。对于社会群体和工作群体来说,共享相似性与共享实体的关系是不同的。共享实体对于成功的团队在理论上和实践上都很重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
5.40%
发文量
37
期刊介绍: Policy: Small Group Research is an international and interdisciplinary journal presenting research, theoretical advancements, and empirically supported applications with respect to all types of small groups. Through advancing the systematic study of small groups, this journal seeks to increase communication among all who are professionally interested in group phenomena.
期刊最新文献
Group Dynamics in the Metaverse: A Conceptual Framework and First Empirical Insights The Science (and Practice) of Teamwork: A Commentary on Forty Years of Progress… Hybrid Teamwork: What We Know and Where We Can Go From Here A Conceptualization of Mood Influences on Group Judgment and Decision Making: The Key Function of Dominant Cognitive Processing Strategies Virtual Teams: Taking Stock and Moving Forward
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1