Experiencing Diversity, Conflict, and Emotions in Teams

Abstract

Diversity in teams has been previously defined in terms of the nominal categories into which team members "fall". The core argument of this paper is that diversity is a subjective experience of social categories to which members "feel" they belong. These categories, or social identities, may become more or less salient in different contexts and at different times. We propose a model of diversity in teams that explains under what conditions these social identities become salient and how these social identities may influence appraisals of issues and events. These appraisals, in turn, can influence conflict and emotion. This dynamic view of diversity provides us with a better understanding of the "black box" --the cognitive and affective processes that may help to explain behavior and subsequently team performance.

Interrelation between regulatory and socioemotional processes within collaborative groups characterized by facilitative and directive other-regulation

“…However, for some groups, unresolved disagreement can transform into socioemotional challenge or relational conflicts (Darnon, Doll, & Butera, 2007). The negative socioemotional processes that predominate group activity are in competition for limited attentional resources (Barron, 2003) and provoke interactions characterized by disengagement, or disrespectful, critical, and low cohesive exchanges (De Dreu & Weingart, 2003;Garcia-Prieto, Bellard, & Schneider, 2003;Jehn & Mannix, 2001;Webb, Ing, Kersting, & Nemer, 2006). In harsher circumstances, socioemotional challenge can devolve into battles related to status differences, with the aim of outperforming others (Salomon & Globerson, 1989).…”

Regulation of emotions in socially challenging learning situations: an instrument to measure the adaptive and social nature of the regulation process

“…Research on motivation and self-regulation, in particular the regulation of motivation and emotions, was reviewed (Ainley & Hidi, 2002;Azmitia, 2000;Boekaerts, 2002;McCann & Garcia, 1999;Pintrich, Smith, Garcia, & McKeachie, 1991;Schutz et al, 2004;Wolters, 2003). Ultimately, the theoretical foundation of the instrument was grounded in a combination of contemporary theories of SRL, especially regulation of motivation and emotions and former empirical work on motivation in reallife learning contexts (Järvelä et al, 2010), emotional experience in collaborative learning (Järvenoja & Järvelä, 2005) and strategies for handling socially challenging learning activities (Burdett, 2003;Garcia-Prieto, Bellard, & Schneider, 2003;Volet & Mansfield, 2006).…”

Significance of context in university students' (meta)cognitions related to group work: A multi-layered, multi-dimensional and cultural approach

“…Yet, despite all the potentially beneficial effects of group work in academic learning, there is a parallel, strong and converging body of literature documenting students' negative perceptions (Pauli, Mohiyeddini, Bray, Michie, & Street, 2007;Volet & Mansfield, 2006) and experiences of socioemotional as well as socio-cultural challenges (Burdett, 2003;Garcia-Prieto, Bellard, & Schneider, 2003). Potential problems include unmotivated peers (Bourner, Hughes, & Bourner, 2001), communication difficulties (Salomon & Globerson, 1989), challenges in the management of workload (Feichtner & Davis, 1985) and frustration with group assessment (Livingston & Lynch, 2000).…”