Factors Related To Group Cohesiveness

Roark, Albert E.; Sharah, Hussein S.

doi:10.1177/104649648902000105

Cited by 53 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, several researchers have found that children and youth exposed to chronic community violence are at risk for academic problems, such as poor achievement and grade retention~Mazza & Overstreet, 2000!. In contrast, safety and trust contributes positively to intimacy within a group, and is a factor that underlies adolescent willingness to engage in community action~McLaughlin, Irby, & Langman, 1994;Roark & Sharah, 1989!.…”

Section: Neighborhood Resources and Safetymentioning

confidence: 95%

Neighborhood experiences, community connection, and positive beliefs about adolescents among urban adults and youth

Zeldin

Topitzes

2002

Journal Community Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Neighborhood Resources and Safetymentioning

confidence: 95%

Neighborhood experiences, community connection, and positive beliefs about adolescents among urban adults and youth

Zeldin

Topitzes

2002

Journal Community Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Cohesiveness is a key theoretical construct to describe the ''group-ness'' of individuals constituting an interactive small team (Hogg, 1992;Shaw, 1980). As individuals extend their trust to others, they create a work environment that is characterized by mutual empathy, a willingness to accept others, and a high level of cohesiveness (Roark & Hussen, 1989). This high level of cohesiveness, in turn, leads to the members' deep identification with a team (Roark & Hussen 1989).…”

Section: Effect Of Trust On Cohesivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Exploratory Study of Trust Dynamics in Work-Oriented Virtual Teams

Kuo

2009

Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study explores trust development and maintenance in temporary, work-oriented virtual teams, and examines the effect of trust on communication and cohesiveness. Results suggest that for work-oriented virtual teams formed on a temporary basis, members swiftly develop calculus-based trust in order to assess the outcomes and costs of maintaining team relationships. Members also rely on prior knowledge to determine other members' competence so that they can make predictions about one another's behaviors. Thus, both calculus-based and knowledge-based trust play accentuating roles in the initial development of work-oriented virtual teams. Identification-based trust also develops swiftly initially, but is relatively insignificant compared to the other two types of trust. Finally, initial trust may correlate to both later communication and later cohesiveness.Key words: work-oriented virtual teams, trust development doi:10.1111/j. 1083-6101.2009.01472.x IntroductionComputer-mediated communication (CMC) technology, such as the Internet, has the potential to overcome spatial and temporal barriers in human communication. CMC systems are sociotechnical systems for supporting such activities as knowledge learning and sharing free from constraints of time and place. Work-oriented virtual teams, composed of parties that have not worked together previously, are becoming the norm in organizations for completing temporary team tasks or project engagements Jarvenpaa, Shaw, & Staples;McKnight, Cummings, & Chervany, 1998). Unlike the traditional teams that are allowed to develop slowly, these teams are required to be effective in completing tasks and meeting various demands from the beginning to the end of the group life. This is especially visible as companies rely more and more on outsourcing in their business operations. In this pursuit, many researchers have focused on understanding the role of trust in influencing the performance of work-oriented virtual teams (Tyler . Trust is ''a state involving confident positive expectations about another's motives with respect to oneself in situations entailing risk '' (Boon & Holmes, 1991, p. 194). For teams in traditionally physical settings, trust has been seen as an essential part of a healthy personality (Erikson, 1997;McKing, Choudhury, & Kacmar, 2002;Shaver & Hazan, 1994), as a foundation for interpersonal relations (Ba & Pavou, 2002;Brown, Poole, & Rodgers, 2004), as a foundation for cooperation (McKnight et al., 1998), and as the basis for stability in social institutions (Aubert & Kelsey, 2003;Larsen & McInerney, 2002;Paul & McDaniel, 2004;Jarvenpaa et al., 2004). 823 &Yet, for temporary, work-oriented virtual teams consisting of members that are geographically dispersed and accountable to different stakeholders, responses often are not synchronized and information exchange can become decoupled from events (Jarvenpaa & Leidner 1998). Hence, there exists much difficulty in monitoring and managing team performance (Chidambaram, 1996;Kollock & Smith, 1996;Paul & McDaniel, 2004;...

show abstract

“…Worker solidarity is a key concept in the sociology of work (Hodson 2001). Social psychologists have repeatedly returned to issues surrounding cohesion and solidarity, attempting to understand both its nature (Bollen and Hoyle 1990;Gross and Martin 1952;Roark and Shara 1989) and consequences (Carron 1982;Hansell 1984).…”

Section: Structural Cohesion and Embeddedness: A Hierarchical Conceptmentioning

confidence: 99%