Performance Flashcards
Social Facilitation Norman Triplett studies of bycyclists
Alone < paced by motor < competing with others
If other people are competing in your presence you perform better
it indicates that people’s performance improves whn they work with others. Social facilitation occurs for both coaction tasks and audience tasks.
Social facilitation
An improvement in task performance that occurs when people work in the presence of other people.
Social Facilitation Floyd Allport
We should do everything in groups because we then perform better.
Robert Zajonc Theory of social facilitation (Hull Spence drive)
In the presence of others, social facilitation only occurs whn the task requites a dominant respons and then you have performance gain
Zajonc concluded social facilitation usually occurs when a simple task requires dominant responses, whereas social interference or impairment occurs for complex tasks that require nondominant responses. Studies conducted in a variety of settings have confirmed the effect, which also holds for many species— including cockroaches.
Coation
Performing a task or another type of goal-oriented activity in the presence of one or more other individuals who are performing a similar type of activity.
Zajonc thinks arousal comes from….
Cottrel thinks arousal comes from….
Baron & Sanders thinks arousal comes from….
compresence
Evaluation apprehension
Distraction-conflict
Zajonc Drive theory / the compresence explanation? Social facilitation: arousal comes from compresence
Drive theory = In general, an analysis of human motivation that stresses the impact of psychological or physio logical needs or desires on individuals’ thoughts, feelings, and actions; also an explanation of social facilitation that maintains that the presence of others evokes a generalized drive state characterized by increased readiness and arousal (proposed by Robert Zajonc).
Drive theory (Zajonc) argues that the mere presence of a member of the same species (compresence) raises the performer’s arousal level by touching off a basic alertness response.
In the maze on the left cockroaches had a simple task: to go from the starting point down the runway to the darkened box. They performed this feat faster when other roaches were watching than when they were alone. In the maze on the right, the cockroaches had a more difficult task. It took them longer to solve this maze when other roaches were watching when they were alone.
Cottrell Social facilitation arousal comes from evaluation apprehension
Being evaluated is arousing. The presence of others implies potential evaluation. If others are present but clearlu can’t evaluate, social facilitation should disappear.
Cottrell ’s evaluation apprehension theory proposes that the presence of others increases arousal only when individuals feel that they are being evaluated.
Evaluation apprehension theory = An analysis of performance gains in groups arguing that individuals working in the presence of others experience a general concern for how these others are evaluating them and that this apprehension facilitates their performance on simple, well-learned tasks.
Baron & Sanders - Distraction conflict theory
Social facilitation arousal comes from distraction conflict because the presence of others is distracting. Being distracted from a task is arousing.
Distraction alone should be sufficient to cause “social” facilitation.
Distraction–conflict theory emphasizes the mediational role played by distraction, attentional conflict, and increased motivation.
Distraction–conflict theory = An analysis of performance gains in groups assuming that when others are present, attention is divided between the other people and the task; this attentional conflict increases motivation, and it facilitates performance on simple, well-learned tasks.
Self presentation theory Goffman
Self presentation theory (Goffman) suggests that this apprehension is greatest when performance may threaten the group member’s public image.
Self-presentation theory = An analysis of performance gains in groups assuming that social facilitation is caused by individuals striving to make a good impression when they work in the presence of others.
The ringelman effect (Max Ringelmann)
The tendency, for people to become less productive when they work with others; this loss of efficiency increases as group size increases, but at a gradually decreasing rate.
Groups become less productive as they increase in size. This Ringelmann effect is caused by coordination losses and by social loafing—the reduction of individual effort when people work in a group.
For example: People could lift more weight than one, but not twice as much.
Two causes of the ringelmann effect? - Latané, Williams, and Harkins
- Coordination loss: People cannot combine their efforts with maximum efficiency.
- Social Loafing: The reduction of individual effort exerted when people work in groups compared to when they work alone.
Social loafing, and factors that influence it? (5)
The reduction of individual effort exerted when people work in groups compared to when they work alone.
- Increasing Identifiability: When people feel as though their level of effort cannot be ascertained because the task is a collective one, then social loafing becomes likely. But when people feel that they are being evaluated, they tend to exert more effort, and their productivity increases.
- Minimize Free riding: Individuals expend less effort if they believe others will compensate for their lack of productivity and to avoid being the “sucker” who works too hard (the sucker effect).
- Set Goals: Groups that set clear, challenging goals outperform groups whose members have no clear performance standards.
- Involvement: Loafing is less likely when people work at exciting, challenging, and involving tasks. Members sometimes work harder to compensate for the poor performance of others (social compensation; Williams & Karau, 1991).
- Identity: Social identity theory suggests that when individuals derive their identity from their membership in a group, social loafing is replaced by social laboring as members expend extra effort for their groups.
Sucker effect
The tendency for members to contribute less to a group endeavor when they expect that others will think negatively of anyone who works too hard or contributes too much (considering them to be a “sucker”).
Karau and Williams’s collective effort model (CEM)
A theoretical explanation of group productivity that traces losses of productivity in groups to diminished expectations about successful goal attainment and the diminished value of group goals (developed by Steven Karau and Kipling Williams).
Draws on expectancy-value theories of motivation to provide a comprehensive theoretical framework for understanding social loafing.
Valence
|
Expectations –> Performance –> Rewards –> Motivation —> Ex…
Social facilitation effects are related to a number of interpersonal processes, including ……?
prejudice, eating, electronic performance monitoring (Electronic performance monitoring, or EPM = The use of information technologies, such as computer net works, to track, analyze, and report information about workers’ performance., and collaborative learning.
Harkins Mere effort model
Traces facilitation effects back to changes in how information is processed.
Social orientation theory
An analysis of performance gains in groups suggesting individual differences in social orientation (the tendency to approach social situations apprehensively or with enthusiasm) predict when social facilitation will occur.
What are 5 theoretical explanations of social facilitation?
Drive processes
Physiological and neurological processes : threat/challange theory
Motivational processes : evaluation apprehension theory and self presentation theorie
Cognitive processes : distraction conflict theory and mere effect model
Personality processes : social orientation theory
When do groups outperform individuals? Steiner what did he belief?
in his analysis of group productivity, suggests that few groups reach their potential, because negative group processes (process loss) place limits on their performance.
He believed that actual productivity = potential productivity minus process loss, or AP = PP − PL.
Process loss = A reduction in performance effectiveness or efficiency caused by actions, operations, or dynamics that prevent the group from reaching its full potential, including reduced effort, faulty group processes, coordination problems, and ineffective leadership.
When do groups outperform individuals and what thing is important for that?
The type of task:
Groups outperform individuals on additive tasks and compensatory tasks. Galton confirmed the wisdom-of-the-crowd: independent individuals’ judgments, when averaged, tend to be accurate. Other work indicates that a crowd must be sufficiently large, and the problem not too difficult, for a crowd to be wise.
On what tasks do groups perform?
Disjunctive tasks
Intellective tasks
Conjunctive tasks
Type of tasks what are their Productivity effects?
Additive
Compensatory
Disjunctive
Conjunctive: Unitaru
Conjunctive: Divisible
Discretionaty
Additive = Better than the best
Compensatory = Better than most
Disjunctive = Better than average and some times equal to the best
Conjunctive: Unitaru = equal to the worst
Conjunctive: Divisible = better than the worst
Discretionaty = variable (depends)
How do groups perform on Disjuntive tasks and what is it?
Disjunctive tasks (= A task or project that is completed when a single solution, decision, or recommendation is adopted by the group.)
* Groups perform well on disjunctive tasks if the group includes at least one individual who knows the correct solution. The truth-wins rule usually holds for groups working on Eureka problems, whereas the truth-supported-wins rule holds for groups working on non-Eureka problems.
