TY - JOUR
T1 - Examining the asymmetrical effects of goal faultlines in groups
T2 - A categorization-elaboration approach
AU - Ellis, Aleksander P.J.
AU - Mai, Ke Michael
AU - Christian, Jessica Siegel
PY - 2013/11
Y1 - 2013/11
N2 - The purpose of this study was to use the categorization-elaboration model (CEM) to examine the asymmetrical effects of goal faultlines in groups, which are present when hypothetical dividing lines are created on the basis of different performance goals, splitting the group into subgroups. On the basis of the CEM, we expected groups with goal faultlines to exhibit higher levels of creative task performance than (a) groups with specific, difficult goals and (b) groups with do-your-best goals. We expected the benefits of goal faultlines to be due to increases in reflective reframing, which occurs when group members build on each other's ideas by shifting to alternate frames. However, we expected groups with goal faultlines to exhibit lower levels of routine task performance than (a) groups with do-your-best goals and (b) groups with specific, difficult goals, due to increased perceptions of loafing. Results from 87 groups generally supported our hypothesized model. Implications are discussed as well as possible limitations and directions for future research.
AB - The purpose of this study was to use the categorization-elaboration model (CEM) to examine the asymmetrical effects of goal faultlines in groups, which are present when hypothetical dividing lines are created on the basis of different performance goals, splitting the group into subgroups. On the basis of the CEM, we expected groups with goal faultlines to exhibit higher levels of creative task performance than (a) groups with specific, difficult goals and (b) groups with do-your-best goals. We expected the benefits of goal faultlines to be due to increases in reflective reframing, which occurs when group members build on each other's ideas by shifting to alternate frames. However, we expected groups with goal faultlines to exhibit lower levels of routine task performance than (a) groups with do-your-best goals and (b) groups with specific, difficult goals, due to increased perceptions of loafing. Results from 87 groups generally supported our hypothesized model. Implications are discussed as well as possible limitations and directions for future research.
KW - Faultlines
KW - Goal-setting
KW - Groups
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84887914345&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84887914345&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1037/a0033725
DO - 10.1037/a0033725
M3 - Article
C2 - 23855916
SN - 0021-9010
VL - 98
SP - 948
EP - 961
JO - Journal of Applied Psychology
JF - Journal of Applied Psychology
IS - 6
ER -