Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Social loafing negative consequences
Characteristics of social loafing
Social loafing negative consequences
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Social loafing negative consequences
Social Loafing
A major component of Social Psychological research is based on social
loafing. Social loafing can result in diverse possibilities and also
not only affects the individual who is conducting the social
phenomenon but also group members are subjected to exposure.
Discussion regarding the reasons of social loafing as an occurrence
will be based primarily on evidence from literature regarding the
specific component, envy. Possibilities of outcomes range from members
being awarded unfair workloads or dissatisfaction, to group
performance being decreased. Theories that support some of these and
other notions will become evident after the recognition of previous
research findings. Discussion will be based primarily on Ringleman who
is supported by Ingham and also Latane, Karau Williams and Harkins
(specifically Latane) and. To sum up, personal opinion will be
reviewed and compared to its validity in reducing social loafing in an
educational setting. ‘Educational setting’, on this occasion is
specifically referring to groups of University students creating
poster presentations.
Initially the definition of social loafing according to a recognised
Psychology dictionary will be stated. The dilemma as to what aspects
result in ‘social loafing’ is recognised in this literature with
differences from theories, concepts and experiments as cited being
evaluated. This evidence is aimed to acknowledge and prove the
predicament of the affects and causes related to ‘social loafing’.
Aspects, which contribute to the reduction of social loafing in an
educational setting, are resulted prior to the conclusion as a
prominent component o...
... middle of paper ...
...different
arrangements of social consequences: Social loafing, social
facilitation, deindividuation, and modified social loafing. The
Psychological Record, 49(4), 565-578.
Karau, S.J., & Williams, K.D. (1993). Social Loafing: A meta-analytic
review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 65, 681-786.
Latane, B. Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979).Many hands make light
work: The causes and consequences of social loafing. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 822-832.
Raven, B.H., & Reber. J. (1983) Social Psychology (2nd ed.). United
state of America: Wiley/Sons.
Reber, A.S., & Reber. E. (2001). The Penguin Dictionary of Psychology
(3rd ed.). England: Clays.
Weiten, W. (2004). Psychology : Themes and Variations (6th ed.).
Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
The author of the essay, Carol Tavris, seems to be very passionate about what she is writing. She has her doctorate in Psychology and has had her articles published in many well-known magazines. The intended audience of her essay is the general public. The purpose of this article is to inform the public that they need to stand out and use their own minds in a group setting instead of hiding in the comfort of their fellow friends and colleagues.
Passer, M., Smith, R., Holt, N., Bremner, A., Sutherland, E., & Vliek, M. (2009). Psychology; Science of Mind and Behaviour. (European Edition). New York.
Social Loafing is an important concept that can be identifiable in our day to day lives such as through school work, household chores, employment and even sporting activities. The current research investigated the effect of social loafing on collective and coactive conditions through an experiment which asked participants to complete a brainstorming task asking them to list as many ways to use a pencil as they could. The results indicated that social loafing was non-significant in both collective and coactive conditions. However, group work improved the amount of answers the participants had. The results have important effects for reducing or eliminating social loafing to ensure that the participants are accountable for their own activities regardless if in an individual setting or group. Karau & Williams (1993) formed the conceptual idea that participants performing a group task would identify aspects of social loafing and thus having group cohesiveness would eliminate participant loafing. Shepperd, Stephen, Wright and Rex (1989) also established the social loafing concept to be related to impression management. Impression management being a goal directed conscious or unconscious process in which participants attempt to influence the perception of others (Stephen, Wright and Rex, 1989). In another theoretical concept of social loafing, Kerr (1983) demonstrated the free rider effect by addressing the role of the “sucker” in experiment groups. In stating this, it is evident that the many concepts surrounding social loafing derive from the same fundamentals. Though there are conflicting views within social loafing, results from this experiment do not show a significant difference of social loafing between collective groups and coact...
Myers, David G. “Chapter 14: Social Psychology.” Psychology. 10th ed. New York, NY US: Worth
According to social psychologists a group is composed of more than two individuals who depend and interact with each other in some manner (Lessing). Examples of groups include a class, a football team, a cult etc. Groups normally have various similar features including: norms that determine the right behavior, roles assigned to individuals, which determine what responsibilities and behaviors people should undertake, a communication structure and a power structure, which determines how much influence and authority group members have. For example, a class has norms, like the time people should arrive in class. The role of the professor includes teaching, administering exams and inviting discussions. The ro...
On Tuesday the 8th, I was surprised to discover the number of times I drifted off into my thoughts, was preoccupied or distracted in a day. These were all instances when I realized I was not listening, nor being respectful to the other person. This assignment was particularly difficult because when a person is not listening usually, they are not aware of the situation until after the fact. I discovered my nonlistening habits in school, in my social life, and in my personal life.
The Social Imagination in my Life Described by Mills, the social imagination is as follows: “What [people] need, and what [people] feel they need, is a quality of mind that will help them to use information and to develop reason in order to achieve lucid summations of what is going on in the world and of what may be happening within themselves” (1959, 14). My opinion of social imagination is how our personal problems and experiences affect larger public issues. Whether a macro or micro issue, all of these issues are important to a formation for a better society. Social imagination can be present in social institutions, cultural factors, and historical factors. These different facts and institutions are important to the future formation of our society as a whole.
Crisp, R, J. Turner, R, N. (2007). Essential Social Psychology. Sage Publications Limited. London. (UK). First Edition.
The amount of situations appear with public indifference is increasing in current community. This lack of perception for general public is concern. There is a recent case in China, Yue-yue, a two-years old girl was run over twice, ignored by eighteen passers-by in seven minutes without any aid and finally passed out. This paper agrees with the belief that social apathy is an issue in today’s world. There are two main reasons for this: first, the scare emotion of the negative outcome after assist others, and second, bystander effect.
Social Loafing and Recommendations on How to Reduce Its Occurrence within Groups Working on University Poster Presentations
According to Louis (1980), organizational socialization is a process by which individuals come to be familiar with and to appreciate the value, norms, missions and required behaviors of organizations in which they are going to work. Each newcomer of any organizations has to experience a transition period, which typically last between 6 to 10 months, to adapt to a new setting, in another word, to be organizational socialized in the new setting (Louis, 1980). Experiences during this time largely influence the newcomer’s impression and future adjustment of the organization (Song & Chathoth, 2011). Taormina (1994) concluded that there were four factors that impact a worker’s organizational socialization: the received training from the organization, the understanding of the organizational context, the supports from significant co-workers, and the prospects of the future of the organization. Based upon the four aspects, Taormina (1994) created an Organizational Socialization Inventory (OSI) to measure workers’ socialization in organizations. This inventory has been used and examined by following researchers as a reliable measurement of organizational socialization (e.g. Bigliardi et al., 2005; Bauer et al., 2007).
Organizations in today’s society are adopting a team based structure in their approach to tackle company’s challenges, problems and issues. Team based success stories include Hallmark who had a 200% reduction in design time, which allowed for the introduction of 23,000 new card lines in a single year (Janasz, Dowd, Schneider, 2006). But in saying all this there is a factor which causes the positive effect of team work and team cohesiveness to be affected and that is social loafing. Social loafing is more likely to occur in large teams from 3 members onwards, and is where members in the team apply less effort than when working as an individual. Social loafing appears within every team one way or another, even if it’s in a high functioning or dysfunctional environment (Murphy, Wayne Linden, Erdogan, 1992). Research has shown that a combined team performance required less effort by individuals than if they were to work alone, and therefore the social loafer in the team is able to profit from the work of the others without exerting any of their potential. “Loafers and free riders are allowed to benefit because, in each case, the outcome of the group performance…is shared equally by all group members, regardless of their input.” (Weldon and Mustari 1988, p.33)
In Betty White’s opening monologue to Saturday Night Live, she said, “I didn’t know what Facebook was, and now that I do know what it is, I have to say, it sounds like a huge waste of time. I would never say the people on it are losers, but that’s only because I’m polite.” Originally intended for the use of students at Harvard University in 2004, Facebook grew exponentially to be an online phenomenon in the years following. In 2006, it became accessible to anyone and everyone with internet connection. Aside from the advantages that give the site its popularity, creating a profile comes with a number of significant disadvantages inherit to online social networks. What do more than 500 million active users use their Facebook for? Communicating with long distance friends and spreading awareness of causes are common responses. Unfortunately, Facebook has it flaws, from limiting the privacy of relationships to creating a form of almost unmanageable bullying, making one reconsider their involvement and think, “do I really want my Facebook account?”
A highly valued view of building the community is that students must have the capability to motivate themselves and the likelihood to be active in both educational and social experiences. Socializing contains a variety of features from transferring messages to self-disclosure. Online professors can support the socialization by making a forum for discussions. The term ‘water cooler forum’ came from workers gathering at a water cooler to socialize with one another. For the online professor, this concept of socializing is done in an online forum where both student and the professor participate.
In 2009, a theory was presented regarding social loafing from positive respect. The study exposed social loafing as a technique for workers to preserve energy to prevent burnout from working independently. The restriction that these theories share, contains the tendency to propose reason and make calculations about conditions under which social loafing will occur. These philosophies of social loafing deliver perceptions regarding why the result transpires as a whole.