Small Group Research

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Whiteoak, J. W.
Right arrow Articles by Hort, L. K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Small Group Research, Vol. 35, No. 2, 158-173 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/1046496403258495
© 2004 SAGE Publications

Assessing Group Efficacy

Comparing Three Methods of Measurement

John W. Whiteoak

Zayed University

Laurence Chalip

University of Texas at Austin

Linda K. Hort

Australian National University

Two hundred eighty-two undergraduate students (94 groups) participated in a laboratory study designed to compare three methods of assessing group efficacy: an aggregate of self-efficacy perceptions, an aggregate of individual perceptions of group efficacy, and a consensual approach. Findings indicate that the three methods of measuring group efficacy do not differ in their capacity to discriminate high and moderate task-difficulty conditions nor do they differ in terms of their consistency, the magnitude of their relationship with goals, or the degree to which they are affected by performance. Findings suggest that any of the three methods can be applied when studying the effects of group efficacy, at least for tasks with low interdependence.

Key Words: group efficacy • measurement • assessment • goal • performance


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Small Group ResearchHome page
A. M. Hardin, M. A. Fuller, and R. M. Davison
I Know I Can, But Can We?: Culture and Efficacy Beliefs in Global Virtual Teams
Small Group Research, February 1, 2007; 38(1): 130 - 155.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Organizational Research MethodsHome page
W. Arthur Jr., S. T. Bell, and B. D. Edwards
A Longitudinal Examination of the Comparative Criterion-Related Validity of Additive and Referent-Shift Consensus Operationalizations of Team Efficacy
Organizational Research Methods, January 1, 2007; 10(1): 35 - 58.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of Applied Behavioral ScienceHome page
H. E. Peelle III
Appreciative Inquiry and Creative Problem Solving in Cross-Functional Teams
Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, December 1, 2006; 42(4): 447 - 467.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Small Group ResearchHome page
A. M. Hardin, M. A. Fuller, and J. S. Valacich
Measuring Group Efficacy in Virtual Teams: New Questions in an Old Debate
Small Group Research, February 1, 2006; 37(1): 65 - 85.
[Abstract] [PDF]