No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Differentiation of selves: Differentiating a fuzzy concept
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 October 2016
Abstract
Notwithstanding the appeal of the “one size fits all” approach that Baumeister et al. propose, we argue that there is no panacea for improving group performance. The concept of “differentiation of selves” constitutes an umbrella term for similar seeming but actually different constructs. Even the same type of “differentiation of selves” can be beneficial for some and harmful for other tasks.
Information
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016
References
Gockel, C., Kerr, N. L., Seok, D.-H. & Harris, D. W. (2008) Indispensability and group identification as sources of task motivation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
44:1316–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H. & Bell, M. P. (1998) Beyond relational demography: Time and the effects of surface and deep-level diversity on work group cohesion. Academy of Management Journal
41:96–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jehn, K. (1994) Enhancing effectiveness: An investigation of advantages and disadvantages of value-based intragroup conflict. International Journal of Conflict Management
5:223–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jehn, K. (1995) A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly
40:256–82.Google Scholar
Larson, J. R. Jr. (2010) In search of synergy in small group performance. Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Schulz-Hardt, S., Brodbeck, F. C., Mojzisch, A., Kerschreiter, R. & Frey, D. (2006) Group decision making in hidden profile situations: Dissent as a facilitator for decision quality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
91:1080–93. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.91.6.1080.Google Scholar
White, S. E., Dittrich, J. E. & Lang, J. R. (1980) The effects of group decision-making process and problem-situation complexity on implementation attempts. Administrative Science Quarterly
25:428–40.Google Scholar
Worchel, S., Rothberger, H., Day, E. A., Hart, D. & Butemeyer, J. (1998) Social identity and individual productivity within groups. British Journal of Social Psychology
37:389–413.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Target article
Are groups more or less than the sum of their members? The moderating role of individual identification
Related commentaries (29)
Beyond old dichotomies: Individual differentiation can occur through group commitment, not despite it
But is it social? How to tell when groups are more than the sum of their members
Considering the role of ecology on individualdifferentiation
Differentiated selves can surely be good for the group, but let's get clear about why
Differentiated selves help only when identification is strong and tasks are complex
Differentiation of selves: Differentiating a fuzzy concept
Disputing deindividuation: Why negative group behaviours derive from group norms, not group immersion
Group and individual as complementary conceptual categories
Group behavior in the military may provide a unique case
Group effort in resuscitation teams
Group members differ in relative prototypicality: Effects on the individual and the group
Group membership: Who gets to decide?
Groups need selves, but which selves? Dual selves in groups and the downsides of individuation
How group members contribute to group performance: Evidence from agent-based simulations
Humans are not the Borg: Personal and social selves function as components in a unified self-system
Identity matters to individuals: Group assessment cannot be reduced to collective performance
Member differentiation and group tasks: More than meets the eye
Not even wrong: Imprecision perpetuates the illusion of understanding at the cost of actual understanding
Reputational concerns as a general determinant of group functioning
Roles and ranks: The importance of hierarchy for group functioning
Social identification is generally a prerequisite for group success and does not preclude intragroup differentiation
Social, not individual, identification is the key to understanding group phenomena
Solved paradoxes and old hats? The research needed on differentiated selves
Task specificity and the impact on both the individual and group during the formation of groups
The hows and whys of “we” (and “I”) in groups
The subtle effects of incentives and competition on group performance
The unique role of the agent within the romantic group
Vicarious contagion decreases differentiation – and comes with costs
We agree and we disagree, which is exactly what most people do most of the time
Author response
Differentiating selves facilitates group outcomes