individual, or showing non-significant results.It even tually became apparent that neither group nor individual performance was consistently superior.The recognition of this fact became evident in the trend of studies to search for conditions which led to group success.These efforts were not very successful either, due to the continued focus on productivity, and the neglect of processes and task demands.Some writers tried to infer particular group processes, resources, or constraints from the instructions or conditions imposed on the group.But because processes were not actually mea sured these studies barely advanced the understanding of how groups operate, or how performance standards are determined, At the end of V/orld War II, the interest in produc tivity began to fade, as the importance of group processes became increasingly evident.A number of reasons may be given for this change in emphasis, including these four* 1, Many scholars became disinterested or disillusioned after their attempts to delineate the determinants of group productivity proved not to be very successful, A primary reason for this mediocrity was their lack of attention to characteristics of the tasks.2, 3y 1 9 5 0 , empirical investigations had outdistanced theory.Literature reviews became encyclopedic listings of minor discoveries that appeared to stand aloof from others.Each new study was piled on top of another in the same category, producing a situation that was at once dull and chaotic.3.There was a growing awareness that productivity should depend on processes and intervening variables.There were increasingly numerous successes in other areas, drawing attention away from the study of productivity.The work of Sherif (1936) and later Asch (1951) on conformity, for example, attracted those who wished to succeed; the study of group productivity failed to provide much prominence for its promoters.This general trend gained momentum in the early fifties, as the focus shifted ninety degrees from produc tivity to the interactions of group members who were engaged in a problem or task.Laboratory experiments became more popular in the attempts to control the myriad Variables impinging on group members during their discus sions.Some investigators developed elaborate techniques for observing, classifying and recording the ongoing inter personal exchanges (Bales, 1 9 5 0 ), This desire to take account of the broadest possible range of variables was especially evident in the theore tical work of Lev/in (1951)* Lev/in became interested in how people hindered or facilitated each other's progress toward goals.He created an abstract theoretical frame work for the purpose of studying how a person's aspira tions, decisions, and satisfactions were affected by the behaviors of others in his "life space," These formulations
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 853 citations exist upstream.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.