Social loafing is a concept that has been discussed and researched since the year1913. However, in 1913 the phenomenon did not obtain the required attention. Maximilien Ringelmann, a French agricultural engineer, found that when a group of people collectively pulled on a rope, the output was comparitively less than when group members pulled on the rope individually (Kravitz and Martin, 1986; Ringelmann, 1913).
The result of this finding was not considered until 1974 when Ingham, Levinger, Graves, and Peckham worked on the experiment once again. The term “social loafing” was coined for the discovery that participants working in groups exert less effort than participants working individually. It was described as having a negative effect on individuals …show more content…
Williams, Harkins, and Latane, expanded their cheering experiment with an added variable: if people thought their individual effort could be measured, would they have less of a tendency to loaf (Williams, Harkins, & Latane, 1981).
In order to convince participants that their individual efforts would be measured, microphones were attached to each individual. The results clearly suggest that the belief their personal efforts are measured does discourage social loafing. In the second experiment they performed, they demonstrated that individual output measurability is important even when someone is working alone.
So what can be done to discourage social loafing when individual output cannot be measured? Many previous research papers focused on the measurement of output. This paper will delve into various aspects to study the relationship of social loafing on group cohesiveness and productivity and offer suggestions.
Keywords: Social Loafing, Group Cohesiveness, Productivity, and Measurability
CHAPTER - 1 …show more content…
Firstly, it decreases group efficiency. Reduced group efficiency might further result in lowered profits and benefits (Latané et al., 1979). Secondly, the group-level motivation and cohesiveness will decline pertaining to the presence and perception of social loafing (Mulvey & Klein, 1998). Thirdly, the negative emotional reactions to the perception of social loafing in the group may cause peer members to refuse to become the suckers who pick up the slack of those loafers, thereby reducing their own contributions to the group instead – a phenomenon termed as the sucker effect by Kerr
The result of this finding was not considered until 1974 when Ingham, Levinger, Graves, and Peckham worked on the experiment once again. The term “social loafing” was coined for the discovery that participants working in groups exert less effort than participants working individually. It was described as having a negative effect on individuals …show more content…
Williams, Harkins, and Latane, expanded their cheering experiment with an added variable: if people thought their individual effort could be measured, would they have less of a tendency to loaf (Williams, Harkins, & Latane, 1981).
In order to convince participants that their individual efforts would be measured, microphones were attached to each individual. The results clearly suggest that the belief their personal efforts are measured does discourage social loafing. In the second experiment they performed, they demonstrated that individual output measurability is important even when someone is working alone.
So what can be done to discourage social loafing when individual output cannot be measured? Many previous research papers focused on the measurement of output. This paper will delve into various aspects to study the relationship of social loafing on group cohesiveness and productivity and offer suggestions.
Keywords: Social Loafing, Group Cohesiveness, Productivity, and Measurability
CHAPTER - 1 …show more content…
Firstly, it decreases group efficiency. Reduced group efficiency might further result in lowered profits and benefits (Latané et al., 1979). Secondly, the group-level motivation and cohesiveness will decline pertaining to the presence and perception of social loafing (Mulvey & Klein, 1998). Thirdly, the negative emotional reactions to the perception of social loafing in the group may cause peer members to refuse to become the suckers who pick up the slack of those loafers, thereby reducing their own contributions to the group instead – a phenomenon termed as the sucker effect by Kerr