群体背景下的自我监控：对个体地位获取和群体任务绩效的积极效应

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2018.01169

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

自我监控是与人际互动密切相关的人格特质。在群体建立和发展的过程中, 自我监控不仅影响个体的人际交往质量, 同时也作用于群体内部的互动; 并且, 自我监控的作用可能随着群体的发展而发生动态变化。为探究上述设想, 本研究针对32个大学新生寝室进行了一学期的跟踪调查。结果表明, 在个体层面, 个体自我监控水平促进群体成员对该个体的积极情感, 并进而间接促进其在群体中的地位获取(个体地位和友谊网络中心度); 在群体层面, 群体自我监控水平促进群体成员间的凝聚力, 并进而间接促进群体在合作中的绩效表现。此外, 个体自我监控水平对他人积极情感的影响存在时间效应, 具体而言, 其正向效应随着群体发展得到一定程度的增强。本研究揭示了自我监控对于个体和群体发生影响的机理, 对于自我监控理论以及地位等相关领域做出了一定的贡献。

关键词: 自我监控, 地位获取, 群体绩效, 追踪研究

Abstract:

Self-monitoring, as a personality trait, describes the extent to which an individual is attentive to social cues and regulates and adapts his/her own behaviors accordingly to achieve social appropriateness. In the process of group establishment and development, self-monitoring not only impacts the quality of interpersonal relationships but also influences both group interaction and group outcome. While prior studies have focused on the effects of self-monitoring at the individual level, researchers have generally ignored the effects at the group level and have not examined the role of self-monitoring in group dynamics over time. To fill this gap, this study examined the effects of self-monitoring within the context of group development.

In general, this research adopts a dynamic perspective to explore the effects of self-monitoring at both individual and group levels. Specifically, at the individual level, we attempted to examine how self-monitoring affects the positive sentiments held by other group members toward an individual and further influences the individual’s status attainment within the group; at the group level, we attempted to examine how group-mean self-monitoring affects group cohesion as well as the group performance in collaborative tasks. In addition, we intended to explore whether the effect of self-monitoring on positive sentiments changes over time and whether the effect of group-mean self-monitoring on group cohesion changes over time.

To test the hypotheses, we conducted a longitudinal study (three points in time) over one semester, deliberately choosing students from 32 freshmen dorms as the participants, and we collected data through both surveys and a behavioral task at three waves (T1, T2, and T3). The results showed that at the individual level, self-monitoring was positively related to positive sentiments held by other group members toward the focal person, and self-monitoring had a positive indirect effect on the focal person’s status attainment (indicated by status rating and friendship network centrality) via positive sentiments; at the group level, group-mean self-monitoring was positively related to group cohesion, and group-mean self-monitoring had a positive indirect effect on the group performance in a collaborative task via group cohesion. We also found that the positive effect of self-monitoring on group members’ positive sentiments toward the focal person increased over time (from T2 to T3).

This research makes several contributions to existing literature. First, we contribute to the self-monitoring literature by exploring the effects of self-monitoring at both individual and group levels. Our findings revealed that high self-monitors can not only build high-quality interpersonal relationships for themselves but also enhance group cohesion in a collective way. Second, we introduce a dynamic approach to studying self-monitoring. With the change of interactions among group members and with the group development over time, the effect of self-monitoring may change as well. Adopting the dynamic perspective can capture this changing track and thus deepen our understanding of the role of self-monitoring in the group context. Lastly, we contribute to status research by identifying an important antecedent of individual’s status attainment in group - positive sentiments held by other group members toward the focal person.

Key words: self-monitoring, status attainment, group performance, longitudinal study

中图分类号:

B849:C91

胡琼晶, 路西, 张志学. (2018). 群体背景下的自我监控：对个体地位获取和群体任务绩效的积极效应. 心理学报, 50(10), 1169-1179.

HU Qiongjing, LU Xi, ZHANG Zhixue. (2018). Self-monitoring in group context: Its indirect benefits for individual status attainment and group task performance. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 50(10), 1169-1179.

图/表 7

参考文献 57

[1]	Anderson C., John O. P., Keltner D., & Kring A. M . ( 2001). Who attains social status? Effects of personality and physical attractiveness in social groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81( 1), 116-132. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.81.1.116 URL pmid: 11474718
[2]	Bai F . ( 2017). Beyond dominance and competence: A moral virtue theory of status attainment. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 21( 3), 203-227. doi: 10.1177/1088868316649297 URL pmid: 27225037
[3]	Baldwin T. T., Bedell M. D., & Johnson J. L . ( 1997). The social fabric of a team-based M.B.A. program: Network effects on student satisfaction and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 40( 6), 1369-1397.
[4]	Beal D. J., Cohen R. R., Burke M. J., & McLendon C. L . ( 2003). Cohesion and performance in groups: A meta-analytic clarification of construct relations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88( 6), 989-1004. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.6.989 URL pmid: 14640811
[5]	Bell S.T . ( 2007). Deep-level composition variables as predictors of team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology,92( 3), 595-615. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.92.3.595 URL pmid: 17484544
[6]	Bendersky C., &Shah N.P . ( 2012). The cost of status enhancement: Performance effects of individuals’ status mobility in task groups. Organization Science, 23( 2), 308-322. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1100.0543 URL
[7]	Bradley B. H., Klotz A. C., Postlethwaite B. E., & Brown K. G . ( 2013). Ready to rumble: How team personality composition and task conflict interact to improve performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98( 2), 385-392. doi: 10.1037/a0029845 URL
[8]	Colbert A. E., Barrick M. R., & Bradley B. H . ( 2014). Personality and leadership composition in top management teams: Implications for organizational effectiveness. Personnel Psychology, 67( 2), 351-387. doi: 10.1111/peps.2014.67.issue-2 URL
[9]	Correl S.J., &Ridgeway C.L . ( 2003). Expectation states theory. In Delamater, J.(Ed.), Handbook of Social Psychology
[10]	Dabbs J. M., Evans M. S., Hopper C. H., & Purvis J. A . ( 1980). Self-monitors in conversation: What do they monitor? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39( 2), 278-284. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.39.2.278 URL
[11]	Day D. V., Schleicher D. J., Unckless A. L., & Hiller N. J . ( 2002). Self-monitoring personality at work: A meta- analytic investigation of construct validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87( 2), 390-401. doi: 10.1037//0021-9010.87.2.390 URL pmid: 12002965
[12]	Devine D.J., &Philips J.L . ( 2000). Do smarter teams do better? A meta-analysis of team level cognitive ability and team performance. Paper presented at the 15th annual conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, New Orleans,LA.
[13]	Diefendorff J. M., Croyle M. H., & Gosserand R. H . ( 2005). The dimensionality and antecedents of emotional labor strategies. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66( 2), 339-357. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2004.02.001 URL
[14]	Filho E., Dobersek U., Gershgoren L., Becker B., & Tenenbaum G . ( 2014). The cohesion-performance relationship in sport: A 10-year retrospective meta-analysis. Sport Science for Health, 10( 3), 165-177. doi: 10.1007/s11332-014-0188-7 URL
[15]	Flynn F. J., Reagans R. E., Amanatullah E. T., & Ames D. R . ( 2006). Helping one’s way to the top: Self-monitors achieve status by helping others and knowing who helps whom. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91( 6), 1123-1137. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.91.6.1123 URL
[16]	Fredrickson B.L . ( 1998). What good are positive emotions? Review of General Psychology,2( 3), 300-319. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.300 URL pmid: 3156001
[17]	Frey M.C., &Detterman D.K . ( 2004). Scholastic assessment or g? The relationship between the scholastic assessment test and general cognitive ability. Psychological Science, 15( 6), 373-378.
[18]	Frijda N. H. ( 1994). Varieties of affect: Emotions and episodes, moods, and sentiments. In Ekman, P., & Davidson, R. J. (Eds.), The nature of emotion: Fundamental questions (pp. 59-67). New York: Oxford University Press.
[19]	Gangestad S.W., & Snyder M . ( 2000). Self-monitoring: Appraisal and reappraisal. Psychological Bulletin, 126( 4), 530-555.
[20]	Hall R. J., Workman J. W., & Marchioro C. A . ( 1998). Sex, task, and behavioral flexibility effects on leadership perceptions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 74( 1), 1-32.
[21]	Hobfoll S.E . ( 1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44( 3), 513-524.
[22]	Ickes W., Holloway R., Stinson L. L., & Hoodenpyle T. G . ( 2006). Self-monitoring in social interaction: The centrality of self-Affect. Journal of Personality, 74( 3), 659-684.
[23]	James L.R .( 1982). Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67( 2), 219-229.
[24]	Jehn K.A., &Mannix E.A .( 2001). The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal study of intragroup conflict and group performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44( 2), 238-251.
[25]	Jenkins J.M .( 1993). Self-monitoring and turnover - the impact of personality on intent to leave. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14( 1), 83-91.
[26]	Kelly J.R., &Barsade S.G . ( 2001). Mood and emotions in small groups and work teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86( 1), 99-130.
[27]	Klein H.J., , &Mulvey P.W . ( 1995). Two investigations of the relationships among group goals, goal commitment, cohesion, and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 61( 1), 44-53.
[28]	Klein K. J., Lim B.-C., Saltz J. L., & Mayer D. M . ( 2004). How do they get there? An examination of the antecedents of centrality in team networks. Academy of Management Journal, 47( 6), 952-963.
[29]	LeBreton J.M., &Senter J.L . ( 2008). Answers to 20 Questions about interrater reliability and interrater agreement. Organizational Research Methods, 11( 4), 815-852.
[30]	Lennox R.D., &Wolfe R.N . ( 1984). Revision of the self-monitoring scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46( 6), 1349-1364.
[31]	LePine J.A . ( 2003). Team adaptation and postchange performance: Effects of team composition in terms of members’ cognitive ability and personality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88( 1), 27-39.
[32]	LePine J. A., Hollenbeck J. R., Ilgen D. R., & Hedlund J . ( 1997). Effects of individual differences on the performance of hierarchical decision-making teams: Much more than g. Journal of Applied Psychology,82( 5), 803-811.
[33]	Lin H.-C., & Rababah N .( 2014). CEO-TMT exchange, TMT personality composition, and decision quality: The mediating role of TMT psychological empowerment . Leadership Quarterly, 25( 5), 943-957.
[34]	Liu X., &Zhang Z ( 2005). Process of interaction among members in simulated work teams. Acta Psychological Sinica, 37( 2), 253-259.
	[ 刘雪峰, 张志学 . ( 2005). 模拟情境中工作团队成员互动过程的初步研究及其测量. 心理学报, 37( 2), 253-259.]
[35]	MacKinnon D. P., Fritz M. S., Williams J., & Lockwood C. M . ( 2007). Distribution of the product confidence limits for the indirect effect: Program PRODCLIN. Behavior Research Methods, 39( 3), 384-389.
[36]	MacKinnon D. P., Lockwood C. M., & Williams J . ( 2004). Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39( 1), 99-128.
[37]	Magee J.C., &Galinsky A.D .( 2008). Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. The Academy of Management Annals, 2( 1), 351-398.
[38]	Man D.C., &Lam S. S.K . ( 2003). The effects of job complexity and autonomy on cohesiveness in collectivistic and individualistic work groups: A cross-cultural analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24( 8), 979-1001.
[39]	Mehra A., Kilduff M., & Brass D. J . ( 2001). The social networks of high and low self-monitors: Implications for workplace performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46( 1), 121-146.
[40]	Mullen B., & Copper C .( 1994). The relation between group cohesiveness and performance: An integration. Psychological Bulletin, 115( 2), 210-227.
[41]	Norris S.L., &Zweigenhaft R.L . ( 1999). Self-monitoring, trust, and commitment in romantic relationships. The Journal of Social Psychology, 139( 2), 215-220.
[42]	Oh H., &Kilduff M .( 2008). The ripple effect of personality on social structure: Self-monitoring origins of network brokerage. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93( 5), 1155-1164.
[43]	Pettit N. C., Yong K., & Spataro S. E . ( 2010). Holding your place: Reactions to the prospect of status gains and losses. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46( 2), 396-401.
[44]	Roberson Q.M., &Williamson I.O .( 2012). Justice in self-monitoring teams: The role of social networks in the emergence of procedural justice climates. Academy of Management Journal,55( 3), 685-701.
[45]	Scott B. A., Barnes C. M., & Wagner D. T . ( 2012). Chameleonic or consistent? A multilevel investigation of emotional labor variability and self-monitoring. Academy of Management Journal, 55( 4), 905-1050.
[46]	Scott B. A., Colquitt J. A., & Zapata-Phelan C. P . ( 2007). Justice as a dependent variable: subordinate charisma as a predictor of interpersonal and informational justice perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92( 6), 1597-1609.
[47]	Synder M .( 1974). Self-monitoring of expressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30( 4), 526-537.
[48]	Synder M., & Cantor N . ( 1980). Thinking about ourselves and others: Self-monitoring and social knowledge. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39( 2), 222-234.
[49]	Tofighi D., & MacKinnon D.P . ( 2011). RMediation: An R package for mediation analysis confidence intervals. Behavior Research Methods, 43( 3), 692-700.
[50]	Tuckman B.W . ( 1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63( 6), 384-399.
[51]	Turner R.G . ( 1980). Self-monitoring and humor production. Journal of Personality, 48( 2), 163-167.
[52]	Turnley W.H., &Bolino M.C . ( 2001). Achieving desired images while avoiding undesired image: Exploring the role of self-monitoring in impression management. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86( 2), 351-360.
[53]	Tziner A., &Eden D . ( 1985). Effects of crew composition on crew performance: Does the whole equal the sum of its parts? Journal of Applied Psychology, 70( 1), 85-93.
[54]	Wang S., Hu Q., & Dong B . ( 2015). Managing personal networks: An examination of how high self-monitors achieve better job performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 91, 180-188.
[55]	Watson D . ( 2000). Mood and temperament. New York: Guilford Press.
[56]	Watson D., & Clark L.A .( 1994). The PANAS-X: Manual for the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule, expanded form. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press
[57]	Zaccaro S. J., Foti R. J., & Kenny D. A . ( 1991). Self-monitoring and trait-based variance in leadership: An investigation of leader flexibility across multiple group situations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76( 2), 308-315.

变量	M	SD	1	2	3	4
1. 个体自我监控(T1)	4.69	0.67
2. 他人积极情感(T2)	4.84	0.92	0.18^*
3. 他人积极情感(T3)	4.90	0.92	0.31^***	0.64^***
4. 个体地位(T3)	5.08	0.98	0.04	0.41^***	0.62^***
5. 友谊网络中心度 (T3)	0.78	0.34	0.01	0.28^**	0.32^***	0.29^**

变量	M	SD	1	2	3	4
1. 个体自我监控(T1)	4.69	0.67
2. 他人积极情感(T2)	4.84	0.92	0.18^*
3. 他人积极情感(T3)	4.90	0.92	0.31^***	0.64^***
4. 个体地位(T3)	5.08	0.98	0.04	0.41^***	0.62^***
5. 友谊网络中心度 (T3)	0.78	0.34	0.01	0.28^**	0.32^***	0.29^**

变量	M	SD	1	2	3
1. 群体自我监控 (T1)	4.69	0.30
2. 群体凝聚力(T2)	5.49	0.91	0.49^**
3. 群体凝聚力(T3)	5.54	0.91	0.45^*	0.60^***
4. 群体任务绩效 (T3)	11.64	3.91	0.28	0.45^**	0.45^**

变量	M	SD	1	2	3
1. 群体自我监控 (T1)	4.69	0.30
2. 群体凝聚力(T2)	5.49	0.91	0.49^**
3. 群体凝聚力(T3)	5.54	0.91	0.45^*	0.60^***
4. 群体任务绩效 (T3)	11.64	3.91	0.28	0.45^**	0.45^**

变量	模型1 他人积极情感(T2)	模型2 他人积极情感(T3)	模型3 个人地位(T3)	模型4 友谊网络中心度(T3)
个体自我监控	0.25^* (0.12)	0.60^*** (0.07)	-0.08 (0.12)	-0.03 (0.04)
他人积极情感(T2)		0.28^** (0.09)	0.42^*** (0.09)	0.10^** (0.03)
样本量(群体水平)	32	32	32	32
样本量(个体水平)	122	122	122	122
偏差(deviance)	319.93^*	250.27^***	311.67^***	64.40^**