Cited by 218Team Dynamics and PerformanceJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorSocial and Intergroup Psychology

The positive group affect spiral: a dynamic model of the emergence of positive affective similarity in work groups

Walter, Frank, Bruch, Heike·2008·Journal of Organizational Behavior

Abstract

Abstract This conceptual paper seeks to clarify the process of the emergence of positive collective affect. Specifically, it develops a dynamic model of the emergence of positive affective similarity in work groups. It is suggested that positive group affective similarity and within‐group relationship quality are reciprocally interrelated in the form of a self‐reinforcing spiral, which is driven by mechanisms of affective sharing and affective similarity‐attraction between group members. We label this spiraling relationship ‘Positive Group Affect Spiral.’ This spiral is proposed to continuously strengthen both the similarity of group members' positive affect and the quality of their interpersonal relationships in a dynamic process. Further, we embed the Positive Group Affect Spiral into a framework of contextual factors that may diminish or strengthen its functioning, considering the potential impacts of charismatic leadership, individuals' or subgroups' organizational cynicism, group and organizational emotion norms, and organizational identity. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/job.505

Cites

179 of 179 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A supportive environment provides positive affect, a sense of predictability, and recognition of self-worth.

    “A supportive environment, on the other hand, provides positive affect, a sense of predictability, and recognition of self-worth (Walter and Bruch 2008).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Walter, F., & Bruch, H.
Affiliations
  • University of Groningen (NL)
  • University of St.Gallen (CH)
Corresponding author
Walter, Frank
Venue
Journal of Organizational Behavior
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-01-15
Volume
29
Issue
2
Pages
239-261
ISSN
  • 0894-3796 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1379
OpenAlex
W2079531197
Cited by
218
References
179
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 12
FWCI
16.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Organizational Behavior (publishedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion)
  • Alexandria (UniSG) (University of St.Gallen) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
work teams, interpersonal relationship quality, affective sharing, similarity attraction, charismatic leadership, organizational cynicism, emotion norms, organizational identity, group dynamics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review