CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 138Team Dynamics and PerformanceSocial and Intergroup PsychologySocial Power and Status Dynamics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The power motive as an influence on group decision making.

Fodor, Eugene M., Smith, Terry·1982·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.178
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

An experiment was conducted with college students to determine both the influence of the group leader's power motivation and the group's cohesiveness on quality of group decision making. Forty groups of five students came together to discuss a business study case that concerned whether a company should market a new microwave oven. Each member of the group had a different role—company president, manager of production, and so forth—and each had a role sheet specifying items of information available to that person and not to other members of the group. The case was designed to feature most of the characteristics that Janis sees as identifying the kinds of policy decisions that produce groupthink. Need for power was assessed by means of the Thematic Apperception Test measure devised by Winter. Students scoring among the top and bottom quarter of those taking the test were selected as group leaders, and an attempt was made to create group cohesiveness in half the groups by offering a group reward to the group that performed best. Groups whose leaders scored low on n Power brought more factual information from their role sheets into group discussion and also considered more action proposals than did groups headed by leaders who scored high in power motivation. Group cohesiveness was not found to have any effect on the quality of the decision-making process.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.178

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 138

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Fodor, E. M., & Smith, T.
Affiliations
Clarkson College (US)
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
1982-01
Volume
42
Issue
1
Pages
178-185
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
DOI
10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.178
OpenAlex
W2123609063
Cited by
138
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
FWCI
4.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
Keywords
power motivation, group decision making, groupthink, group cohesion, group leadership, group incentives, role assignment, Thematic Apperception Test, decision quality, university students

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