The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The paradox of intragroup conflict: A meta-analysis.
Abstract
Since the meta-analysis by De Dreu and Weingart (2003b) on the effects of intragroup conflict on group outcomes, more than 80 new empirical studies of conflict have been conducted, often investigating more complex, moderated relationships between conflict and group outcomes, as well as new types of intragroup conflict, such as process conflict. To explore the trends in this new body of literature, we conducted a meta-analysis of 116 empirical studies of intragroup conflict (n = 8,880 groups) and its relationship with group outcomes. To address the heterogeneity across the studies included in the meta-analysis, we also investigated a number of moderating variables. Stable negative relationships were found between relationship and process conflict and group outcomes. In contrast to the results of De Dreu and Weingart, we did not find a strong and negative association between task conflict and group performance. Analyses of main effects as well as moderator analyses revealed a more complex picture. Task conflict and group performance were more positively related among studies where the association between task and relationship conflict was relatively weak, in studies conducted among top management teams rather than non-top management teams, and in studies where performance was measured in terms of financial performance or decision quality rather than overall performance.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
“Stress: appraisal and coping,”
Folkman, S. (2013) · Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine · doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-1005-9_215 · Cited by 27,833
Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.98.2.224 · Cited by 21,995
Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package
Viechtbauer, W. (2010) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v036.i03 · Cited by 20,464
An introduction to cybernetics
Ashby, W. R. (1956) · doi:10.5962/bhl.title.5851 · Cited by 7,578
Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (2015) · doi:10.4135/9781483398105 · Cited by 5,542
A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict
Jehn, K. A. (1995) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393638 · Cited by 4,050
Self-citationA Temporally Based Framework and Taxonomy of Team Processes
Marks, M. A., Mathieu, J. E., & Zaccaro, S. J. (2001) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/259182 · Cited by 3,659
Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: A meta-analysis.
De Dreu, C. K. W., & Weingart, L. R. (2003) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.741 · Cited by 3,071
Exploring the Black Box: An Analysis of Work Group Diversity, Conflict and Performance
Pelled, L. H., Eisenhardt, K. M., & Xin, K. R. (1999) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2667029 · Cited by 2,971
Outlier and influence diagnostics for meta-analysis
Viechtbauer, W., & Cheung, M. W.-L. (2010) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.11 · Cited by 2,949
Cited by
Hong, R. Y., & Cheung, M. W.-L. (2015) · Clinical Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/2167702614553789 · Cited by 201
(2015) · doi:10.1145/2696454.2696460 · Cited by 175
Heerdink, M. W., van Kleef, G. A., Homan, A. C., & Fischer, A. H. (2013) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0033362 · Cited by 110
Spillover of interpersonal conflicts from work into nonwork: A daily diary study.
Martinez-Corts, I., Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., & Boz, M. (2015) · Journal of Occupational Health Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0038661 · Cited by 92
Abraham, E., & Feldman, R. (2018) · Physiology & Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2017.12.034 · Cited by 90
Metadata
- Authors
- de Wit, F. R. C., Greer, L. L., & Jehn, K. A.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Psychology
- Published
- 2012
- Volume
- 97
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 360-390
- ISSN
- 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1854
- OpenAlex
- W2065967577
- Cited by
- 1,192
- References
- 25
- FWCI
- 153.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The paradox of intragroup conflict: A meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/a0024844
- The paper
- de Wit, F. R. C., Greer, L. L., & Jehn, K. A. (2012). The paradox of intragroup conflict: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024844
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.