The DOI matches its Crossref record; 196 of the 196 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Moving beyond relationship and task conflict: Toward a process-state perspective.
Abstract
Teams are formed to benefit from an expanded pool of expertise and experience, yet 2 aspects of the conflict stemming from those core differences will ultimately play a large role in determining team viability and productivity: conflict states and conflict processes. The current study theoretically reorganizes the literature on team conflict--distinguishing conflict states from conflict processes--and details the effects of each on team effectiveness. Findings from a meta-analytic cumulation of 45 independent studies (total number of teams = 3,218) suggest states and processes are distinct and important predictors of team performance and affective outcomes. Controlling for conflict states (i.e., task and relationship conflict), conflict processes explain an additional 13% of the variance in both team performance and team affective outcomes. Furthermore, findings reveal particular conflict processes that are beneficial and others detrimental to teams. The truth about team conflict: conflict processes, that is, how teams interact regarding their differences, are at least as important as conflict states, that is, the source and intensity of their perceived incompatibilities.
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
A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
(2017) · Macat Library eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781912282432 · Cited by 18,122
Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values.
Sorge, A., & Hofstede, G. (1983) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393017 · Cited by 15,062
The Social Psychology of Organizations.
Hackman, J. R., Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1979) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2989929 · Cited by 12,235
Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology.
Hammer, T. H., Anderson, J., Gurdon, M., Jick, T., Petit, A., Stern, R., Schwartz, H., Vardi, Y., & Dunnette, M. D. (1977) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2391755 · Cited by 11,945
Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research.
Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. L. H., & Ng, K. Y. (2001) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.425 · Cited by 5,942
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
Differentiation and Integration in Complex Organizations
Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2391211 · Cited by 3,937 · cited 2×
“…toward organizing task-work to achieve collective goals”; Marks et al., 2001, p. 357) is rooted in systems theory (Allport, 1954; Katz & Kahn, 1966; Lawrence & Lorsch, 1967) and has proved useful in understanding the nuanced aspects of team interaction that mediate the effects of inputs on…”
BackgroundInfluentialA 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
The ripple effect: emotional contagion and its influence on group behavior
Barsade, S. G. (2002) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3094912 · Cited by 3,361
Cited by
The Value of Codesign: The Effect of Customer Involvement in Service Design Teams
Trischler, J., Pervan, S. J., Kelly, S. J., & Scott, D. R. (2018) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/1094670517714060 · Cited by 292
Zajac, S., Woods, A., Tannenbaum, S., Salas, E., & Holladay, C. L. (2021) · Frontiers in Communication · doi:10.3389/fcomm.2021.606445 · Cited by 235
A review on health and well‐being at work: More than stressors and strains
Sonnentag, S., Tay, L., & Nesher Shoshan, H. (2023) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/peps.12572 · Cited by 212
Artificial Intelligence and Groups: Effects of Attitudes and Discretion on Collaboration
Bezrukova, K., Griffith, T. L., Spell, C., Rice, V., & Yang, H. E. (2023) · Group & Organization Management · doi:10.1177/10596011231160574 · Cited by 51
Intra-team conflict: the moderating effect of emotional self-leadership
Flores, H. R., Jiang, X., & Manz, C. C. (2018) · International Journal of Conflict Management · doi:10.1108/ijcma-07-2017-0065 · Cited by 30
Metadata
- Authors
- DeChurch, L. A., Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., & Doty, D.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Psychology
- Published
- 2013-07
- Volume
- 98
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 559-578
- ISSN
- 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1854
- OpenAlex
- W2063667162
- Cited by
- 273
- References
- 196
- FWCI
- 23.41
- 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: Moving beyond relationship and task conflict: Toward a process-state perspective. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/a0032896
- The paper
- DeChurch, L. A., Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., & Doty, D. (2013). Moving beyond relationship and task conflict: Toward a process-state perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032896
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.
