Cited by 521Team Dynamics and PerformanceGender Diversity and InequalitySocial and Intergroup Psychology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 66 of the 66 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Impact of highly and less job-related diversity on work group cohesion and performance: a meta-analysis

Webber, Sheila Simsarian, Donahue, Lisa M.·2001·Journal of Management

Abstract

A meta-analysis of the data from empirical investigations of diversity in work groups was used to examine the impact of two types of diversity attributes, highly job-related and less job-related, on work group cohesion and performance. This distinction was used to test the proposition that different types of diversity will differentially impact work group cohesion and performance. In addition, type of team was examined as a possible moderator of the relationship between diversity and performance. Results showed that neither type of diversity had a relationship with cohesion or performance. Explanations and directions for future research are offered.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/014920630102700202

Cites

66 of 66 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. 10.1177/014920639802400501 · DOI
  2. Blau, P. M., 1977, Inequality and heterogeneity
  3. Fiske, S. T., 1991, Social cognition
  4. 10.5465/amr.2000.2791606 · DOI
  5. Klimoski, R. J., 2001, How people evaluate others in organizations: person perception and interpersonal judgement in I/O Psychology
  6. Maznevski, M. L., annual meeting of the Academy of Management
  7. Shaw, M. E., 1981, Group dynamics
  8. Simons, T., Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings, 62
  9. Stauffer, J., 1998, MetaQuick II: psychometric meta analysis software for windows
  10. 10.2307/256593 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Williams, R. J., 1995, Journal of Managerial Issues, 7, 466

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 521

Metadata

Authors
Webber, S. S., & Donahue, L. M.
Affiliations
  • Concordia University (CA)
  • George Mason University (US)
Venue
Journal of Management
Published
2001-04
Volume
27
Issue
2
Pages
141-162
ISSN
  • 0149-2063 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-1211
OpenAlex
W4253216628
Cited by
518
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 34 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 34 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 32
FWCI
0.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Management (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Diversity and Inequality
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
team cohesion, group performance, team types

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