CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 3,361Team Dynamics and PerformanceEmotional Intelligence and PerformanceSocial and Intergroup Psychology

The ripple effect: emotional contagion and its influence on group behavior

Open access
Barsade, Sigal G.·2002·Administrative Science Quarterly
DOI 10.2307/3094912
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Group emotional contagion, the transfer of moods among people in a group, and its influence on work group dynamics was examined in a laboratory study of managerial decision making using multiple, convergent measures of mood, individual attitudes, behavior, and group-level dynamics. Using a 2 times 2 experimental design, with a trained confederate enacting mood conditions, the predicted effect of emotional contagion was found among group members, using both outside coders' ratings of participants' mood and participants' self-reported mood. No hypothesized differences in contagion effects due to the degree of pleasantness of the mood expressed and the energy level with which it was conveyed were found. There was a significant influence of emotional contagion on individual-level attitudes and group processes. As predicted, the positive emotional contagion group members experienced improved cooperation, decreased conflict, and increased perceived task performance. Theoretical implications and practical ramifications of emotional contagion in groups and organizations are discussed.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/3094912

Cites

173 of 173 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Sensing anxiety from the employee and/or experiencing anxiety as a result of the employee's work-related resource allocation and lack of relationship engagement should facilitate contagion effects, where the employee's anxiety in the nonwork domain can be 'caught' by their significant others.

    “That is, sensing anxiety from the employee and/or experiencing anxiety as a result of the employee's work-related resource allocation and lack of relationship engagement should facilitate contagion effects, where the employee's anxiety in the nonwork domain can be 'caught' by their significant others (Barsade, 2002; Boyar, Maertz, Pearson, & Keough, 2003).”

    From Killing Me Softly: Organizational E-mail Monitoring Expectations’ Impact on Employee and Significant Other Well-Being (2021) · cites this paper as Barsade, 2002

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Emotional contagion can occur through a strategic and conscious pathway when individuals deliberately align their emotional responses with a higher-status individual, following the logic of social comparison.

    “Second, contagion can be strategic and conscious, when individuals deliberately align their emotional responses with a higher-status individual (e.g., a leader), following the logic of social comparison (Barsade, 2002).”

    From The Groupfeel syndrome: a theory of a counterproductive group emotion (2026) · cites this paper as Barsade, 2002

    The EMOTIONAL CONTAGION section (page unavailable) says contagion can occur consciously through social comparison: people compare their moods with others’ and respond accordingly. It does not say that recipients deliberately align with a higher-status person. The GENERAL DISCUSSION (page unavailable) discusses leaders’ deliberate use of emotion, but that concerns the person inducing contagion, not a follower’s deliberate response. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Emotional contagion can occur through an automatic and unconscious pathway driven by mimicry and emotional empathy.

    “First, it can be automatic and unconscious, driven by mimicry and emotional empathy-individuals involuntarily mirror the sender's affective cues.”

    From The Groupfeel syndrome: a theory of a counterproductive group emotion (2026) · cites this paper as Barsade, 2002

    The EMOTIONAL CONTAGION section describes an automatic, subconscious pathway in which people spontaneously mimic others’ expressions and then experience an emotion through self-feedback. It does not identify emotional empathy as a driver of that pathway. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The cooccurrence of high emotional intensity, positivity norms, and low collective EI creates a self-reinforcing affective configuration that increases the risk of impaired collective judgment.

    “Taken together, these findings support the idea that the cooccurrence of high emotional intensity, positivity norms, and low collective EI creates a self-reinforcing affective configuration that increases the risk of impaired collective judgment.”

    From The Groupfeel syndrome: a theory of a counterproductive group emotion (2026) · cites this paper as Barsade, 2002

    The General Discussion (page not supplied) suggests that unrecognized positive mood contagion could spread unrealistic euphoria, leading to overconfidence, pressure for uniformity, and poor performance. It does not identify high emotional intensity, positivity norms, and low collective emotional intelligence as a cooccurring, self-reinforcing configuration; that specific explanation is not supported by this paper. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • This can further benefit organizations if emotions are transferred to others.

    “This can further benefit organizations if emotions are transferred to others (Barsade, 2002).”

    From The Participation of People with Disabilities in the Workplace Across the Employment Cycle: Employer Concerns and Research Evidence (2020) · cites this paper as Barsade, 2002

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 13

  1. Bartel, C.A., and R. Saavedra 2000 "The collective construction of workgroup moods." Administrative Science Quarterly, 45: 197-231.
  2. Doherty, R. W. 1998 "Emotional Contagion and Social Judgment." Motivation and Emotion, 22(3): 187-209.
  3. Ekman, P. 1999 "Facial Expressions" In T. Dalgleish & M.J. Power (eds.), Handbook of cognition and emotion: 301-320. Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons.
  4. Evans, W. 1965 "Conflict and Performance in R and D Organizations." Industrial Management Review, 7: 37-46.
  5. Friedman, H. S., and T. Miller-Herringer 1991 "Nonverbal display of emotion in public and in private: Self-monitoring, personality, and Journal of expressive cues." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(5):766-775.
  6. Hinsz, V.B., and J.A. Tomhave 1991 "Smile and (half) the world smiles with you, frown and you frown alone." Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17(5): 586-592.
  7. Krackhardt, D., and D.J. Brass 1994 "Intra-organizational networks: The micro side." In S. Wasserman and J. Galaskiewicz (eds.), Advances in Social Network Analysis: 207-229 Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  8. Larsen, R. J., and E.Diener 1992 "Promises and problems with the circumplex model of emotions." Review of Personality and Social Psychology, 13: 25-29.
  9. Levine, J.M. and R.L. Moreland 1998 "Small Groups." In D.T. Gilbert, S.T. Fiske et al. (eds). The handbook of social psychology, 2 (4 th Ed.): 415-469. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
  10. Levine, J.M. and R.L. Moreland 1992 "Small groups and mental health." In D.N. Ruble, P.R. Costanzo et al,. (eds), The social psychology of mental health: Basic mechanisms and applications : 126-165. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  11. Pratt, M. 1994 "The happiest, most dissatisfied people on earth: Ambivalence and commitment among Amway distributors." Unpublished Dissertation. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan.
  12. Rime, B., and V. Christophe 1997 "How individual emotional episodes feed collective memory." In J.W. Pennebaker, D. Paez, et al. (eds.), Collective Memory of Political Events: Social Psychological Perspectives: 131 -146 Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  13. Veith, I. 1965 Hysteria: The history of a disease. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Barsade, S. G.
Affiliations
Yale University (US)
Corresponding author
Barsade, Sigal G.
Venue
Administrative Science Quarterly
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
2002-12
Volume
47
Issue
4
Pages
644-675
ISSN
  • 0001-8392 (ISSN-L)
  • 1930-3815
DOI
10.2307/3094912
OpenAlex
W2067369167
Cited by
3,361
References
172
Citations by year
2026: 176 · 2025: 196 · 2024: 167 · 2023: 202 · 2022: 197 · 2021: 208 · 2020: 177 · 2019: 265 · 2018: 160 · 2017: 198 · 2016: 170 · 2015: 184 · 2014: 171 · 2013: 154 · 2012: 153
FWCI
25.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • Administrative Science Quarterly (publishedVersion)
  • ScholarlyCommons (University of Pennsylvania) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Emotional Intelligence and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
emotional contagion, group dynamics, management decision-making, work teams, cooperation, group conflict, personal attitudes, self-reported mood

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