PSYCHOLOGY 2 Undergraduate Research Proposal Assignments (2 experimental studies)
Course
Psychology Practical Research & Analysis Skills
Institution
University Of The Highlands And Islands (UHI)
2 undergraduate psychology research proposals: Study 1- A laboratory experiment to examine gender-based differences in social loafing behaviour in a university population via an idea-generating task previously used by Charbonnier et al. (1998). Study 2- An experimental study examining the effectiv...
1: A laboratory experiment investigating gender differences in social loafing
behaviour in a Western university population
Introduction- The focus and aim of the study
Social loafing is the tendency for individuals to exert less effort when they work collectively;
that is with each member’s input being all pooled together to create a single group product,
than when they work either alone or coactively; that is in the presence of others but in such
a way that their contributions remain identifiable (Karau & Williams 1993, p. 681). Given that
many organizations and institutions heavily rely on the effective functioning of their work
groups, this finding has considerable practical implications. The identification and
understanding of potential individual- and group-level antecedents and deterrents of social
loafing became a priority for researchers, as these might suggest means for devising
intervention strategies, which can effectively reduce the behaviour.
Up to date, there has only been a handful of studies (Gabrenya, Wang & Latane, 1998;
Kugihara 1999), which directly investigated gender differences in relation to this
phenomenon. Considering that the number of women joining the work force steadily rises,
the lack of such data leaves an important gap in the literature. Additionally, behaviours
associated with gender are subject to change, as they are heavily influenced by societal norms
and cultural values, which are constantly evolving. Therefore, research, which investigates
‘evolving’ gender roles and the related attitudes and behaviours, is much needed. The
proposed experiment would utilize an idea-generating task, which was previously used by
Charbonnier et al. (1998), to examine whether men and women differ in terms of social
loafing behaviour. Based on past research, it has been hypothesized that males would be
more likely to engage in social loafing than females.
1
,Background
Over the years, a wide variety of factors have been identified to encourage social loafing
including increasing group size, which reduces the visibility of individual contributions
(Ingham et al. 1974), fatigue (Hoeksema-van Orden 1998) and low group cohesiveness (Liden
et al. 2004). On the other hand, preference for group work (Stark, Shaw & Duffy 2007),
perceived uniqueness of individual input and task difficulty (Harkins and Patty 1982) have
been shown to be negatively related to loafing. Karau and Williams (1993, p.700) argued that
although social loafing has been found to be robust across cultures, gender and various types
of tasks, the magnitude of the effect varies.
The relationship between gender and the tendency to social loaf has been rather
understudied (Karau & Williams 1993). However, the currently available research evidence
suggests that the magnitude of the effect is smaller for women than men across cultures
(Gabrenya, Wang & Latane 1985), both in self-reported and peer-rated evaluations (Stark,
Shaw & Duffy 2007), when working in actual groups (Kugihara 1999) as well as in virtual teams
(Furumo et al. 2014).
A few reasons have been implicated as to why this difference in loafing behaviour exist
between genders. Firstly, females were found to be significantly higher than males in terms
of agreeableness and conscientiousness (Costa, Terracciano & McCrae 2001). These very
personality traits have been previously reported to be negatively related to social loafing (Tan
& Tan 2008). Individuals, who are high in conscientiousness tend to be reliable, organized and
hard-working, while those high in agreeableness tend to be cooperative, emphatic, helpful
and tolerant of others. Furumo et al. (2014) suggested that women might be less likely to be
social loafers because these qualities allow them to feel more vested in their work groups,
and to evaluate the experience of working in a team more positively than men.
Much empirical evidence regarding gender differences (Clancy & Dollinger, 1993; Cross &
Madson, 1997; Gillian, 1982) also suggests that females are more likely to have
interdependent self-construals, which place much emphasis on relationships, connectedness
and harmony, while males’ representations of self tend to be independent, which emphasizes
specialness, individuality and separateness from others. This difference has been attributed
to the traditional gender roles, which still prevail in society; with men’s main role being
2
, earning and providing for the family, and that of women raising children (Kashima et al. 1995).
The notion, that gender moderates social loafing is largely rests on the assumption that
women are more relational and group-oriented than men. However, Charbonnier et al. (1998)
pointed out that not all individual’s self-description will adhere to the ‘expected’; with some
women describing themselves in terms, which have been predominantly associated with men
and vice versa. When investigating social loafing, the researchers found no gender effects.
Instead, they reported that self-uniqueness; the belief that one is better than others, made a
difference. Individual differences will arise and these can have a huge influence on whether a
person engages in social loafing or not.
Behaviours associated with gender roles are changing as equality improves for women.
Therefore, future research on gender differences is necessary. The purpose of the proposed
study is to contribute to the literature by exploring gender differences in exhibiting loafing
behaviour while performing a cognitive task.
Method
Design
The present laboratory experiment would aim to investigate gender differences in loafing
behaviour via an idea-generating task (previously used by Charbonnier et al. 1998), which
involves the participants generating as many uses as they can for a named object, while
working either coactively (Condition A) or collectively (Condition B). In condition A,
participants would work in the presence of others but would be advised that their
contributions to the project would remain identifiable. In condition B, participants would be
instructed that their individual performance would not be identifiable, and that the
researchers would only evaluate the performance of the group as a whole. The study would
use an independent groups design; with 30 participants (15 males, 15 females) in each
condition, to eliminate order effects and prevent the participants from guessing the true aim
of the study.
Participants
60 (30 male and 30 female) English-speaking participants, all over the age of 18, would be
recruited from a local university population via opportunity sampling.
3
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through EFT, credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying this summary from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller Skyler89. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy this summary for R96,25. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
