The views of the authors do not necessarily reflect the positions of the Department of the Army or the Department of Defense (para. 4-3, AR 360-5). The data utilized in this paper were collected in a long-term study of the Army's “Cohort” New Manning System. The study was directed by D. H. Marlowe. We gratefully acknowledge D. H. Marlowe, T. P. Furukawa, J. E. Griffith, L. H. Ingraham, F. R. Kirkland, J. A. Martin, R. J. Schneider, J. M. Teitelbaum, and numerous other personnel who collected the data used in this paper. We also thank two anonymous reviewers for valuable comments on an earlier draft of this paper.
Group Consensus and Psychological Well-Being: A Large Field Study1
Article first published online: 31 JUL 2006
Journal of Applied Social Psychology
Volume 28, Issue 7, pages 563–580, April 1998
How to Cite
Bliese, P. D. and Halverson, R. R. (1998), Group Consensus and Psychological Well-Being: A Large Field Study. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28: 563–580. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1998.tb01720.x
- Issue published online: 31 JUL 2006
- Article first published online: 31 JUL 2006
Models of group process propose that stressful social environments develop when there is a lack of consensus among group members about issues of relevance to the group. Based on these models, we expected that levels of consensus would be positively related to the average levels of psychological well-being in naturally occurring work groups. An examination of data from 3,546 respondents within 73 work groups revealed that levels of consensus about leadership and peer relations were positively related to the average psychological well-being of the group members, even after controlling for absolute level effects and covariates. In contrast, levels of consensus were not related to the average psychological well-being of group members when identical analyses were conducted using pseudogroups.