Dragging down and dragging up: How relative group status affects responses to common fate

The authors examined whether status differences moderate the effects of common fate on subgroup relations. University students (N = 103) were led to believe that their subgroup was performing well (high status) or poorly (low status) relative to another subgroup. They were then told that the combined performances of the subgroups would have shared implications for their subgroup's welfare. (common fate) or that there would be a direct link between their subgroup's performance and its welfare (no common fate). High-status (but not low-status) group members responded to the common fate situation by (a) decategorizing and (b) showing benevolence to the out-group. Results are discussed with respect to their implications for managing subgroup relations.

A study of the lagged relationships among safety climate, safety motivation, safety behavior, and accidents at the individual and group levels

The authors measured perceptions of safety climate, motivation, and behavior at 2 time points and linked them to prior and subsequent levels of accidents over a 5-year period. A series of analyses examined the effects of top-down and bottom-up processes operating simultaneously over time. In terms of top-down effects, average levels of safety climate within groups at I point in time predicted subsequent changes in individual safety motivation. Individual safety motivation, in turn, was associated with subsequent changes in self-reported safety behavior. In terms of bottom-up effects, improvements in the average level of safety behavior within groups were associated with a subsequent reduction in accidents at the group level. The results contribute to an understanding of the factors influencing workplace safety and the levels and lags at which these effects operate.