Cost-benefit analyses for your group and yourself: The rationality of decision-making in conflict

Two studies in the context of English-French relations in Québec suggest that individuals who strongly identify with a group derive the individual-level costs and benefits that drive expectancy-value processes (rational decision-making) from group-level costs and benefits. In Study 1, high identifiers linked group- and individual-level outcomes of conflict choices whereas low identifiers did not. Group-level expectancy-value processes, in Study 2, mediated the relationship between social identity and perceptions that collective action benefits the individual actor and between social identity and intentions to act. These findings suggest the rational underpinnings of identity-driven political behavior, a relationship sometimes obscured in intergroup theory that focuses on cognitive processes of self-stereotyping. But the results also challenge the view that individuals' cost-benefit analyses are independent of identity processes. The findings suggest the importance of modeling the relationship of group and individual levels of expectancy-value processes as both hierarchical and contingent on social identity processes

Normative influence and rational conflict decisions: Group norms and cost-benefit analyses for intergroup behavior

The present paper articulates a model in which ingroup and outgroup norms inform 'rational' decision-making (cost-benefit analysis) for conflict behaviors. Norms influence perceptions of the consequences of the behavior, and individuals may thus strategically conform to or violate norms in order to acquire benefits and avoid costs. Two studies demonstrate these processes in the context of conflict in Quebec. In the first study, Anglophones' perceptions of Francophone and Anglophone norms for pro-English behaviors predicted evaluations of the benefits and costs of the behaviors, and these cost-benefit evaluations in turn mediated the norm-intention links for both group norms. In the second study, a manipulated focus on supportive versus hostile ingroup and outgroup norms also predicted cost-benefit evaluations, which mediated the norm-intention relationships. The studies support a model of strategic conflict choices in which group norms inform, rather than suppress, rational expectancy value processes. Implications for theories of decision-making and normative influence are discussed.

An analysis of relational complexity in an air traffic control conflict detection task

Theoretical analyses of air traffic complexity were carried out using the Method for the Analysis of Relational Complexity. Twenty-two air traffic controllers examined static air traffic displays and were required to detect and resolve conflicts. Objective measures of performance included conflict detection time and accuracy. Subjective perceptions of mental workload were assessed by a complexity-sorting task and subjective ratings of the difficulty of different aspects of the task. A metric quantifying the complexity of pair-wise relations among aircraft was able to account for a substantial portion of the variance in the perceived complexity and difficulty of conflict detection problems, as well as reaction time. Other variables that influenced performance included the mean minimum separation between aircraft pairs and the amount of time that aircraft spent in conflict.

The impact of LMX differentiation on perceptions of team conflict and procedural justice climate

The fundamental tenet of Leader Member Exchange (LMX) theory is that leaders develop different quality relationships with each of their employees; however, to our knowledge, no study has investigated the impact of LMX differentiation on teams. Drawing upon the justice literature, we suggest that fostering different quality LMX relationships runs counter to principles of equality' and consistency, which are important for maintaining social harmony in groups, and perceptions of procedural fairness. We therefore propose that differential treatment of employees by the leader (as indicated by within-team variability in LMX relationships) will have a negative effect on team reladons, and percepdons of procedural jusdce climate. Two samples of employed individuals are used to invesdgate the hypothesized reladonships. Sample A consists of 74 individuals from a variety of occupadonal and organisadonal backgrounds, and Sample B consists of 152 individuals from an Australian organisadon dealing in the sale and service of heavy machiner)'. In both samples, high LMX variability within teams is associated with higher reports of team reladonal conflict, and lower reports of procedural jusdce climate. The results suggest that leaders may need to be caudous about fostering special relationships with only a select subset of employees.

The role of team identification in the dissimilarity-conflict relationship

This study examined the role of team identification in the dissimilarity and conflict relationship. We tested competing predictions that team identification would either mediate or moderate the positive associations between visible (age, gender and ethnic background), professional (background) and value dissimilarity and task and relationship conflict. Data was collected from 27 MBA student teams twice during a semester. Multilevel modelling and a longitudinal design were used. Results showed that value dissimilarity was positively associated with task and relationship conflict at Time 2. Its effects on relationship conflict at Time 1 were moderated by team identification. Team identification also moderated the effects of gender, age and ethnic dissimilarity on task conflict at Time 2, and the effects of gender and professional dissimilarity on relationship conflict at Time 2. No support was obtained for the mediating role of team identification on the associations between dissimilarity and conflict, or for changes in the effects of dissimilarity over time.