refer to the individual characteristics of group members
classified these personal factors into three categories: demographic attributes (e.g., member similarity, sex),
cognitions and motives (e.g., attributions for responsibility, anxiety), and
behavior (e.g., adherence, social loafing).
Carron and Dennis (2001) suggested that the most important personal factor associated with the development of both task and social cohesion on sport teams is INDIVIDUAL SATISFACTION
Another factor often cited as a correlate of cohesiveness is similarity (a demographic attribute)— similarity in attitudes, aspirations, commitments, and expectations. (Kindle Locations 5100-5101).
* Group status. The higher athletes' perceptions of task cohesion are, the less importance athletes place on rewards and on achieving status.
* Role clarity and acceptance. A circular relationship exists between role clarity and acceptance and task cohesion.
* Collective efficacy. High collective efficacy is related to higher levels of task cohesion, and higher task cohesion is related to higher levels of cohesion.
* Group norms. When normative expectations for certain behaviors are strong, cohesion is also strong.
* Decision style. Stronger perceptions of cohesion are related to a more participative decision style.
* Self-presentation. Self-presentation concerns decrease as group cohesion increases (Divine, Munroe-Chandler, & Loughead, 2013).
* Sacrifice. Players engage in sacrifices to the team to a greater extent when cohesion is high.
* Self-handicapping. Athletes engage in more self-handicapping behavior (strategies used to protect self-esteem such as externalizing failure and internalizing success) when task cohesion is viewed as high.
* Skill level. The relationship between cohesion and performance exists across a broad band of athletic skill and experience, from high school to professional sport.
* Social loafing. Athletes on teams higher in cohesion are less likely to think that their teammates may socially loaf and are less likely to socially loaf themselves.
* Attributions for responsibility. Successful, cohesive teams use team-enhancing attributional strategies such as distributing the credit for success and sharing the responsibility for failure.
* Competitive state anxiety. Athletes who perceived their cognitive or somatic anxiety to be facilitative have higher levels of task cohesion (Eys, Hardy, Carron, & Beauchamp, 2003).
* Imagery. Teams higher in cohesion are more likely to use certain types of imagery such as cognitive specific imagery (focus on a specific task or skill) and motivational general mastery (build confidence; Hardy, Hall, & Carron, 2003).
* Motivational outcomes. Group cohesion has been shown to be related to adaptive motivational outcomes such as increased effort, expectancies of success, and increased persistence (Gu, Solomon, Zhang, & Xiang, 2011).
* Passion. Passion increases as cohesion increases.
(Kindle Locations 5278-5287).
Cohesion is positively related to other important constructs, such as satisfaction, conformity, social support, group goals, and stability. In addition, cohesion has been shown to be related to role acceptance, group status, decision-making style, sex, collective efficacy, group norms, ability and experience, imagery, and self-handicapping. This knowledge is important to consider when coaches, teachers, and exercise leaders want to enhance cohesion in their teams or groups.