Lucie Finez

When Good Teammates Are Bad: Physiological Threat on Recently Formed Teams

This research examined the ways in which superior teammate performance in recently formed teams affects an individual’s motivation. It was hypothesized that members of recently formed teams for whom social identity was not yet salient would experience threat, a maladaptive physiological pattern that indicates low perceptions of coping resources relative to situational demands. Furthermore, it was hypothesized that this effect would be the greatest for individuals on recently formed teams who had briefly interacted with teammates but still lacked a strong social identity, relative to those who have not interacted with teammates at all. Fifty-three participants were each paired with 2 confederates to form 53 triads. Depending on the condition, participants and confederates either competed as a team on a mental task (minimal team condition), completed a team-building exercise prior to competing as a team on a mental task (team condition), or competed as individuals against each other (individual/coaction baseline condition) on a mental task. The results revealed that participants who worked on a team with superior performers were threatened. Interestingly, participants who had the opportunity to bond with their teammates prior to working together were even more threatened by superior performers. Results are discussed in terms of psychological closeness and social comparison theory.

Trait self-esteem and claimed self-handicapping motives in sports situations

Abstract We examined the relationship between physical self-esteem and claimed self-handicapping among athletes by taking motives into consideration. In Study 1, 99 athletes were asked to report their tendency to engage in claimed self-handicapping for self-protective and self-enhancement motives (trait measures). Low self-esteem athletes reported a higher tendency to engage in claimed self-handicapping for these two motives compared with high self-esteem athletes. Neither low nor high self-esteem athletes reported a preference for one motive over the other. In Study 2, 107 athletes participated in a test that was ostensibly designed to assess high physical abilities – and thus to encourage self-handicapping for self-enhancement motives (success-meaningful condition) – or to assess low physical abilities, and thus to encourage self-handicapping for self-protective motives (failure-meaningful condition). Before starting the test, athletes were given the opportunity to claim handicaps that could impair their performance. Low self-esteem athletes claimed more handicaps than high self-esteem athletes in both conditions. Findings suggest that low physical self-esteem athletes engage more in claimed handicapping regardless of motives, relative to high physical self-esteem athletes.

For better or for worse: The effect of superior and inferior teammate performance on changes in challenge/threat cardiovascular responses

Although much research has investigated the consequences of working with teammates, little research has addressed the effect of team processes on changes in motivational states and associated cardiovascular responses. Filling this gap, we utilized the biopsychosocial model of challenge and threat to examine the effect of teammate performance on evaluations of resources and demands in a team performance situation. It was hypothesized that, assuming team identity engagement, individuals who worked with superior teammates would perceive more resources available to them and exhibit a challenge response (a physiological change that indicates relatively high perceived resources), whereas individuals who worked with inferior teammates would perceive less resources and exhibit a threat response (a physiological change that indicates relatively low perceived resources). For four weeks, 38 teams completed team-building exercises and competed in an anagram tournament, during which measures of cardiovascular reactivity were collected. Participants teamed with two confederates who were either inferior or superior performers. The results of the study revealed that despite the fact that they were the best performers on their team, individuals who worked with inferior teammates were threatened. However, individuals who worked with superior teammates were challenged. Explanations of the observed findings and applications for work/organizational contexts are discussed.

Effects of Autonomy-Supportive and Controlling Styles on Situational Self-Determined Motivation: Some Unexpected Results of the Commitment Procedure

Distinct and simultaneous effects of autonomy-supportive and controlling styles, usually considered as mutually exclusive, on situational self-determined motivation are tested. In Study 1, economics students (N = 100; 57 men, 43 women; M age = 21.5 yr.) were randomly assigned to one of the four experimental conditions (high vs. low) of autonomy supportive and / or controlling behaviors during a task. Results supported the independence of those constructs. An unexpected effect in regards to Self-determination Theory was found in the Low autonomy – High control condition in which self-determined motivation was observed. The interpretation for this specific condition, an effect due to the attempt to reduce cognitive dissonance triggered by the commitment procedure, was tested. In Study 2, sport students (N = 80, 44 men, 36 women; M age = 19.2 yr.) were randomly assigned to one of the three experimental conditions: No commitment, Commitment plus self-affirmation, and Commitment without self-affirmation. Results supported Study 1s interpretation: motivation was lower when participants were recruited without a commitment procedure or when they were invited to self-affirm than when participants recruited with a commitment procedure.