The Social Influence Network Model of Performance Expectations
Abstract
Disagreement among group members on each other’s status and competence has been found to negatively impact group performance. However, in theories, it is oftentimes assumed that group members have common perceptions of each other’s competence, or in other words, have a consensus on performance expectations. Recognizing the importance of disagreement on performance expectations, in this dissertation I argue that individuals are subject to the self-serving bias and can develop different performance expectations based on the same status information. The results of an online experiment show that individuals tend to think highly of themselves in both status-homogeneous and status-heterogenous situations, and consequently disagree on performance expectations. The self-serving bias largely impacts how individuals translate status information into performance expectations for themselves and others, especially when the status information is sufficiently ambiguous for subjective interpretation. I also propose a dynamic model integrating Status Characteristics Theory and Social Influence Network Theory to investigate the process by which group consensus on performance expectations can emerge from initial disagreement. The model formulates the coevolution of individuals’ performance expectations and the social influence network in a collectively oriented task group. The proposed model is validated and used to simulate the coevolution process of groups differing in network attributes. The simulation results indicate that the rapidity of reaching equilibrium on performance expectations hinges on the initial degree of disagreement, group size and network density. These factors, in addition to the segregation between opinion subgroups, also affect whether a group can reach consensus on performance expectations through the social influence process. Taken together, this dissertation provides empirical evidence of group dissensus on performance expectations, suggesting the necessity of extending the theoretical scope to account for situations where a group consensus cannot be assumed. The proposed model serves as a parsimonious mechanism explaining how initial disagreement on performance expectations can evolve into consensus. The findings based on the model shed light on how interpersonal influence operates in small groups to foster group consensus.