Effects of group size and proximity under cooperative and competitive conditions.

Abstract

Research on coaction has concentrated on the arousal-inducing properties of others while practically ignoring the possibility that others may be a source of arousal reduction. The results of the present study support the notion that other coactors can be a source of arousal reduction as well as induction, as reflected in their performance on novel tasks. One experiment varied group size (two or four) and instructional set (competition or cooperation), while a second experiment varied proximity (close or far) and instructional set (competition or cooperation). In both experiments, a significant interaction was obtained. In the first experiment, subjects in the cooperative condition performed better in groups of four than in groups of two, while the reverse was obtained in the competitive condition. In the second experiment, subjects in the cooperative condition performed better when seated close as opposed to far apart, while opposite results were obtained in the competitive condition. Past research has demonstrated that an individual's task performance can be affected by the mere presence of others (see Cottrell, 1972, for a review). This research has involved the use of two paradigms, audience and coaction. In the audience paradigm, individuals perform a task in the presence of observers, while in the coaction paradigm a group of individuals concurrently and individually perform an identical task. Zajonc (1965) has argued that the mere presence of others increases an individual's general level of arousal which in turn increases the tendency to emit dominant responses. If the dominant responses are correct (as is presumably the case for well-learned tasks), heightened arousal results in improved performance by an individual, while if the dominant responses are incorrect (as is presumably the case for tasks that are not well-learned), arousal results in impaired performance.