Teaching and Learning in Nursing (2015) xx, xxxxxx

www.jtln.org

Social dynamics in group work1

Jeffery W. Forehand DNP, RN-BC a,, Katherine H. Leigh DNP, RN b ,
Robin Gosdin Farrell DNP, FNP-C c , Amy Y. Spurlock PhD, RN a
a

Troy University, Troy, AL, USA 36082

Troy University, Dothan, AL, USA 36304
c
Troy University, Montgomery, AL, USA 36104
b

KEYWORDS:
Social dynamics
Group work
Social loafing
Group projects

Abstract
Group work plays an important role in the preparation and role development of nursing students.
Benefits of group work include skill building and promotion of positive behaviors. Despite the many
benefits of group work, there are challenges that accompany the process for students and nursing
educators. This article will highlight concerns related to group work. In addition, evidence-based
teaching strategies for nursing educators will be presented.
2015 National Organization for Associate Degree Nursing. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Group work projects have become a common method

of preparing students for the real world, particularly within
nursing programs. In the midst of today's health care
environment, it is important for undergraduate nursing
students to cultivate a variety of skills as a group member
in the academic and clinical setting (Beccaria, Kek, Huijser,
Rose, & Kimmins, 2014). These skills are important to
the delivery of care. Group work can enhance the
development of learning through promoting self-confidence,
problem-solving skills, teamwork skills, management
skills, active learning, and shared understanding (Beccaria
et al., 2014; Hunt & Hutchings, 2014). Group work also
creates opportunities for nursing students to enhance
interpersonal skills such as oral communication, listening,
manners, cultural awareness, and accountability (Hunt &
Hutchings, 2014).
Despite the many potential benefits of group work, there
are challenges that accompany the management of group
work projects. Social dynamics such as procrastination,
1

No Grant or Financial Assistance Received for This Study.

Corresponding author. Tel.: + 1 334 670 5864; fax: +1 334 670 3744.
E-mail address: jforehand@troy.edu

social loafing, and free riding often occur with group work
projects. These social dynamics can affect the assessment of
individual accountability in group work. Students often cite a
variety of concerns with group work projects including
individual versus group grading, group members not meeting
expectations of the group, and the peer assessment process. It
is essential that nurse educators are cognizant of social and
group work dynamics (Freeman & Greenacre, 2011).
Understanding social dynamics and their applicability to
group work projects can assist nurse educators to maximize
the learning opportunities inherent to the use of group work.

1. Defining the Social Dynamics of Group Work

Procrastination is defined as an individual's voluntary
delay of an intended action toward a task despite the negative
consequences and outcome (Ferrari & Pychyl, 2012) and is a
common issue that impacts group work. Another primary
problem cited by students within a group is the issue of social
loafing. Indeed, social loafing is the most common complaint
of students while working in group projects (Aggarwal &
OBrien, 2008; Donmeyer, 2012). Social loafing is

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.teln.2015.12.007
1557-3087/ 2015 National Organization for Associate Degree Nursing. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

J.W. Forehand et al.

characterized by the susceptibility of a reduced individual

effort when participating in groups as compared to the
individual effort put forth when working alone (Williams &
Karau, 1991). Free-riding students, another term used
interchangeably for social loafers, do not contribute to the
group but expect others to pick up their slack and yet receive
the same grade (Jassawalla, Malshe, & Sashittal, 2008).
Research indicates that some degree of social loafing can be
found within every group (Davoudi, Oraji, & Kaur, 2012).

Fig. 1

On average, group work projects require increased time

and dependence on others in contrast to student perceptions
of independent learning (Piezon & Donaldson, 2005). (See
Figs. 1 3.)
Jassawalla et al. (2008) studied 394 undergraduates
qualitatively in face-to-face business classes. Students
viewed social loafers as slackers who perform low-quality
work in terms of poor contributions and amount of work.
Social loafers in group work also result in a smaller number

Group Project Guidelines.

Social Dynamics in Group Work

Fig. 2

Group Project Grading Rubric.

of ideas generated and failure to meet assignment deadlines.

Jassawalla, Sashittal, and Malshe (2009) studied the same
participants quantitatively, finding that social loafers'
distractive behavior ( = 0.253, t = 3.20) and poor quality
work ( = 0.295, t = 4.06) significantly affect group
performance; other group members must compensate when
social loafers do less work (Jassawalla et al., 2009). Social
loafing is often more pronounced in technology settings
(Alnuaimi, Robert, & Maruping, 2010; Blaskovich, 2008).

2. Historical Perspectives on Group Work

Research has yielded findings on the identification of
social loafing, its reasons for occurring, and the antecedents'
preempting its presence in group work. Theories have
emerged as to why certain individuals within groups may
contribute less than others. In the early 1900s, Ringelmann
first noticed that when individuals work as a group, there is a
decrease in individual effort, noted as the Ringelmann Effect
(Kravitz & Martin, 1986). Ringelmann found this to be true
when a group of German employees were requested to exert
maximum effort on a rope-pulling assignment. It was noted
that participants who were assigned to groups contributed
significantly less than when working alone (Suleiman &
Watson, 2008).

Latane's Social Impact Theory explains social loafing in

terms of the dilution effect: the larger the group size, the less
the social impact of its members (Chidambarum & Tung,
2005; Latane, 1981). Chidambarum and Tung (2005) studied
240 undergraduate business students split into groups of four
or eight and compared face-to-face and electronic group
decision-making task performance. Findings indicated that
an increased group size was inversely related to a mean
decrease in the number of ideas generated ( = 0.442, t =
3.593, p b .005) although the quality of ideas was not
significant. In addition, increases in group size were
inversely related to the quality of group decisions ( =
0.736, t = 7.164, p b .005) and degree of cohesiveness of
the group ( = 0.429, t = 3.537, p b .005). Interestingly,
while group performance did not differ on whether groups
were face-to-face or electronic, larger groups in either format
reduced performance on tasks.

3. Evidence-Based Teaching Strategies

Understanding the phenomena of social loafing and its
antecedents is critical to improving the pedagogy of nursing
education. Research has identified evidence-based strategies
to improve the utility of group work and reduce social loafing
among group members.

J.W. Forehand et al.

Fig. 3

Group Project Evaluation.

It is important that educators consider evidence-based

strategies that help to promote a successful group project. An
example of one such project is presented in Table 1. This
group work assignment has been implemented with both
undergraduate and graduate students and may be applied to
nursing students at any program level. The development of

Table 1

Evidence-Based Strategies for Group Work Projects.

Small group size (Alnuaimi et al., 2010; Clark & Baker, 2011)
Reliable performance assessment mechanisms (Clark & Baker, 2011;
Donmeyer, 2012)
Incorporation of a peer rating process (Clark & Baker, 2011;
Donmeyer, 2012; Khamis, Sulong, & Deros, 2012)
Coaching of the peer evaluation process by the instructor (Aggarwal &
OBrien, 2008; Blaskovich, 2008; Jassawalla et al., 2009)
Evaluation of individual performance and accountability (Clark &
Baker, 2011; Jassawalla et al., 2008)

these projects took into account each of the evidence-based

strategies presented in Table 1. The first evidence-based
strategy involves creating small group sizes of no more than
three to four members. The small group size promotes more
collaboration and shared work. The second strategy includes
reliable performance assessment mechanisms. Monitoring of
group participation throughout the entire project process
allows faculty to be engaged in assessment of performance
and social dynamics of the group and its members. One of
the goals for the group project is to promote student
centeredness and to enhance social dynamics within the
group through the use of multiple mediums for communication. The third evidence-based strategy involves evaluation
of individual performance and accountability through the use
of a peer rating process. This is accomplished through the use
of a faculty developed peer review tool that takes into
account the assessment of the group project along with the
social dynamic components. The next evidence-based

Social Dynamics in Group Work

strategy involves coaching of the peer evaluation process by
the instructor. Providing an introduction to the group project
assignment and elements of the peer evaluation process will
provide knowledge to students regarding group work.
Specific elements that are presented to students within the
introduction include, individual/group expectations, handling conflict resolution, and strategies for being successful
in a group project. Research has demonstrated that
evidence-based strategies can be implemented to help
improve the group project experience (Brown & McIlroy,
2011; Gagnon & Roberge, 2012; Liu & Dall Alba, 2012;
Shiu, Chan, Lam, Lee, & Kwong, 2012; Yang, Woomer, &
Matthews, 2012).

4. Implications to Nursing Education

Nurse educators are faced with the challenge of
culminating group work activities in the most effective
manner for student learning. It is critical for nurse educators
to employ learning opportunities for students that support
competency development for future collaborative practice.
These experiences often require effective group work skills
and should be structured to promote problem-solving skills
that are transferrable to diverse workplace settings. Graduating students with strong communication skills along with
cognizant awareness of social dynamics and group work
ensure the success of interdisciplinary and collaborative
practice in an evolving health care delivery system.

References
Aggarwal, P., & OBrien, C. (2008). Social loafing on group projects:
Structural antecedents and effect on student satisfaction. Journal of
Marketing Education, 30(3), 255264.
Alnuaimi, O., Robert, L., Jr., & Maruping, L. (2010). Team size, dispersion,
and social loafing in technology-supported teams: A perspective on the
theory of moral disengagement. Journal of Management Information
Systems, 27(1), 203230.
Beccaria, L., Kek, M., Huijser, H., Rose, J., & Kimmins, L. (2014). The
interrelationships between student approaches to learning and group
work. Nurse Education Today, 34(7), 10941103.
Blaskovich, J. L. (2008). Exploring the effect of distance: An experimental
investigation of virtual collaboration, social loafing, and group
decisions. Journal of Information Systems, 22(1), 2746.
Brown, C., & McIlroy, K. (2011). Group work in healthcare students
education: What do we think we are doing? Assessment & Evaluation in
Higher Education, 36(6), 687699.

5
Chidambarum, L., & Tung, L. L. (2005). Is out of sight, out of mind? An
empirical study of social loafing in technology-supported groups. Information Systems Research, 16(2), 149168.
Clark, J., & Baker, T. (2011). Its not fair! Cultural attitudes to social
loafing in ethnically diverse groups. Intercultural Communication,
20(1), 124140.
Davoudi, S., Oraji, S., & Kaur, R. (2012). Social loafing as a latent factor in
organizations: Productivity loss in group work. Arth Prabhand: A
Journal of Economics and Management, 1(2).
Donmeyer, C. J. (2012). A new strategy for dealing with social loafers on the
group project: The segment manager method. Journal of Marketing
Education, 34(2), 113127.
Ferrari, J. R., & Pychyl, T. A. (2012). If I wait, my partner will do it: The
role of conscientiousness as a mediator in the relation of academic
procrastination and perceived social loafing. North American Journal of
Psychology, 14(1), 1324.
Freeman, L., & Greenacre, L. (2011). An examination of socially destructive
behaviors in group work. Journal of Marketing Education, 33(1), 517.
Gagnon, L., & Roberge, G. (2012). Dissecting the journey: Nursing student
experiences with collaboration during the group work process. Nursing
Education Today, 32(8), 945950.
Hunt, J. A., & Hutchings, M. (2014). Innovative group-facilitated peer and
educator assessment of nursing students group presentations. Health
Science Journal, 8(1), 2231.
Jassawalla, A. R., Malshe, A., & Sashittal, H. (2008). Student perceptions of
social loafing in undergraduate business classroom teams. Decisions
Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 6(2), 403426.
Jassawalla, A., Sashittal, H., & Malshe, A. (2009). Students perceptions of
social loafing: Its antecedents and consequences in undergraduate
business classroom teams. Academy of Management Learning &
Education, 8(1), 4254.
Khamis, N., Sulong, A., & Deros, B. (2012). A case study on peer review
and lecturer evaluations in an academic setting. Asian Social Science,
8(16), 192199.
Kravitz, D., & Martin, B. (1986). Ringelmann rediscovered: The original
article. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50.
Latane, B. (1981). The psychology of social impact. American Psychology,
36, 343356.
Liu, S., & Dall Alba, G. (2012). Learning intercultural communication
through group work oriented to the world beyond the classroom. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(1), 1932.
Piezon, S., & Donaldson, R. (2005). Online groups and social loafing:
Understanding student-group interactions. Online Journal of Distance
Learning Administration, 8(4).
Shiu, A., Chan, C., Lam, P., Lee, J., & Kwong, A. (2012). Baccalaureate
nursing students perceptions of peer assessment of individual
contributions to a group project: A case study. Nurse Education
Today, 32(3), 214218.
Suleiman, J., & Watson, R. (2008). Social loafing in technology-supported
teams. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 17, 291309.
Williams, K., & Karau, S. (1991). Social loafing and social compensation:
The effects of expectations of co-worker performance. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 61(4), 570581.
Yang, K., Woomer, G., & Matthews, J. (2012). Collaborative learning
among undergraduate students in community health nursing. Nurse
Education in Practice, 12(2), 7276.