Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Human Relations
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (3)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Suls, J. M.
Right arrow Articles by Miler, R. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Ability Comparison and Its Effects on Affiliation Preferences

Jerry M. Suls

Department of Psychology, State University of New York at Albany, 1400 Washington Avenue, Albany, New York 12222.

Richard L. Miler

Georgetown University

The present paper reports the results of two experiments which examined how subjects choose partners for work interactions. In both experiments subjects were given feedback ("very good, " "good, " "average," "poor") about their previous level of performance and about the performance of others who could be chosen as partners for an evaluated or nonevaluated work interaction. The results of Experiment 1 indicated that there was an overall tendency for subjects to choose "very good" or "good" partners scoring in the upper quartiles. Further, "very good" and "good" subjects tended to select similar ability partners whether the interaction was expected to be evaluated or not. "Average"subjects tended to pick "good" partners for the evaluated interaction and "very good" partners for the nonevaluated interaction. "Poor" subjects showed the opposite trend. In Experiment 2 subjects received performance feedback and indicated their partner choicesfor evaluated or nonevaluated interactions consisting of either two or 10 members. The same trends were shown as in Experiment 1. It was also found that when expecting to work in a J0-person group subjects of all performance categories tended to choose "very good" partners. The results suggest that ability feedback, evaluation, and group size are important factors in partner selection for work interactions. The effects of these factors are presumed to reflect the conflict between the desire for a superior partner who may improve the work effort and serve as a model vs. the threat to self-esteem that may result from ability comparison.

Human Relations, Vol. 31, No. 3, 267-282 (1978)
DOI: 10.1177/001872677803100305
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 American Behavioral ScientistHome page
A. P. Hare
Group Size
American Behavioral Scientist, May 1, 1981; 24(5): 695 - 708.


Home page
 Human RelationsHome page
S. L. Titus
A Function of Friendship: Social Comparisons as a Frame of Reference for Marriage
Human Relations, June 1, 1980; 33(6): 409 - 431.
[Abstract] [PDF]