The Ringelmann effect: Studies of group size and group performance

https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(74)90033-XGet rights and content

Abstract

Ringelmann's classic finding—that the addition of co-workers in a rope-pulling task leads to a linear decrement in the individual group member's average performance—was reexamined experimentally. Study I attempted to replicate the effect, using groups of subjects ranging in size from 1 to 6. Performance dropped significantly as group size was increased from one individual to two or to three, but the addition of a fourth, fifth, or sixth member produced insignificant additional decrements; thus, the effect was not linear but curvilinear. Study II was designed to examine possible sources of performance loss, separating the factors of “coordination” and “motivation” loss (Steiner, 1972). The possibility of intermember incoordination was eliminated, while motivation loss remained free to vary: Each experimental subject pulled alone, and in “groups” where he believed there were from one to five other members. Once again, individual performance declined significantly with the addition of the first and second perceived co-worker, but then leveled off for perceived group sizes three to six. Some implications are discussed.

References (13)

  • J.F. Dashiell

    Experimental studies of the influence of social situations on the behavior of individual human adults

  • J.H. Davis

    Group performance

    (1969)
  • E. Goffman

    The presentation of self in everyday life

  • O. Köhler

    Über den Gruppenwirkungsgrad der menschlichen Körperabeit und die Bedingung optimaler Kollektivkraftreakton

    Industrielle Psychotechnik

    (1927)
  • B. Latané et al.

    The unresponsive bystander: Why doesn't he help?

    (1970)
  • W. Moede

    Die Richtlinien der Leistungs-Psychologie

    Industrielle Psychotechnik

    (1927)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (286)

  • How Group Size and Decision Rules Impact Risk Preferences: Comparing group and individual settings in lottery-choice experiments

    2022, Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics
    Citation Excerpt :

    For example, pivotality in the majority rule and the process of unanimous decision-making in the unanimity rule depend on the number of players in the group (Zhang and Casari, 2012). Also, each member's responsibility or motivation for group behavior may decline as group size increases (Ingham et al., 1974; Wang et al., 2018; Dannenberg and Martinsson, 2021). In addition, it is unclear why individual risk attitudes in a group environment differ by collective decision rules.

View all citing articles on Scopus

The research was facilitated, in part, from funds from the Graduate Research Council of the University of Massachusetts and from Grant HD-04319 from the U. S. Public Health Service to the second author. We are indebted to Benjamin Ricci for his generosity in making available his laboratory and equipment, and to Ivan Steiner for his valuable advice.

View full text