Cohesion, team mental models, and collective efficacy: towards an integrated framework of team dynamics in sport

Edson Filho, Gershon Tenenbaum, Yanyun Yang
2014 Journal of Sports Sciences  
A nomological network on team dynamics in sports consisting of a multi-framework perspective is introduced and tested. The aim was to explore the interrelationship among cohesion, team mental models (TMM), collective-efficacy (CE), and perceived performance potential (PPP). Three hundred and forty college-aged soccer players representing 17 different teams (8 female and 9 male) participated in the study. They responded to surveys on team cohesion, TMM, CE and PPP. Results are congruent with the
more » ... congruent with the theoretical conceptualization of a parsimonious view of team dynamics in sports. Specifically, cohesion was found to be an exogenous variable predicting both TMM and CE beliefs. TMM and CE were correlated and predicted PPP, which in turn accounted for 59% of the variance of objective performance scores as measured by teams' season record. From a theoretical standpoint, findings resulted in a parsimonious view of team dynamics, which may represent an initial step towards clarifying the epistemological roots and nomological network of various team-level properties. From an applied standpoint, results suggest that team expertise starts with the establishment of team cohesion. Following the establishment of cohesiveness, teammates are able to advance teamrelated schemas and a collective sense of confidence. Limitations and key directions for future research are outlined. Keywords: team dynamics, cohesion, team mental models, collective efficacy, nomological network. framework of team dynamics in sports (see Figure 1 ). Nonetheless, certain aspects of the group 70 structure were not included in the model but indirectly measured through the consideration of 71 member attributes (i.e., demographic factors, such as mean age, gender, players' nationality) 72 pertaining to the participants and their teams. Individual products were not considered here 73 because the focus was at the team-level of analysis. Leadership and environmental factors, which 74 have been associated with group dynamics in sport (Carron & Eys, 2012), were also beyond the 75 scope of the present study, which was centered on integrating cohesion, TMM and CE using 76 structural equation modeling techniques. Accordingly, from a path-analytical perspective, this 77 model postulates that (a) cohesion is an antecedent variable of TMM, and (b) TMM mediates the 78 relationship between cohesion and CE, and (c) CE predicts PPP. In addition to being grounded in 79 the seminal conceptualization of team dynamics in sports proposed by Carron and Hausenblas 80 (1998), these directional paths are aligned with extant research suggesting that (a) team cohesion, 81 TMM, and CE are intrinsically related constructs (Feltz et al., 2008; Mohammed et al., 2010), 82 and (b) CE beliefs evolve once a sense of "team" has been established, and have a positive effect 83 on performance (Bandura, 1997; Myers et al., 2004; Zaccaro et al., 1995) . 84 From a factor analysis standpoint, the proposed model considers leading instruments 85 designed to measure cohesion, TMM and CE. Also, we aimed for a parsimonious model with 86 non-overlapping factors. Accordingly, we focused on measuring only the unique factorial 87 contributions representing cohesion, TMM, and CE. In other words, potentially overlapping 88 factors among the instruments utilized in this study were not considered. In particular, two sub-89 dimensions of TMM (i.e., General Task and Team Knowledge, Attitude Towards Teammate 90 Task) as measured by the Team Assessment Diagnostic Measure (see Johnson et al., 2007) and 251 Questionnaire, in which the instrument was found to assess two, and not four, latent factors 252 (Carless & De Paola, 2000; Schutz et al., 1994) . The maintenance of GI-T and GI-S in the model 253 proposed herein is (a) congruent with the overarching theoretical notion of social and task 254 cohesion, and (b) representative of participants' group views of cohesion. 255 Correlational Analyses. Correlation coefficients among the Team Outcome 256 Questionnaire and objective performance measures were positive and moderate-to-high, hence 257 supporting the predictive validity of this instrument. Specifically, Team Outcome Questionnaire 258 and team season record showed a r = .77 (R 2 = .59), whereas Team Outcome Questionnaire and 259 the National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics's final ranking correlated positively with a r 260 = .55 (R 2 = .30). Correlation coefficients among Group Environment Questionnaire, Collective
doi:10.1080/02640414.2014.957714 pmid:25385557 fatcat:saumo7tknffyrmqiacgevjgrwu