↓ Skip to main content

Feel like you belong: on the bidirectional link between emotional fit and group identification in task groups

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Feel like you belong: on the bidirectional link between emotional fit and group identification in task groups
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01106
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ellen Delvaux, Loes Meeussen, Batja Mesquita

Abstract

Three studies investigated the association between members' group identification and the emotional fit with their group. In the first study, a cross-sectional study in a large organization, we replicated earlier research by showing that group identification and emotional fit are positively associated, using a broader range of emotions and using profile correlations to measure group members' emotional fit. In addition, in two longitudinal studies, where groups of students were followed at several time points during their collaboration on a project, we tested the directionality of the relationship between group identification and emotional fit. The results showed a bidirectional, positive link between group identification and emotional fit, such that group identification and emotional fit either mutually reinforce or mutually dampen each other over time. We discuss how these findings increase insights in group functioning and how they may be used to change group processes for better or worse.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 37 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 26%
Researcher 7 18%
Student > Master 4 11%
Professor 3 8%
Librarian 2 5%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 9 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 42%
Computer Science 3 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 5%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 9 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 June 2020.
All research outputs
#15,607,533
of 23,959,899 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#16,973
of 31,938 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#148,616
of 267,324 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#361
of 547 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,959,899 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,938 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 267,324 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 547 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.