Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Who benefits from group work in higher education? An attachment theory perspective

  • Published:
Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Several studies have pointed to the benefits of learning in groups. However, surprisingly little research has been conducted regarding what role relationship-related personality traits play in the effectiveness of this kind of student learning. Such personality factor can potentially buffer the students’ effectiveness in groups. The present study focused on attachment orientations—personal characteristics of individuals that reflect internal models of relationships—and assessed their impact on different aspects of students’ feelings and functioning in higher-education study groups. It was hypothesized that individuals with interpersonal difficulties (characterized by high attachment anxiety or avoidance) will not benefit from a learning group and that they may exhibit poorer performance in group projects. Participants (N = 244) were college students enrolled in courses that included a group project. They completed measures of their attachment orientations, instrumental and socio-emotional functioning in the group, and satisfaction from the group. Additionally, their GPA and grade in the group project were assessed. Results indicated negative associations of attachment anxiety and avoidance with students’ self-reported instrumental and socio-emotional functioning in the group. However, attachment anxiety was associated with higher grades in the group task. Attachment avoidance was not associated with students’ grades. The study’s findings generally suggest that attachment insecurities do not obscure students’ actual performance in group projects, contrary to students’ self-perceptions. Implications for group learning are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Al-Yagon, M., & Mikulincer, M. (2004). Socioemotional and academic adjustment among children with learning disorders: The meditational role of attachment-based factors. The Journal of Special Education, 38, 111–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barry, B., & Stewart, G. L. (1997). Composition, process, and performance in self-managed groups: The role of personality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 62–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles among young adults: A test of a four category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 226–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belbin, R. M. (2012). Team roles at work. Emergence of a team role language (pp. 19–32). New York: Routledge. (Chapter 3).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertucci, A., Conte, S., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2010). The impact size of cooperative groups on achievement, social support, and self-esteem. Journal of General Psychology, 137, 256–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boud, D. (2014). Making the move to peer learning. In D. Boud, R. Cohen, & J. Sampson (Eds.), Peer learning in higher education: Learning from and with each other (pp. 1–20). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowlby, J. (1969/1982). Attachment and loss, Vol. I: Attachment. New York, NY: Basic Books.

  • Bradley, B. H., Klotz, A. C., Postlethwaite, B. E., & Brown, K. G. (2013). Ready to rumble: How team personality composition and task conflict interact to improve performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(2), 385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, K. A., Clark, C. L., & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Self-report measurement of adult attachment. In J. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment theory and close relationships (pp. 46–76). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassidy, J., & Kobak, R. R. (1988). Avoidance and its relation to other defensive processes. In J. Belsky & T. Nezworski (Eds.), Clinical implications of attachment (pp. 300–323). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64, 1–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeBerard, M. S., Spielmans, G. I., & Julka, D. L. (2004). Predictors of academic achievement and retention among college freshmen: A longitudinal study. College Student Journal, 38, 66–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doyle, A. B., & Markiewicz, D. (2005). Parenting, marital conflict, and adjustment from early- to mid-adolescence: Mediated by adolescent attachment style? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 34, 97–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Druskat, V. U., & Kayes, D. C. (2000). Learning versus performance in short-term project teams. Small Group Research, 31, 328–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fass, M. E., & Tubman, J. G. (2002). The influence of parental and peer attachment on college students’ academic achievement. Psychology in the Schools, 39, 561–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (1996). Navigating the bumpy road to student-centered instruction. College Teaching, 44, 43–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraley, R. C., & Spieker, S. J. (2003). Are infant attachment patterns continuously or categorically distributed? A taxometric analysis of strange situation behavior. Developmental Psychology, 39, 387–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuendeling, J. M. (1998). Affect regulation as a stylistic process within adult attachment. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15, 291–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furnham, A., Batey, M., & Martin, N. (2011). How would you like to be evaluated? The correlates of students’ preferences for assessment methods. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 259–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furnham, A., Christopher, A., Garwood, J., & Martin, N. (2008). Ability, demography, learning style and personality trait correlates of student preferences for assessment method. Educational Psychology, 28, 15–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaudet, A. D., Ramer, L. M., Nakonechny, J., Cragg, J. J., & Ramer, M. S. (2010). Small-group learning in an upper-level university biology class enhances academic performance and student attitudes toward group work. Public Library of Science One, 5, 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, R., & Thorley, L. (2013). Introduction. In R. Gregory & L. Thorley (Eds.), Using group-based learning in higher education (pp. 19–23). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harms, P. D. (2011). Adult attachment styles in the workplace. Human Resource Management Review, 21, 285–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. (1990). Love and work: An attachment-theoretical perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 270–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holt, L. J. (2014). Attitudes about help-seeking mediate the relation between parent attachment and academic adjustment in first-year college students. Journal of College Student Development, 55(4), 418–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, J., Kirschner, F., Erkens, G., Kirschner, P. A., & Paas, F. (2010). Making the black box of collaborative learning transparent: Combining process-oriented and cognitive load approaches. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 139–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins-Guarnieri, M. A., Wright, S. L., & Hudiburgh, L. M. (2012). The relationships among attachment style, personality traits, interpersonal competency, and Facebook use. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 33(6), 294–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (2003). Training for cooperative group work. In M. West, D. Tjosvold, & K. Smith (Eds.), International handbook of organizational teamwork and cooperative working (pp. 167–183). London: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (2005). New developments in social interdependence theory. Psychology Monographs, 131, 285–358.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher, 38, 365–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lavy, S., Azaiza, F., & Mikulincer, M. (2012). Attachment patterns of Arabs and Jews in Israel: Are we really so different? Israel Journal of Psychiatry and Related Issues, 49, 184–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavy, S., Bareli, Y., & Ein-Dor, T. (2014). The effects of attachment heterogeneity and team cohesion on team functioning. Small Group Research, 44, 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawler, E. E., Mohrman, S. A., & Ledford, G. E. (1995). Creating high performance organizations: Practices and results of employee involvement and total quality management in Fortune 1000 companies. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Littman Ovadia, H., Oren, L., & Lavy, S. (2013). Attachment and autonomy in the workplace – new insights. Journal of Career Assessment, 21, 502–518. doi:10.1177/1069072712475282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lopez, F. G., Mauricio, A. M., Gormley, B., Simko, T., & Berger, E. (2001). Adult attachment orientations and college student distress: The mediating role of problem coping styles. Journal of Counseling and Development, 79, 459–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mattanah, J. F., Hancock, G. R., & Brand, B. L. (2004). Parental attachment, separation-individuation, and college student adjustment: A structural equation analysis of mediational effects. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51(2), 213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mikulincer, M., & Florian, V. (2000). Exploring individual differences in reactions to mortality salience: Does attachment style regulate terror management mechanisms? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 260–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mikulincer, M., Florian, V., & Tolmacz, R. (1990). Attachment styles and fear of personal death: A case study of affect regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 273–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2007). Attachment patterns in adulthood: Structure, dynamics, and change. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, P., Wynia, M., Golden, R., McNellis, B., Okun, S., Webb, C. E. et al. (2012). Core principles & values of effective team-based health care. Retrieved on 12 Nov 2013. http://217ewmp01.blackmesh.com/~/media/Files/Perspectives-Files/2012/Discussion-Papers/VSRT-Team-Based-Care-Principles-Values.pdf.

  • Moss, E., & St-Laurent, D. (2001). Attachment at school age and academic performance. Developmental Psychology, 37, 863–874.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuman, G. A., Wagner, S. H., & Christiansen, N. D. (1999). The relationship between work-team personality composition and the job performance of teams. Group and Organization Management, 24(1), 28–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noftle, E. E., & Shaver, P. R. (2006). Attachment dimensions and the big five personality traits: Associations and comparative ability to predict relationship quality. Journal of Research in Personality, 40(2), 179–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ortiz, A., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (1996). The effect of positive goal and resource interdependence on individual performance. Journal of Social Psychology, 136, 243–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peeters, M. A., Rutte, C. G., Tuijl, H. F., & Reymem, I. M. (2006). The big five personality traits and individual satisfaction with the group. Small Group Research, 37, 187–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfaff, E., & Huddelston, P. (2003). Does it matter if I hate group work? What impacts students attitudes towards group work. Journal of Marketing Education, 25, 37–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quimby, J. L., & O’Brien, K. M. (2006). Predictors of well-being among nontraditional female students with children. Journal of Counseling and Development: JCD, 84(4), 451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richards, D. A., & Schat, A. C. H. (2011). Attachment at (not to) work: Applying attachment theory to explain individual behavior in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 169–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rom, E., & Mikulincer, M. (2003). Attachment theory and group processes: The association between attachment style and group—related representation, goals, memories, and functioning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 1220–1235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadikaj, G., Moskowitz, D. S., & Zuroff, D. C. (2015). Felt security in daily interactions as a mediator of the effect of attachment on relationship satisfaction. European Journal of Personality, 29(2), 187–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaver, P. R., & Brennan, K. A. (1992). Attachment styles and the “Big Five” personality traits: Their connections with each other and with romantic relationship outcomes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18(5), 536–545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaver, P. R., & Mikulincer, M. (2002). Attachment-related psychodynamics. Attachment and Human Development, 4, 133–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, J. B. (2004). A fair go for all? The impact of intra-group diversity and diversity-management skills on student experiences and outcomes in team-based class projects. Journal of Management Education, 28, 139–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. E., Leavey, M., & Madden, N. A. (1982). Combining cooperative learning and individualized instruction: Effects on student mathematics achievement, attitudes and behaviors. Baltimore: Center for Organization of Schools.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, E. R., Murphy, J., & Coats, S. (1999). Attachment to groups: Theory and management. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 94–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Springer, L., Stanne, M. E., & Donovan, S. S. (1999). Effects of small group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 69, 21–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sterns, H. L., & Spokus, D. M. (2013). Lifelong learning and the world of work. In P. Taylor (Ed.), Older workers in an ageing society: Critical topics in research and policy (pp. 89–109). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Susskind, A. M., & Borchgrevink, C. P. (1999). Team-based interaction in the foodservice instructional laboratory: An exploratory model of team composition, team-member interaction, and performance. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 10, 22–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tasa, K., Sears, G. J., & Schat, A. C. (2011). Personality and teamwork behavior in context: The cross-level moderating role of collective efficacy. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(1), 65–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tribe, D. M. (2013). An overview from higher education. In R. Gregory & L. Thorley (Eds.), Using group-based learning in higher education (pp. 25–35). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, N. M. (1982a). Peer interaction and learning in cooperative small groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 642–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, N. M. (1982b). Group composition, group interaction and achievement in cooperative small groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 475–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, S. L., Perrone-McGovern, K. M., Boo, J. N., & White, A. V. (2014). Influential factors in academic and career self-efficacy: Attachment, supports, and career barriers. Journal of Counseling and Development, 92(1), 36–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Benjamin Zemelman and Tali Ducas for their assistance in collecting data and material for the preparation of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Leadership and Policy in Education, The University of Haifa, 199 Abba Khoushy Ave., Mount Carmel, 3498838, Haifa, Israel

    Shiri Lavy

Authors
  1. Shiri Lavy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shiri Lavy.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lavy, S. Who benefits from group work in higher education? An attachment theory perspective. High Educ 73, 175–187 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0006-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0006-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation