Sport Sciences for Health

, Volume 10, Issue 3, pp 165–177 | Cite as

The cohesion–performance relationship in sport: a 10-year retrospective meta-analysis

  • Edson Filho
  • Urska Dobersek
  • Lael Gershgoren
  • Betsy Becker
  • Gershon Tenenbaum
Original Article


The purposes of this meta-analysis were to: (a) examine the direction and magnitude of the cohesion–performance relationship in studies published between 2000 and 2010 and (b) explore moderators of this relationship. A total of 118 effect sizes were calculated. Results revealed a statistically significant (a) moderate relationship between overall cohesion and performance (r = 0.34, p < 0.01), (b) large relationship between task cohesion and performance (r = 0.45, p < 0.01), and (c) small relationship between social cohesion and performance (r = 0.11, p < 0.01). Gender, athletes’ skill level, sport type, and performance were found to be significant moderators of the cohesion–performance relationship. These results are interpreted in relation to previous research and theoretical frameworks on cohesion and performance in sports.


Meta-analysis Cohesion Performance Sports 



Edson Filho and Urska Dobersek contributed equally to this work. The authors would like to thank Itay Basevitch, Seung Jin Lee, Jean Rettig, and Bernd Weiss for their contributions to this paper. The authors would also like to thank Bi-Jen Hsieh and Sicong Liu, among other contributors, for their help with articles written in languages other than English.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Carron AV, Brawley LR, Widmeyer WN (1998) Measurement of cohesion in sport and exercise. In: Duda JL (ed) Advances in sport and exercise psychology measurement. Fitness Information Technology, West Virginia, pp 213–226Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Carron AV, Eys MA (2012) Group dynamics in sport, 4th edn. Fitness Information Technology, West VirginiaGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kozub SA, Button CJ (2000) The influence of competitive outcome perceptions of cohesion in rugby and swimming teams. Int J Sport Psychol 31:82–95Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mullen B, Copper C (1994) The relation between group cohesiveness and performance: an integration. Psychol Bull 115:210–227. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.115.2.210 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Carron AV, Colman MM, Wheeler J, Stevens D (2002) Cohesion and performance in sport: a meta-analysis. J Sport Exerc Psychol 24:168–188Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carron AV, Brawley LR (2000) Group dynamics in sport and physical activity. In: Horn TS (ed) Human Kinetics, IllinoisGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Carron AV, Widmeyer WN, Brawley LR (1985) The development of an instrument to assess cohesion in sport teams: the group environment questionnaire. J Sport Psychol 7:244–266Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Carron AV, Eys MA, Burke SM (2007) Team cohesion: nature, correlates, and development. In: Jowette S, Lavallee D (eds) Social psychology in sport. Human Kinetic, IllinoisGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Widmeyer WN, Brawley LR, Carron AV (1985) The measurement of cohesion in sport teams: the group environment questionnaire. Sports Dynamics, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gruber JJ, Gray GR (1981) Factor patterns of variables influencing cohesiveness at various levels of basketball competition. Res Q Exerc Sport 52:19–30PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Paskevich DM, Estabrooks PA, Brawley LR, Carron AV (2001) Group cohesion in sport and exercise. In: Singer RN, Hausenblas HA, Janelle CM (eds) Handbook of sport psychology, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York, pp 472–494Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Arrow H, Poole MS, Henry KB, Wheelan S, Moreland R (2004) Time, change, and development: the temporal perspective on groups. Small Group Res 35:73–105. doi: 10.1177/1046496403259757 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Beam JW, Serwatka TS, Wilson WJ (2004) Preferred leadership of NCAA division I and II intercollegiate student-athletes. J Sport Behav 27:3–17Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chelladurai P (1990) Leadership in sports: a review. Int J Sport Psychol 21:328–354Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ward P, Eccles DW (2006) A commentary on “team cognition and expert teams: emerging insights into performance for exceptional teams”. Int J Sport Exerc Psychol 4:463–483. doi: 10.1080/1612197X.2006.9671808 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Williams AM, Ericsson KA (2008) From the guest editors: how do experts learn? J Sport Exerc Psychol 30:653–662PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Becker BJ (2000) Multivariate meta-analysis. In: Tinsley HA, Brown S (eds) Handbook of applied multivariate statistics and mathematical modeling. Academic Press, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kamata A, Tenenbaum G, Hanin YL (2002) Individual zone of optimal functioning (IZOF): a probabilistic estimation. J Sport Exerc Psychol 24:189–208Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    APA Publications and Communications Board Working Group on Journal Article Reporting Standards (2008) Reporting standards for research in psychology: why do we need them? What might they be? Am Psychol 63:839–851PubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lamal PA (1990) On the importance of replication. J Soc Behav Pers 5:31–35Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jamieson JP (2010) The home field advantage in athletics: a meta-analysis. J Appl Soc Psychol 40:1819–1848. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2010.00641.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cooper H, Hedges LV, Valentine JC (2009) The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis. Russell Sage Foundation, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Patton MQ (2002) Qualitative research and evaluation methods, 3rd edn. Thousand Oaks, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bray CD, Whaley DE (2001) Team cohesion, effort, and objective individual performance of high school basketball players. Sport Psychol 15:260–275Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Grieve FG, Whelan JP, Meyers AW (2000) An experimental examination of the cohesion–performance relationship in an interactive team sport. J Appl Sport Psychol 12:219–235. doi: 10.1080/10413200008404224 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Williams JM, Hacker CM (1982) Causal relationship among cohesion, satisfaction, and performance in women’s intercollegiate field hockey teams. J Sport Psychol 4:324–337Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rothstein HR (2008) Publication bias as a threat to the validity of meta-analytic results. J Exp Criminol 4:61–81. doi: 10.1007/s11292-007-9046-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Eagly AH, Johnson BT (1990) Gender and leadership style: a meta-analysis. Psychol Bull 108:233–256. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.108.2.233 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Duda JL (1987) Toward a developmental theory of children’s motivation in sport. J Sport Psychol 9:130–145.
  30. 30.
    Heuzé J, Raimbault N, Fontayne P (2006) Relationships between cohesion, collective efficacy and performance in professional basketball teams: an examination of mediating effects. J Sports Sci 24:59–68. doi: 10.1080/02640410500127736 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Podsakoff PM, Ogran DW (1986) Self-reports in organizational research: problems and prospects. J Manag 12:531–545. doi: 10.1177/014920638601200408 Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Carron AV, Bray SR, Eys MA (2002) Team cohesion and team success in sport. J Sports Sci 20:119–126PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lipsey MW, Wilson DB (2001) Practical meta-analysis. Sage Publications, UKGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Egger M, Smith GD, Schneider M, Minder C (1997) Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. Br Med J 315:629–634. doi: 10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Carless SA, De Paola C (2000) The measurement of cohesion in work teams. Small Group Res 31:71–88. doi: 10.1177/104649640003100104 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Dyce JA, Cornell J (1996) Factorial validity of the group environment questionnaire among musicians. J Soc Psychol 136:263–264. doi: 10.1080/00224545.1996.9714003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Schutz RW, Eom HJ, Smoll FL, Smith RE (1994) Examination of the factorial validity of the group environment questionnaire. Res Q Exerc Sport 65:226–236PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Mullen B, Muellerleile P, Bryant B (2001) Cumulative meta-analysis: a consideration of indicators of sufficiency and stability. Pers Soc Psychol B 27:1450–1462. doi: 10.1177/01461672012711006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Eccles DW, Tenenbaum G (2004) Why an expert team is more than a team of experts: a social-cognitive conceptualization of team coordination and communication in sport. J Sport Exerc Psychol 26:542–560Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Callow N, Smith MJ, Hardy L, Arthur CA, Hardy J (2009) Measurement of transformational leadership and its relationship with team cohesion and performance level. J Appl Sport Psychol 21:395–412. doi: 10.1080/10413200903204754 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Dai X, Brendl CM, Ariely D (2010) Wanting, liking, and preference construction. Emotion 10:324–334. doi: 10.1037/a0017987 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Huang C, Chou C, Lin P (2010) Involvement theory in constructing bloggers’ intention to purchase travel products. Tour Manag 31:513–526. doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2009.06.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Shondell DS, Reynaud C (2002) The volleyball coaching bible. Human Kinetics, IllinoisGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Ely R, Padavic I (2007) A feminist analysis of organizational research on sex differences. Acad Manag Rev 32:1121–1143. doi: 10.2307/20159359 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Blanchard C, Amiot CE, Perreault S, Vallerand RJ, Provencher P (2009) Cohesiveness, coaches interpersonal style and psychological needs: their effects on self-determination and athletes subjective well-being. Psychol Sport Exerc 10:545–551. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2009.02.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Hollembeak J, Amorose AJ (2005) Perceived coaching behaviors and college athletes’ intrinsic motivation: a test of self-determination theory. J Appl Sport Psychol 17:20–36. doi: 10.1080/10413200590907540 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Till K, Cobley S, Wattie N, O’Hara J, Cooke C, Chapman C (2010) The prevalence, influential factors and mechanisms of relative age effects in UK rugby league. Scand J Med Sci Sport 20:320–329. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2009.00884.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Mowen JC (1995) Consumer behavior, 4th edn. Prentice Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Hanin YL (1997) Emotions and athletic performance: individual zones of optimal functioning model. Eur Yb Sport Psychol 1:29–72Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Fisher LA, Roper EA, Butryn TM (2009) Engaging cultural studies and traditional sport psychology. In: Schinke RJ, Hanrahan SJ (eds) Cultural sport psychology. Human Kinetics, Illinois, pp 23–31Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Sorensen LJ (2010) Review of cognitive work analysis: coping with complexity. Ergonomics 53:139–141. doi: 10.1080/00140130903458293 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

References used in meta-analysis

  1. 53.
    Andrews GM (2001) The impact of cohesion–performance relationships in competitive cheerleading (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Thesis databaseGoogle Scholar
  2. 54.
    Bailey EJ (2007) Playing the culture game: organizational culture in collegiate athletics (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Thesis databaseGoogle Scholar
  3. 55.
    Bergeles N, Hatziharistos D (2003) Interpersonal attraction as a measure of estimation of cohesiveness in elite volleyball teams. Percept Motor Skill 96:81–91. doi: 10.2466/PMS.96.1.81-91 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 56.
    Fetteroll C (2001) Cohesion and performance relationships in intercollegiate coacting teams (Master’s thesis). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Thesis databaseGoogle Scholar
  5. 57.
    Gentile TI (2009) How can the stages of peck’s community-making model be identified and predicted for a collegiate basketball team over the course of consecutive seasons? (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Thesis databaseGoogle Scholar
  6. 58.
    Kjørmo O, Halvari H (2002) Two ways related to performance in elite sport: the path of self-confidence and competitive anxiety and the path of group cohesion and group goal-clarity. Percept Motor Skill 94:950–966. doi: 10.2466/PMS.94.3.950-966 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 59.
    Lazarovitz SM (2004) Team and individual flow in female ice hockey players: The relationships between flow, group cohesion, and athletic performance (Doctoral dissertation)Google Scholar
  8. 60.
    Lowther J, Lane A (2002) Relationship between mood, cohesion and satisfaction with performance among soccer players. Online J Sport Psychol 4:57–69Google Scholar
  9. 61.
    Manning CT (2008) Relationship among team collective efficacy, cohesion, and coaching competency in sports (Doctoral dissertation)Google Scholar
  10. 62.
    Shapcott KM (2010) Team attributions in sport (Doctoral dissertation)Google Scholar
  11. 63.
    Tziner A, Nicola N, Rizac A (2003) Relation between social cohesion and team performance in soccer teams. Percept Motor Skill 96:145–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 64.
    Zakrajsek RA, Abildso CG, Hurst JR, Watson JC (2007) The relationship among coaches’ and athletes’ perceptions of coaching staff cohesion, team cohesion, and performance. Online J Sport Psychol 9:1–14Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edson Filho
    • 1
  • Urska Dobersek
    • 2
  • Lael Gershgoren
    • 3
  • Betsy Becker
    • 2
  • Gershon Tenenbaum
    • 2
  1. 1.Behavioral Imaging and Neural Dynamics CenterUniversity of Chieti-PescaraChietiItaly
  2. 2.Department of Educational Psychology and Learning SystemsFlorida State UniversityTallahasseeUSA
  3. 3.Zinman College of Physical Education and Sport SciencesWingate InstituteNetanyaIsrael

Personalised recommendations