Diffusion of responsibility in group work: Social loafing
Şule Betül Tosuntaş 1 *
More Detail
1 Bursa Uludağ University, Faculty of Education, Turkey
* Corresponding Author


Determining the effect of social loafing behaviors on the performance of individual and group members in the context of group work is considered important. The aim of this research is to examine the effect of social loafing and cyberloafing behaviors on group work. The effect of social loafing and cyberloafing on group studies was examined on the basis of a structural equation model. For this purpose, the study was designed using a causal research design. Using criterion sampling, one of the purposeful sampling methods, 846 undergraduate students studying at a state university participated in the study. The data of the study were collected using social loafing, cyberloafing, self-evaluation and group evaluation measurement tools. The data of the study were analyzed using t test, correlation analysis, simple linear regression, multiple regression and path analysis. As a result of the analysis of the data, it was seen that individual social loafing, cyberloafing and self-evaluations differed according to gender. In addition, when social loafing, cyberloafing, self-evaluation and group evaluation were analyzed according to group formation, there were statistically significant differences in favor of the student-created groups. Group size was found to be positively correlated with social loafing behaviors, but no significant relationship was found with task visibility. The structural equation model created within the scope of the study was tested with path analysis and it was concluded that individual loafing behaviors had an effect on self-assessment, and that group social loafing behaviors had an effect on group evaluations. Group size and group formation can be taken into consideration in order to make effective and productive group studies in higher education. These results may guide future studies on addressing the factors associated with social loafing in the context of group work, which has an important place in the learning-teaching process. 



  • Aggarwal, P., & O'Brien, C. L. (2008). Social loafing on group projects structural antecedents and effect on student satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Education, 30(3), 255-264. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475308322283
  • Akbulut, Y., Dursun, Ö. Ö., Dönmez, O., & Şahin, Y. L. (2016). In search of a measure to investigate cyberloafing in educational settings. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 616-625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.002
  • Albayrak, E., Ayas, T. & Horzum, M. B. (2012). Examining social loafing behavior and groups work eligibility of university. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Education Faculty, 12(23), 335 – 353.
  • Aslanoğlu, A. E. (2017). Assessment of the individual in a group: Peer and self-assessment. Boğaziçi University Journal of Education, 34(2), 35-50.
  • Bacon, D. R., Stewart, K. A., & Anderson, E. S. (2001). Methods of assigning players to teams: A review and novel approach. Simulation & Gaming, 32(1), 6-17. https://doi.org/10.1177/104687810103200102
  • Baker, D. F. (2008). Peer assessment in small groups: A comparison of methods. Journal of Management Education, 32(2), 183–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562907310489
  • Blowers, P. (2003). Using student skill self-assessments to get balanced groups for group projects. College Teaching, 51(3), 106-110. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567550309596422
  • Brooks, C. M., & Ammons, J. L. (2003). Free riding in group projects and the effects of timing, frequency, and specificity of criteria in peer assessments. Journal of Education for Business, 78(5), 268-272. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832320309598613
  • Chapman, K.J., Meuter, M., Toy, D., & Wright, L. (2006). Can’t we pick our own groups? The influence of group selection method on group dynamics and outcomes. Journal of Management Education, 30(4), 557-569. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562905284872
  • Chidambaram, L., & Tung, L. L. (2005). Is out of sight, out of mind? An empirical study of social loafing in technology-supported groups. Information Systems Research, 16(2), 149-168.
  • Çepni, S. (2008). Performansların değerlendirilmesi [Performance evaluation]. E. Karip (Ed.), Ölçme ve değerlendirme [Measurement and evaluation] (p. 194-239). Pegem Akademi.
  • Demir Uslu, Y., & Çavuş, M. (2014). Organizational justice and loafing behaviors. ODU Journal of Social Sciences Research, 4(9), 51-54.
  • Doğan, A., Bozkurt, S., & Demir, R. (2012). A research about investigating the relationship between social loafing behavior and the perception of task visibility. The Journal of Social Economic Research, (24), 53-79.
  • Duffy, M. K., & Shaw, J. D. (2000). The Salieri syndrome: Consequences of envy in groups. Small Group Research, 31, 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/104649640003100101
  • Dyrud, M. A. (2001). Group projects and peer review. Business Communication Quarterly, 64(4), 106-111.
  • Ergün, E., & Altun, A. (2012). The student’s perspective of cyberloafing and its causes. Educational Technology Theory and Practice, 2(1), 36-53.
  • Feichtner, S. B., & Davis, E. A. (1984). Why some groups fail: A survey of students' experiences with learning groups. Organizational Behavior Teaching Review, 9(4), 58-73. https://doi.org/10.1177/105256298400900409
  • Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2001). Effective strategies for cooperative learning. Journal of Cooperation & Collaboration in College Teaching, 10(2), 69-75.
  • George, J. M. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic origins of perceived social loafing in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 35(1), 191–202.
  • Hilton, S., & Phillips, F. (2010). Instructor-assigned and student-selected groups: a view from inside. Issues in Accounting Education, 25(1),15-33. https://doi.org/10.2308/iace.2010.25.1.15
  • Hoegl, M. (2005). Smaller teams–better teamwork: How to keep project teams small. Business Horizons, 48(3), 209-214.
  • Ilgın, B. (2010). The roles of the emotional intelligence and leader member exchange in the occurrence of the organizational citizenship behaviors and its relationship with the social loafing (Doctoral dissertation). Hacettepe University, Institute of Social Sciences, Ankara.
  • Ilgın, B. (2013). A social disease: Social loafing. Uşak University Journal of Social Sciences, 6(3), 238-270.
  • Ingham, A. G., Levinger, G., Graves, J., & Peckham, V. (1974). The Ringelmann effect: Studies of group size and group performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 10(4), 371-384.
  • Jassawalla, A., Sashittal, H., & Sashittal, A. (2009). Students' perceptions of social loafing: Its antecedents and consequences in undergraduate business classroom teams. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 8(1), 42-54. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2009.37012178
  • Karadal, H., & Saygın, M. (2013). An investigation of the relationship between social loafing and organizational citizenship behavior. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 99, 206-215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.487
  • Karau, S., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: a meta-analytic review and theoretical integration Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(4), 681-706. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.65.4.681
  • Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1997). The effects of group cohesiveness on social loafing and social compensation. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research and Practice, 1, 156-168. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.1.2.156
  • Kaufman, D. B., Felder, R. M., & Fuller, H. (2000). Accounting for individual effort in cooperative learning teams. Journal of Engineering Education-Washington, 89(2), 133–140. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2000.tb00507.x
  • Kerr, N. (1983). Motivation losses in small groups: a social dilemma analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(4), 819-828.
  • Koç Erdamar, G., & Demirel, H. (2010). Preservice teachers’ perceptions of group work. Journal of Kirsehir Education Faculty, 11(3), 205-223.
  • Lam, C. (2015). The role of communication and cohesion in reducing social loafing in group projects. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 78(4), 454-475. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329490615596417
  • Langan, A. M., & Wheater, C. P. (2003). Can students assess students effectively? Some insights into peer-assessment. Learning and Teaching in Action, 2(1).
  • Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many hands make light the work: The causes and consequences of social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(6), 822-832. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.37.6.822
  • Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Jaworski, R. A., & Bennett, N. (2004). Social loafing: A field investigation. Journal of Management, 30(2), 285-304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jm.2003.02.002
  • Lim, V. K. (2002). The IT way of loafing on the job: Cyberloafing, neutralizing and organizational justice. Journal of organizational behavior: The international Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 23(5), 675-694. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.161
  • Mattheos, N., Nattestad, A, Christersson, C., Jansson, H. & Attstrom. R. (2004). The effects of an interactive software application on the self assessment ability of dental students. European Journal of Dental Education 8(3), 97–104. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0579.2004.00325.x
  • Mulvey, P. W., & Klein, H. J. (1998). The impact of perceived loafing and collective efficacy in group goal processes and group performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 74, 62-87. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1998.2753
  • Neuman, W. L. (2014) Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Pearson.
  • Öneren, M., Demirel, E. N., Arar, T., & Kartal, C. (2019). Investigating social loafing behavior in higher education institutes: A case of public university. Journal of Social Sciences of Mus Alparslan University, 7(1) 309–318 https://doi.org/10.18506/anemon.427913
  • Pfaff, E., & Huddleston, P. (2003). Does it matter if I hate teamwork? What impacts student attitudes toward teamwork. Journal of Marketing Education, 25(1), 37-45. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475302250571
  • Piezon, S. L., & Ferree, W. D. (2008). Perceptions of social loafing in online learning groups: A study of public university and U.S. Naval War College students. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(2), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v9i2.484
  • Rajaguru, R., Narendran, R., & Rajesh, G. (2020). Social loafing in group-based learning: student-created and instructor-created group perspectives. Education+ Training, 62(4), 483-501. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-01-2019-0018
  • Schippers, M. (2014). Social loafing tendencies and team performance: the compensating effect of agreeableness and conscientiousness. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 13(1), pp. 62-81. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2012.0191
  • Sedikides, C., & Strube, M. J. (1997). Self evaluation: To thine own self be good, to thine own self be sure, to thine own self be true, and to thine own self be better. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 29 (p. 209–269). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60018-0
  • Sherrard, W. R., & Raafat, F. (1994). An empirical study of peer bias in evaluations: students rating students. Journal of Education for Business, 70(1), 43-48.
  • Simms, A., & Nichols, T. (2014). Social loafing: a review of the literature. Journal of Management Policy and Practice, 15(1), 58-67.
  • Sridharan, B., Tai, J., & Boud, D. (2018). Does the use of summative peer assessment in collaborative group work inhibit good judgement?. Higher Education, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0305-7
  • Strong, J.T., & Anderson, R.E. (1990). Free-riding in group projects: Control mechanisms and preliminary data. Journal of Marketing Education, 12(2), 61-67. https://doi.org/10.1177/027347539001200208
  • Synnott, C. K. (2016). Guides to reducing social loafing in group projects: Faculty development. Journal of Higher Education Management, 31(1), 211-221.
  • Şeşen, H., & Kahraman, Ç. A. (2014). The effect of coworkers’ social loafing on ındıvıdual’s job satisfactıon, organizational commitment and his own social loafing. Journal of Human and Work, 1(1), 43-51. https://doi.org/10.18394/iid.08880
  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics. Pearson.
  • Tok, T. N. (2019). The relationship between the perceptions of personality traits and social loafing behaviors of candidate teachers. Journal of Teacher Education and Educators, 8(1), 55-77.
  • Ugrin, J. C., Pearson, J. M., & Odom, M. D. (2008). Profiling cyber-slackers in the workplace: Demographic, cultural, and workplace factors. Journal of Internet Commerce, 6(3), 75-89. https://doi.org/10.1300/J179v06n03_04
  • Uyar, Ş., Demir, K., & Aksekioğlu, B. (2016). A triplet on performance-based assessment: Self, peer and rater assessments. International Journal of Turkish Education Sciences, 4(7), 69-80.
  • Ülke, H. E. (2006). Investigating the role of personality and justice perceptions on social loafing (Doctoral dissertation). Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
  • Vik, G. N. (2001). Doing more to teach teamwork than telling students to sink or swim. Business Communication Quarterly, 64(4), 112-119.
  • Yıldız, K. (2018). Political skill and social loafing behavior of university students, International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 10(2), 59-80. https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2018.02.005


This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.