By contrast with the preceding measures, the “Group Environment Questionnaire”
(GEQ; Carron, Widmeyer and Brawley, 1985) has become the most widely used
instrument in research on team cohesion. The dominance of this test is attributable mainly
to the fact that it is based on an explicit conceptual model of cohesion (see Carron, 1982;
also Figure 7.3). The GEQ is an eighteen-item self-report questionnaire scale which
purports to measure the four key dimensions of cohesion described in the previous
section. In this test, “group integration-task” (GI-T: five items) refers to an individual
member’s perceptions of the similarity, closeness, and bonding within the group as a
whole with regard to the task it faces. It is measured by items such as “our team is united
in trying to reach its goals for performance” or “we all take responsibility for any loss or
poor performance by our team”. Next, “group integration-social” (GI-S: four items)
refers to an individual member’s feelings about the similarity and unification of the group
as a social unit. A sample item here is that “members of our team would rather go out on
their own than get together as a team” (reverse scored) or “our team would like to spend
time together in the off-season”. Third, “individual attractions to the group-task” (ATG-
T: four items) designates a team-member’s feelings about his or her personal involvement
with the group’s task. It is typically assessed using items like “I’m not happy with the
amount of playing time I get” (reverse scored) or “I do not like this team’s style of play”
(reverse scored). Finally, “individual attractions to the group-social” (ATG-S: five items)
describes an individual team-member’s feelings about his or her personal social
interactions with the group. A sample item to assess this component of cohesion is “I am
not going to miss the members of this team when the season ends” (reverse scored) or
“some of my best friends are on this team”.
Responses to these items are indicated by choosing the appropriate answer on a nine-
point Likert scale ranging from “strongly disagree” (1) to “strongly agree” (9). Negative
items are reverse scored to ensure that relatively higher scores on the GEQ reflect
stronger perceptions of team cohesiveness. This test is very popular in sport psychology
and has recently been translated into French (Heuze and Fontayne, 2002). It has also been
used in exercise settings. For example, Estabrooks and Carron (1999) investigated the
relationship between exercise intentions, attitudes and behaviour among a sample of
elderly adults in an exercise group. Results showed that as expected, both types of
cohesion (social- and task-) were associated positively with the participants’ attitudes to,
and frequency of attendance at, the exercise classes (see Chapter 8 for a discussion of
exercise psychology).
In general, the psychometric characteristics of the Group Environment Questionnaire
are quite impressive (Dion, 2000). Specifically, with regard to test reliability, the internal
consistency coefficients of the four cohesion sub-scales range from 0.64 (in the case of
“individual attractions to the group-social”) to 0.75 (for “individual attractions to the
group-task”). Perhaps more importantly, Carron et al. (1998) supported the construct
validity of the GEQ on the basis of evidence that the four dimensions of cohesion were
significantly positively associated with such variables as role clarity in teams and
adherence to exercise programmes. They were also and significantly negatively
correlated with variables like social loafing—which we defined earlier in this chapter as a
tendency for some people within a group to “slacken off’ when working towards a
common goal. Unfortunately, Dion (2000) noted that the factorial structure of the test
remains unclear due to equivocal research findings. For example, whereas Li and Harmer
Sport and exercise psychology: A critical introduction 194