The Editorial Board of Group Dynamics is pleased to announce that the Group Dynamics Most Valuable Paper for 2019 is “Multilevel measurement models for group collective constructs” by Joseph Bonito, PhD, and Joann Keyton, PhD. The paper is available as a free download on the journal website.
This is the first year that the editors of Group Dynamics presented a Most Valuable Paper Award, and we are very proud to give the award to Joe Bonito and Joann Keyton for their wonderful article. One of the challenges of group research is that individuals are nested within groups and so individual data are not independent, which violates a key assumption of statistical tests. There was a tendency in the past to look at individual data only and ignore the effects of groups. This may seem trivial, but in fact this outdated approach resulted in erroneous findings because of a dramatic increase in the probability of falsely calling a result statistically significant when in fact it is not. There are ways of handling this problem for different situations (see for example the special issue of Group Dynamic from 2016). Bonito and Keyton do an excellent job of describing statistical methods of modeling the measurement of constructs at the individual level while accounting for the influence of the group collective construct. Validating measures is an important part of psychological research and practice, and Bonito and Keyton show how this can be done in a statistically reliable way with grouped data. Bonito and Keyton’s paper is an excellent example of the cutting edge research and methodology that we publish in Group Dynamics.
The process of selecting the most valuable paper included a initial phase in which the Editorial Board nominated the top papers from 2019, and then a voting phase in which one paper among the top four was selected as MVP. I would be remiss if I did not mention the three other nominees for the Group Dynamics Most Valuable Paper 2019 Award because they are outstanding for their quality and for their impact on the field of group research. First, Norah Chapman and Martin Kivlighan published an excellent paper called: “Does the cohesion–outcome relationship change over time? A dynamic model of change in group psychotherapy.” They used a sophisticated method of analyzing longitudinal data in therapy groups, and they found that the cohesion – outcome relationship was strongest at later sessions of therapy, implying that therapists must identify individuals group members who need to increase their experience of group cohesion throughout treatment but especially as the group matures.
Second, was Meredith Tittler and Nathaniel Wade’s paper “Engaging white participants in racial dialogues: Group composition and dialogue structure.” This is an fascinating study of racial dialogue groups in a university campus. Student participants reported being more likely to be honest in racial dialogue groups that were composed of mixed-race participants if the dialogue groups were structured.
Third, was Mitchell and Coyle’s paper “When racial/ethnic minorities emerge as leaders: The role of learning orientation and team minority composition.” In this paper, the authors asked, When or under what conditions do racial/ethnic minorities emerge as leaders in organizations? They found that it is critical for racial/ethnic minorities to possess high levels of a learning goal orientation when working in predominantly white teams in order to attain informal leadership status within the team.
I encourage members of Division 49 to go to the journal webpage or follow the links provided above and download and read each of these high quality and high impact studies. These papers represent the cutting edge of group research that will inevitably influence practice in teams, organizations and therapy groups.