Growing concern about the seriousness of issues such as climate change has made the value of research on social and behavioral aspects of environmental problems clearer than ever. For authors studying environmental concern or attitudes, however, survey development can be a daunting task. A large number of scales measuring environmental concern have been developed, and it can be challenging to make informed decisions about which to use. To assist authors in navigating the literature, we present a review of existing scales, followed by two studies in which we examine the structural validity of five scales that are commonly implemented in this corpus and that adhere to classical test theory. These results have important implications for general issues with measurement in this area, and inform our recommendations for authors about key considerations when selecting and using environmental concern scales.

This laboratory study implemented the hidden profile paradigm in an attempt to assess whether group cohesion (both task and social) mediated the negative effects of relationship conflict on group performance. In the main, it was found that the negative effect of relationship conflict was mediated by task cohesion, but not by social cohesion. Instead, it was shown that social cohesion was better represented as a critical group-level outcome. That is to say, relationship conflict had indirect negative effects on both task-based aspects of group performance (i.e., decision accuracy), as well as social-based aspects of group performance (i.e., social cohesion). A discussion is offered in which the implications of these findings are considered.

No abstract

Implementing any innovation successfully is a challenge. In addition to commonly reported climate and values‐fit constructs, this study proposes that communication behaviors (i.e., monitoring, challenging, managing, and negotiating) are also vital for innovation implementation. Via an in‐depth literature review, the study first defines these metrics. Second, a content analysis of an integrated project delivery (IPD) case study report enables the study to explore if these communication behaviors exist in inter‐organizational architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) project teams. Results provide four key communication metrics for innovation implementation, supported by evidence and examples that illustrate these metrics in AEC teams implementing IPD as an innovation.

Although conceptualized initially as a dyadic-level theory, scholars have since broadened the theoretical underpinnings of leader–member exchange (LMX) to account for its effects on group-level phenomena. LMX differentiation, for example, captures the extent to which variance in LMX quality within teams affects numerous outcomes (e.g., performance). However, the specific mechanisms by which LMX differentiation affects team-level outcomes remains virtually unknown. In an attempt to address this limitation, this study investigates the extent to which task and social cohesion mediate the effects of LMX differentiation on team performance. Results indicate that the negative effect of LMX differentiation on team performance is mediated by task cohesion but not by social cohesion. In addition, LMX differentiation was found to have a negative effect of social cohesion, which was also mediated by task cohesion. A discussion is offered in which the implications of these results are entertained.