Do member attributions for team outcomes represent a collective belief?

ObjectivesThe main purpose of the study was to examine the degree to which member attributions for team outcomes reflect a shared belief. A secondary purpose was to determine if outcome (i.e., win/loss) served to moderate the degree to which shared beliefs were present in team member attributions.DesignCross-sectional survey.MethodParticipants (N=246) from 26 male and female intercollegiate basketball and volleyball teams completed the Causal Dimension Scale for Teams (CDS-T; [Greenlees, I. A., Lane, A., Thelwell, R. C., Holder, T. P., & Hobson, G. (2005). Confirmatory factor analysis and construct validity of a team-referent attribution scale. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 76, 477–487]). The CDS-T is comprised of 16 items that assess four dimensions: locus of causality, stability, team control, and external control.ResultsThree statistical protocols were used to examine consensus: the index of agreement, the intraclass correlation coefficient, and eta-squared. Results showed index of agreement values were high (rwg=0.71–0.92). Also, intraclass correlations were significant (p<0.05) in all instances. However, four of the eta-squared values failed to reach the established criterion of η2=0.20. Match outcome did not have an influence on the index of agreement values (Wilks lambda F(4,21)=1.50, p  >0.05, ηp2=0.22).ConclusionsThe results of the present study provide empirical support that team-referent attributions reflect a collective belief.