Beyond positive psychology? Toward a contextual view of psychological processes and well-being

The field of positive psychology rests on the assumption that certain psychological traits and processes are inherently beneficial for well-being. We review evidence that challenges this assumption. First, we review data from 4 independent longitudinal studies of marriage revealing that 4 ostensibly positive processes-forgiveness, optimistic expectations, positive thoughts, and kindness-can either benefit or harm well-being depending on the context in which they operate. Although all 4 processes predicted better relationship well-being among spouses in healthy marriages, they predicted worse relationship well-being in more troubled marriages. Then, we review evidence from other research that reveals that whether ostensibly positive psychological traits and processes benefit or harm well-being depends on the context of various noninterpersonal domains as well. Finally, we conclude by arguing that any movement to promote well-being may be most successful to the extent that it (a) examines the conditions under which the same traits and processes may promote versus threaten well-being, (b) examines both healthy and unhealthy people, (c) examines well-being over substantial periods of time, and (d) avoids labeling psychological traits and processes as positive or negative.     

The paradox of intragroup conflict: a meta-analysis

Since the meta-analysis by De Dreu and Weingart (2003b) on the effects of intragroup conflict on group outcomes, more than 80 new empirical studies of conflict have been conducted, often investigating more complex, moderated relationships between conflict and group outcomes, as well as new types of intragroup conflict, such as process conflict. To explore the trends in this new body of literature, we conducted a meta-analysis of 116 empirical studies of intragroup conflict (n = 8,880 groups) and its relationship with group outcomes. To address the heterogeneity across the studies included in the meta-analysis, we also investigated a number of moderating variables. Stable negative relationships were found between relationship and process conflict and group outcomes. In contrast to the results of De Dreu and Weingart, we did not find a strong and negative association between task conflict and group performance. Analyses of main effects as well as moderator analyses revealed a more complex picture. Task conflict and group performance were more positively related among studies where the association between task and relationship conflict was relatively weak, in studies conducted among top management teams rather than non-top management teams, and in studies where performance was measured in terms of financial performance or decision quality rather than overall performance.