Humans are social animals. One reason we have been able to survive as a species is our ability to form cooperative, functioning groups. By coordinating with one another, multiple people are able to accomplish a variety of tasks that would be impossible to do alone, ranging from the simple act of carrying a heavy object jointly to the complex social behaviors that make up athletics, school, work, and family life. How, though, do these groups function? And what factors can make them function more effectively? These are questions posed by a variety of empirical disciplines, including social, organizational, sports, and educational psychology.

Factors that I have investigated relating to these questions are the personalities, beliefs, and virtues of the individuals who compose these groups. For example, researchers have become increasingly interested in the concept of intellectual humility – the extent to which a person owns his or her limitations, has a low self-focus, and is receptive to the contributions and criticisms of others. As the quote by Carl Sagan implies, the entire scientific enterprise (in addition to education generally) seems to necessitate that practitioners possess this trait. How, though, can we assess the intellectual humility of the people we work with? Do groups reach consensus regarding the intellectual humility of its members, and does this consensus relate in any way to how people actually describe themselves? Perhaps most importantly, I am interested in whether the composition of a group in terms of this trait (e.g., is everyone high in humility, low in humility, or is there a diversity among members) actually predicts how well or how poorly a group functions and performs.

I have also investigated similar questions in a very different context: faith communities. Much of religious life is characterized by taking part in a community of believers, and so it makes sense that the attitudes, beliefs, and piety of fellow congregants will strongly influence individual parishioners. For example, individuals very often model their spiritual lives on people they view as exemplars for their faith, i.e., those with high levels of religious commitment, belief, and virtue. However, here too we can pose the question of whether groups actually reach consensus regarding these impressions of who among them is holy and worthy of being a spiritual model for others. Is spiritual modeling characterized by a large number of individuals looking up to a singular “saint” in the community, or is this process driven primarily by unique, reciprocal peer-to-peer feedback? If the latter possibility is true, it suggests that having a diverse range of individuals to model after, particularly in terms of religious orientation and virtue, may be more beneficial than belonging to a highly homogeneous body.

All papers below are available upon request. Feel free to send me an email.

Group Embeddedness Publications

Meagher, B. R. (2022). An assessment of self and informant data for measuring intellectual humility. Personality and Individual Differences, 184, 111218. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2021.111218

Meagher, B. R., Leman, J. C., Heidenga, C. A., Ringquist, M. R., & Rowatt, W. C. (2020). Intellectual humility in conversation: Distinct behavioral indicators of self and peer ratings. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 16, 417-429. doi:10.1080/17439760.2020.1738536

Meagher, B. R., Gunn, H., Sheff, N., & Van Tongeren, D. R. (2019). An intellectually humbling experience: Changes in interpersonal perception and cultural reasoning across a 5-week course. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 47, 217-229. doi:10.1177/0091647119837010

Meagher, B. R. (2019). Moral representativeness and satisfaction with one’s religious community. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 29, 18-31. doi:10.1080/10508619.2018.1544447

Haggard, M., Rowatt, W. C., Leman, J. C., Meagher, B. R., Moore, C., Fergus, T., Whitcomb, D., Battaly, H., Baehr, J., & Howard-Snyder, D. (2018). Finding middle ground between intellectual arrogance and intellectual servility: Development and assessment of the Limitations-Owning Intellectual Humility Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 125, 184–193. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2017.12.014

Leman, J. C., Haggard, M. C., Meagher, B. R., & Rowatt, W. C. (2017). Personality predictors and correlates of humility. In E. L. Worthington, Jr., D. E. Davis, & J. N. Hook (Eds.), Handbook of humility: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 137-149). New York, NY: Routledge.

Meagher, B. R. (2016). Judgments of religiosity following minimal interaction. Archive for the Psychology of Religion, 38, 1-21. doi:10.1163/15736121-12341318

Meagher, B. R., Leman, J. C., Bias, J. P., Latendresse, S. J., & Rowatt, W. C. (2015). Contrasting self-report and consensus ratings of intellectual humility and arrogance. Journal of Research in Personality, 58, 35-45. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2015.07.002 [Coverage in: The Huffington Post, Inside Higher Ed, Independent, Daily Mail, City A.M.]

Garcia, R. L., Meagher, B. R., Kenny, D. A. (2015). Analyzing the effects of group members’ characteristics: A guide to the Group Actor-Partner Interdependence Model. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 18, 315-328. doi:10.1177/1368430214556370

Meagher, B. R. (2015). The effects of interpersonal differences within religious communities: A Group Actor-Partner Interdependence Model of U.S. congregations. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 25, 74-90. doi:10.1080/10508619.2013.864531

Hodges, B. H., Meagher, B. R., Norton, D., McBain, R., & Kimball, A. (2014). Speaking from ignorance: Not agreeing with others we believe are correct. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106, 218-234. doi:10.1037/a0034662

Meagher, B. R., & Kenny, D. A. (2013). Judge, that ye shall be judged: Interpersonal judgments of religious characteristics within faith communities. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 5, 116-128. doi:10.1037/a0030438