Úvod do analýzy relačních maticových dat pomocí metody Modelu sociálních vztahů (Social relation model – SRM)

In psychology, especially social psychology, we often encounter situations where people are evaluated and judged by each other or when one group of people evaluates another group. In the case of quantification of such mutual perceptions, we work with matrix relational data whose statistical evaluation is considerably complicated. For a detailed analysis of mutual evaluations, Kenny (1994) developed a methodological approach called the Social Relational Model (SRM). Given that this is not a well-known method of data analysis for us yet, and could be used in a number of areas of psychological research, this article aims to present it briefly and will refer to other important and useful resources. In addition to the basic characteristics and the main observed effects, a specific example of the use of the method in the field of group communication analysis (frequency and quality) will be given. Finally, the areas where the SRM approach could be applied will be considered.

1. Back, M. D., Kenny, D. A. (2010). The Social Relations Model: How to understand dyadic processes. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, (4), 855–870. CrossRef

2. Bahbouh, R. (2011). Sociomapování týmů. Praha: Dar Ibn Rushd & QED GROUP.

3. Bond, C. F., Lashley, B. R. (1996). Round-robin analysis of social interaction: Exact and estimated standard errors. Psychometrika, 61(2), 303–311. CrossRef

4. Cook, W. L. (2001). Interpersonal Influence in Family Systems: A Social Relations Model Analysis. Child Development, 72(4), 1179–1197. CrossRef

5. Cronbach, L. J., Nageswari, R., Gleser, G. C. (1963). Theory of generalizability: A liberation of reliability theory. The British Journal of Statistical Psychology, 16, 137–163. CrossRef

6. Duffy, M. K., Shaw, J. D., Stark, E. M. (2000). Performance and satisfaction in conflicted interdependent groups: When and how does self-esteem make a difference? Academy of Management Journal, 43, 772–783. CrossRef

7. Edwards, M. R., Ewen, A. J. (1996). 360° Feedback: The powerful new model for Employee Assessment & performance improvement. New York: AMACOM American Management Association.

8. Eichelsheim, V. I., Deković, M., Buist, K. L., Cook, W. L. (2009). The Social Relations Model in Family Studies: A Systematic Review. Journal of Marriage & Family, 71(4), 1052–1069. CrossRef

9. Fedor, D. B., Bettenhausen, K. L., Davis, W. (1999). Peer reviews: Employees' dual roles as raters and recipients. Group & Organization Management, 24, 92–120. CrossRef

10. Gill, P. S., Swartz, T. B. (2007). Bayesian analysis of dyadic data. American Journal of Mathematical and Management Sciences, 27, 73–92. CrossRef

11. Gomez, C., Kirkman, B. L., Shapiro, D. L. (2000). The impact of collectivism and in-group/out-group membership on the evaluation generosity of team members. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 1097–1106.

12. Greguras, G. J., Robie, C., Born, M. H., Koenigs, R. J. (2007). A social relations analysis of team performance ratings. International Journal of Selection & Assessment, 15(4), 434–448. CrossRef

13. Kenny, D. A. (1994). Interpersonal perception: A social relations analysis. New York: Guilford Press.

14. Kenny, D. A. (2013). Social relation model programs. Retrieved from http://davidakenny.net/srm/srmp.htm

15. Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A. (2010). Dyadic data analysis using multilevel modeling. In J. Hox, J. K. Roberts (Eds.), The handbook of multilevel analysis (pp. 335–370). London: Taylor Francis.

16. Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., Cook, W. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. New York: Guilford.

17. Kenny, D. A., La Voie, L. (1984). The social relations model. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (pp. 142–182). Orlando: Academic Press.

18. Kenny, D. A., Zaccaro, S. J. (1983). An estimate of variance due to traits in leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 678–685. CrossRef

19. Lam, C. K., Van der Vegt, G. S., Walter, F., Huang, X. (2011). Harming high performers: A social comparison perspective on interpersonal harming in work teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(3), 588–601. CrossRef

20. Lashley, B. R., Bond, C. F., Jr. (1997). Significance testing for round robin data. Psychological Methods, 2(3), 278–291. CrossRef

21. Marcus, D. K. (1998). Studying group dynamics with the social relations model. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 2(4), 230–240. CrossRef

22. May, G. L., Gueldenzoph, L. E. (2006). The effect of social style on peer evaluation ratings in project teams. Journal of Business Communication, 43(1), 4–20. CrossRef

23. Musil, J. V. (2003). Sociometrie v psychologické kognici: Nástroj sociální kompetence učitele. Olomouc: Cyrilometodějská teologická fakulta Univerzity Palackého v Olomouci.

24. Olsen, J. A., Kenny, D. A. (2006). Structural equation modeling with interchangeable dyads. Psychological Methods, 11, 127–141. CrossRef

25. Peiperl, M. (2001). Getting 360 degree feedback right. Harvard Business Review, 79(1), 142–147.

26. Rasbash, J., Jenkins, J., O'Connor, T. G., Tackett, J., Reiss, D. (2011). A social relations model of observed family negativity and positivity using a genetically informative sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(3), 474–491. CrossRef

27. Ross, H., Stein, N., Trabasso, T., Woody, E., Ross, M. (2005). The quality of family relationships within and across generations: A social relations analysis. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 29, 110–119. CrossRef

28. Rozehnalová, E. (2013). Reliabilita a validita sociomapování komunikace: se zaměřením na vzájemné hodnocení u malých pracovních skupin. Doctoral dissertation. Charles Univerzity in Prague, Czech Republic.

29. Schönbrodt, F. D., Back, M. D., Schmukle, S. C. (2012). TripleR: An R package for social relations analyses based on round-robin designs. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 455–470. CrossRef

30. Snijders, T. A. B., Kenny, D. A. (1999). The social relations model for family data: A multilevel approach, Personal Relationships, (6), 471–486. CrossRef

31. Sysinger, Y. E., Crispo, A. W. (2012). Employee Motivation and 360° Feedback. Insights to a Changing World Journal, (1), 1–13.

32. Tziner, A., Murphy, K. R., Cleveland, J. N. (2002). Does conscientiousness moderate the relationship between attitudes and beliefs regarding performance appraisal and rating behavior? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 10(3), 218–224. CrossRef

33. Wright, T. L., Ingraham, L. J., Blackmer, D. R. (1985). Simultaneous study of individual differences and relationship effects in attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1059–1062. CrossRef