Seashore Group Cohesiveness Index Test

For people who want to understand how a small team functions, this questionnaire offers a structured reflection on belonging, relationships, shared work, and the psychological climate around them. The Seashore Group Cohesiveness Index Test is intended for members of an existing group, including employees, students, athletes, and other participants. A group cohesion test can help organize discussion about strengths, tensions, and mutual support without reducing the group to one score.

What This Assessment Explores

Cohesion means unity in a small group, expressed through belonging, mutual support, relationships, and psychological climate. The group cohesiveness assessment helps a respondent consider whether the group feels integrated and supportive or shows fragmentation and conflict. It captures one member’s perspective, not an objective audit of every person.

The item themes cover four areas:

• Belonging shows how strongly the respondent identifies with the group.
• Staying preference indicates whether the group feels worth remaining in when an equivalent alternative is available.
• Member relationships show whether peer interaction feels better, similar, or worse than elsewhere.
• Leadership and task climate reflect management relationships and attitudes toward work or study.

Stronger cohesion reflects unity, mutual support, and team spirit; lower cohesion may signal fragmentation or conflict. The Group Cohesiveness Index ranges from 5 to 19: Low cohesion (5–8), Moderate cohesion (9–12), and High cohesion (13–19).

Methodology and Scientific Basis

Each item offers ordered response alternatives about belonging, changing groups, peer relationships, management, and attitudes toward work or study. Some choices describe favorable or less favorable experiences, while a final option allows the respondent to indicate uncertainty. As a team cohesion questionnaire, the format turns selections into a score; the online version does not state per-answer weighting, so the range cannot show how many points a choice contributes.

The five-item content corresponds closely to Seashore’s published index, which treats cohesion as attachment, interaction, and shared functioning. Dontsov’s work on collectives adds a group-level perspective, while Mudrack’s analysis shows that cohesion and productivity are related but not identical. The questionnaire therefore addresses the same broad construct while keeping cohesion distinct from productivity.

Interpret results as a snapshot of perceived group dynamics shaped by role, recent experiences, expectations, and self-awareness. This version has no stated population norms, reliability estimates, or clinical cutoffs, so its bands are best used to identify themes for reflection. Self-report may be influenced by conflict, loyalty, mood, or pressure to present the group positively.