WHAT IS GROUP COHESION ABOUT? Group cohesion is a widely studied construct in the group dynamics literature. Extensive studies of the literature show that there is a lack of consistency and agreement regarding the construct and its use among the researchers who created this literature (Friedkin, 2004; Greer, 2012). Despite the extensive literature on the construct, there is still a divergent opinion on its nature, type and its effect on performance and productivity. Research on group cohesion has continued to generate interest and popularity (Greer 2012) as a widely studied construct in the academic literature. The group cohesion-group performance relationship has been studied extensively, and the findings of early researchers did not present a methodical connection linking performance and cohesion ( Forsyth, 1990; Stogdill, 1972). Although two meta-analytic studies stated that the positive relationship between group cohesion and group performance existed minimally (Evans & Dion, 1991; Mullen & Copper, 1994). However, subsequent studies differed from these meta-analyses on whether the cohesion-performance relationship was moderated by other variables such as level of analysis, task interdependence, goal acceptance, and group norm (Gully, Devine, & Whitney, 1995; Langfred, 2000; Podsakoff, Mackenzie, & Ahearn, 1997). One explanation for this uncertainty in the literature has been nonuniformity in definitions and measurements of cohesion and performance (Cota, Evans, Dion, Kilik, & Longman, 1995; Mudrack, 1989a, 1989b). The context of group cohesion remains broad, and researchers have continued to propose various definitions and conceptual models of group cohesion. For example, group cohesion was defined as the “total force field that causes… half of paper……… the group within three weeks. This observation leads us to question the role of performance during the first week following the formation of a group. Taylor, Castore, and Tyler (1983) examined how performance can be maintained when groups experience success or failure. They observed that the negative impact of performance feedback on cohesion depends on the attributions that group members make regarding the causes of failure. Attributions can be described as the explanations that people make about their own behavior and that of others (Taylor et al. 1983). Their data demonstrated that cohesion can remain high, despite repeated failures and limited successes. This may be due to group service attribution biases. However, there appears to be limited research examining the role of initial levels of group cohesion and the impact that performance has on subsequent levels of group cohesion...