Final answer:
Interdependent group contingencies foster a stronger sense of accountability, better enforcement in small groups, and ensure that individuals' contributions are significant which results in enhanced cohesiveness and performance, especially for complex tasks.
Step-by-step explanation:
Interdependent group contingencies are often considered superior to independent and dependent group contingencies due to several factors. First, monitoring and enforcement are easier in small groups, which helps in maintaining cohesiveness and a sense of connection. Small groups, however, may struggle with large-scale goals and being heard against larger groups. Despite these challenges, when the whole group is held accountable for each member's actions, it fosters a stronger sense of collective responsibility. Secondly, the nature of incentives varies between large and small groups. Individuals in large groups might be able to free ride without being noticed, but in small groups, everyone's contribution is pivotal. Additionally, people who believe that they can control and impact the outcome of group efforts, indicating an internal locus of control, are generally healthier, better able to cope, and less depressed. This psychological aspect can greatly influence group dynamics. Lastly, the concept of In-Groups and Out-Groups, developed by sociologist William Sumner, highlights the powerful motivation and cohesiveness that can come from belonging to a specific group. In interdependent group contingencies, each member’s participation enhances the group's overall performance and the sense of belonging. This is crucial especially when tasks are complex and difficult, thereby reducing the chances of social loafing which can occur in groups where individual performances are less visible.