An interaction analysis of verbal innovative deviance in small groups

Valentine, K. B.; Fisher, B. Aubrey

doi:10.1080/03637757409375867

Cited by 13 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Among the types of concepts employed in small group research have been idea development (Crowell and Scheidel, 1964), decision emergence (Fisher, 1970), leadership (Stodgill, 1974), group conformity (Tedeschi, 1972), innovative deviance (Valentine and Fisher, 1974), conflict (Ellis and Fisher, 1975), relational communication Ellis, 1976), personality (Freedman et al, 1951;Leary, 1957), and classroom teaching (Medley and Mitzel, 1958). Although not exhaustive, the list of concepts provides a sense of the research variety in small group communication.…”

Section: Conceptual and Operational Focusmentioning

confidence: 98%

Toward a Taxonomy of Small Group Interaction-Coding Systems

Trujillo

1986

Small Group Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents an exploratory taxonomy of small group interaction-coding systems. Six dimensions that characterize interaction-coding schemes are presented in a hierarchical order rangingfrom abstract conceptual issues to specific methodological ones. Recommendations for future research are offered.Although more than three decades old (Bales, 1950), interaction analysis is one of the most popular methods employed in contemporary small group research. The method has enjoyed widespread use in recent years due to the impetus provided by the &dquo;pragmatic perspective&dquo; with its focus on the behavioral aspects of communication (Watzlawick et al., 1967). In fact, according to the metatheoretical framework that underlies the pragmatic perspective, communication is behavior. Accordingly, the method of interaction analysis is employed to provide an assessment of communication behaviors.The worth of any study employing interaction analysis is, of course, dependent upon the coding system used to describe the communication behaviors. Coding schemes are translation devices that allow researchers to assign behaviors into functional categories. And, as Fisher (1978) has noted, those categories are the variables or concepts of the research. As units of interaction are classified and placed within categories, they are SMALL GROUP

show abstract

Section: Conceptual and Operational Focusmentioning

confidence: 98%

Toward a Taxonomy of Small Group Interaction-Coding Systems

Trujillo

1986

Small Group Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Based on the research of others (Ellis and Fisher, 1975;Fisher, 1970;Valentine and Fisher, 1974), Baxter (1982) developed a model of stages in decision-making. The initial stage was characterized by a generally low expression of disagreement.…”

Section: A Model Of Stages In Decision-makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decision-Making in Therapeutic Groups

Fatout

2020

GPWK

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The major focus in the group literature on decision-making processes has been in the area of task groups. Relatively little attention has been given to these processes in relation to therapeutic groups. There are linkages between the stages of group decision making and group development which can add understanding and knowledge to practice in therapeutic groups.Publisher’s note: We are now putting all back issues of Groupwork on line. Articles in this issue have been scanned to pdf files as viable original typesetting files no longer exist. Though they may not look it, these files are to some extent searchable. This issue was published nearly 30 years ago. We have stated author professional details as received at time of publication.

show abstract

“…The initial stage of a group's history has been characterized as generally low in expressed disagreement (Fisher, 1970;Valentine and Fisher, 1974). Whenever disagreement does gain expression during the initial stage of group development, Ellis and Fisher (1975) have observed that the subsequent utterance rarely reciprocates with counter-disagreement but instead takes the form of agreement or ambiguous reaction.…”

Section: Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The middle stage of group development is accompanied by an increased expression of disagreement and argument (Fisher, 1970;Valentine and Fisher, 1974). Unlike disagreements of the initial stage, however, disagreements in this middle stage are likely to be countered by disagreement and information intended to persuade group members (Ellis and Fisher, 1975).…”

Section: Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the final stage of group development, disagreement acts tend to decrease in frequency from their peak in the middle stage (Fisher, 1970;Valentine and Fisher, 1974). Disagreements which are expressed during this final stage tend to be followed by critical testing and interpretation of relevant information, unlike the more polarized assertions of the middle stage (Ellis and Fisher, 1975).…”

Section: Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation