At the Convergence of Input and Process Models of Group Discussion: A Comparison of Participation Rates across Time, Persons, and Groups

Bonito, Joseph A.; Gastil, John; Ervin, Jennifer; Meyers, Renée A.

doi:10.1080/03637751.2014.883081

Cited by 19 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 70 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, a study of the ACP transcripts found that equality of speaking rates among participants was high relative to comparison groups and comparable to another signal deliberative event, the 1996 National Issues Convention held in the United States (Bonito, Meyers, Gastil, & Ervin, 2013) Using a measure that assesses the variation in speaking rates within the breakout discussion tables at the ACP, the vast majority of table discussions rated as having "moderate equality" or higher. Another analysis of ACP speaking rates broken down by day showed quieter participants tending to speak up more by the fourth day, with many of those initially more vocal stepping back (Bonito, Gastil, Ervin, & Meyers, 2014).…”

Section: Was the Event Deliberative?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychological Mechanisms of Deliberative Transformation: The Role of Group Identity

Batalha

Niemeyer

Dryzek

et al. 2020

Journal of Deliberative Democracy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Democratic deliberation has been shown to lead to shifts in people's preferences for particular issues. The psychological mechanisms that underpin such shifts are not well understood. Against the backdrop of a deliberative forum we examined participants' preferences for various types of political systems, how these preferences changed as deliberations proceeded and how the final preferences were associated with different levels of inclusiveness of a social identity. The results showed that at the end of the deliberations people's preferences moved in the direction of satisfaction with the political system, and that this preference was positively associated with identification with the superordinate identification but negatively associated with the subgroup identification. We discuss the implication of these results for the design of deliberative forums as well as the role of social identity in deliberative democracy. Author Biography Luisa Batalha is a social psychologist working at the Australian Catholic University. Her mains research interests are intergroup relation, the psychology of climate change mitigation and collective action. Simon Niemeyer is an Associate Professor and co-founder of the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance. His research ties together the themes of political behaviour, the public sphere and observations from deliberative minipublics, such as Citizens' Juries, to develop insights into potential interventions and institutional settings that improve deliberation and governance. Johh S Dryzek is Centenary Professor at the University of Canberra, Australia. He works in both political theory and empirical social science. Dryzek is best known for his contributions in the areas of democratic theory and practice and environmental politics. One of the instigators of the 'deliberative turn' in democratic theory, he has published numerous books in this area with Oxford University Press, Cambridge University Press, and Polity Press. His work in environmental politics ranges from green political philosophy to studies of environmental discourses and movements to global climate governance, and he has published five books in this area with Oxford University Press, Cambridge University Press, and Basil Blackwell. John Gastil is Professor of Political Science at Penn State University. Gastil is widely credited for promoting deliberation among citizens during elections and in other political institutions. In his book By Popular Demand, he proposed creating panels of citizens, chosen randomly to ensure a cross-section of society, to deliberate on ballot initiatives and referenda.

show abstract

Section: Was the Event Deliberative?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychological Mechanisms of Deliberative Transformation: The Role of Group Identity

Batalha

Niemeyer

Dryzek

et al. 2020

Journal of Deliberative Democracy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, the first row is for the group-level variance for the value in the row 1, column 1 position of the G matrix-one 6 Cross-classified models are possible (Beretvas, 2011), in which members belong to multiple groups, but this complicates the analysis and is not addressed here. See (Bonito, Gastil, Ervin, & Meyers, 2014) for an example of how such models might be estimated. can easily see the value of 124.59 in the estimated G matrix.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimation and application of the latent group model.

Bonito

Ervin

Staggs

2016

Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Group scholars often describe or conceptualize groups as having characteristics similar to those of individuals. For example, groups can be thought of as motivated or satisfied in degree. Describing groups in such terms assumes that members possess similar levels of the characteristic in question and that latent group-level processes influence convergence on that characteristic. The latent group model (LGM) offers conceptual and statistical means for assessing the structure of latent, group-level factors based on the convergence of variables measured at the individual level. This paper outlines the conceptual issues related to the LGM and offers a detailed example using interaction data from 4-person groups for estimating the model in SAS-SPSS, Mplus, and R syntax are provided in the appendixes. Applications and extensions of the LGM are discussed.

show abstract

“…Bonito and Meyers (2011) analyzed previously published group interaction data sets and found that participation tends to be homogeneous (i.e., reflecting group-level processes) and heterogeneous (i.e., exhibiting individual-level properties). Finally, Bonito et al (2014) examined longitudinal participation data in which groups worked on several different tasks over a period of time. One set of groups comprising undergraduate students (with group membership not changing) exhibited both homogeneity and heterogeneity of participation across the tasks-participation at the individual level was consistent across the three tasks as was group-level participation.…”

Section: Intra-and Interpersonal Models Of Group Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The covariance estimates are then used to calculate a correlation matrix, with correlations at the individual level on the lower diagonal, group-level correlations on the upper diagonal, and intraclass correlations (ICC's) for participation at each of the four discussion periods on the diagonal. This method has been used previously for examinations of functional communication (Bonito & Meyers, 2011) and participation during a series of public deliberations (Bonito et al, 2014). For these analyses, alpha = .05, one-tailed for the intraclass correlations, and alpha = .05, two-tailed for the correlations.…”

Section: Research Questionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The task was split into four different discussions, each focused on a different aspect of design and development, where each participant assumed one of four roles (e.g., project manager, interface design). The longitudinal nature of the design contributes to previous research on participation (Bonito, 2003(Bonito, , 2006Bonito, Gastil, Ervin, & Meyers, 2014;Bonito, Meyers, Gastil, & Ervin, 2013) by providing the opportunity to (a) evaluate participation trajectories over a series of discussions, (b) explore how task-related role influences participation over time, and (c) estimate potential variation in group-and individual-level characteristics of participation over time.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Role-Related Participation in Product Design Teams

Bonito

Keyton

Ervin

2016

Communication Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Organizations often delegate decision-making tasks to groups and teams. At issue is the extent to which participation during discussion reflects both individual-level characteristics and emergent (i.e., group-level) processes. Drawing upon Hewes's socio-egocentric model and team meeting literature, we used a multilevel approach to examine participation in product-design teams across a series of tasks. Findings indicate that participation consists of both intra-and group-level processes. Team members who were talkative initially continued to participate frequently during the later tasks, and, as predicted, project managers also spoke more often than team members in any other role. In addition, group-level trends became stronger over time, as evidenced by behavioral convergence. Discussion addresses implications for a "middle ground" approach to modeling communicative behavior in groups.

show abstract

At the Convergence of Input and Process Models of Group Discussion: A Comparison of Participation Rates across Time, Persons, and Groups

Cited by 19 publications

References 70 publications

Psychological Mechanisms of Deliberative Transformation: The Role of Group Identity

Psychological Mechanisms of Deliberative Transformation: The Role of Group Identity

Estimation and application of the latent group model.

Role-Related Participation in Product Design Teams

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About