Graphic techniques for evaluating discussion and conference procedures

Brandenburg, Earnest; Neal, Philip A.

doi:10.1080/00335635309381860

Cited by 6 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These authors point out that research on evaluation has typically accentuated issues other than the identification of criteria most useful for assessing group discussions, and that these issues received more attention in the 1950s. Thompson[26] considered the evaluation of public discussions by students, while Brandenburg and Neal [27] developed and tested graphic techniques for recording and evaluating interaction patterns in discussions and conferences. The effects of evaluation on subsequent group behaviour were the focus of the work of Goldberg [28], while Bane [29] concentrated on the effects of training on discussion.…”

Section: Marketing Decisions As Group Decisionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discourse and Deed

Pitt

Tynan

Nel

1994

Journal of Managerial Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Considers the relationship between the perceived quality of discussion within a group and that group′s performance on a marketing decision‐making game. Reviews the relevant literature and discusses an instrument for the measuring of perceived quality of discussion within a decision‐making group. Evaluates the structural ramifications of the instrument with relevance to a study of 95 MBA students playing a marketing decision‐making game in groups. It was found that, with one exception, the instrument maintained its underlying structure as a measure of perceived quality of discussion within a group. With regard to the faculty of the behavioural variables within the instrument to predict overall unidimensional perceived quality of discussion within a decision‐making group, it was found that, while significant prediction was still maintained, fewer behavioural variables were significant in the regression model. No relationship was found between the perceived quality of discussion in a decision‐making group and the profit achieved by that group.

show abstract

Section: Marketing Decisions As Group Decisionsmentioning

confidence: 99%