This study investigates cultural and communication medium effects on conversational argumentation in a decision-making context. Chinese and U.S. participants worked in pairs on two decision-making tasks via face-to-face (FtF) and instant messaging (IM). The analyses showed that Chinese participants tended to engage in potentially more complex argumentation, whereas U.S. participants tended to utilize proportionally more statements of claims and statements of convergence (agreements, acknowledgments, and concessions). Argumentation in IM tended to be more direct than in FtF interactions. There were no interaction effects between culture and communication medium on argumentation behavior. In addition, statements of convergence were found to be negatively related to measures of persuasion, indicating that such statements do not necessarily indicate true agreements or shifts in opinion. The results are discussed in terms of structuration theory and the socioegocentric model of communication.Argumentation is a pervasive mode of discourse, occurring in face-to-face (FtF), mass-mediated and computer-mediated contexts, and in oral and written discourse. Various definitions of argumentation exist, depending on disciplinary and functional orientations to the study of argument (Voss & Van Dyke, 2001). Decision-making dyads and groups engage in argumentation by exchanging claims and Correspondence should be addressed to Craig O. Stewart, Department of English, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA 23529. E-mail: cstewart@odu.edu reasons, and expressing agreement and disagreement, in the process of arriving at decisions that are, at least ideally, mutually acceptable to the group's members. Increasingly, as organizations internationalize, collaborative decision making takes place over computer-mediated channels and across diverse cultures. However, there is little research on argumentation in decision-making directly comparing the argumentation behaviors found in computer-mediated interactions with those in FtF interactions or argumentation behaviors in collectivistic cultures with those in individualistic cultures. In this article, we analyze the argumentative discourse moves of dyads consisting either of U.S. or Chinese college students collaborating on decision-making tasks in FtF and instant-messaging (IM) interactions. In addition to investigating how culture and communication technology affect argumentation, we investigate relations between argumentation behaviors and postdiscussion agreement between partners and subjective ratings of the tasks.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKStructuration theory has been an influential framework for studying the role of interaction and communicative processes in group decision making. As Poole, Seibold, and McPhee (1985) stated, "Structuration refers to the process of production and reproduction of social systems via the application of generative rules and resources [i.e., structures]" (p. 76). The underlying structures that support social systems emerge through processes of interaction. Argumen...