Chapter 13 Theories of Small Group

Communication

Early Research in Group Interaction

Early work descriptive and simplistic– Phase models (phases of discussions)– Factor models (input—process—output)

More complex models of group process such as Poole’s multiple sequence model– Unitary sequence path (orientation,

problem analysis, solution, and reinforcement)

– Complex cyclic path (multiple problem-solution cycles)

– Solution-oriented path (activity centered on solution

Functional Theory of Decision-Making

Gouran and HirokawaConcerned with factors that

influence the effectiveness of group decisions

Formative Influences–Groupthink (Janis) – Interaction Process Analysis (Bales)

http://www.gamecareerguide.com/features/418/masters_thesis_chatting_in_.php?page=3

Functional Theory: Assumptions

Boundary conditions (p. 232, Table 13.1)

Key functions include: – Problem analysis– Establish criteria for evaluation– Generation of alternative solutions– Evaluation of Positive consequences of

solutions– Evaluation of Negative consequences of

solutions

Functional Theory: Communication important in every

functional step and leads to the predictions on p. 233, Table 13.2.– Ex: Groups characterized by higher

frequencies of communication analyzing the problem/task will arrive at decisions of greater utility than groups characterized by lower frequencies.

Communication also establishes operating norms and procedures

Functional Theory:Tests and Critiques

Generally supported, but some functions are found to be more important (e.g., assessing negative consequences of alternative solutions)

Research critiqued for emphasis on zero-history and ad hoc groups composed of college students

Seems to be relevant only for task-related groups and task functions

Structurational Approaches Recall Structuration from Chapter 12. Duality of structure – action and

structure are intertwined– Reflexivity of human agents– Systems and institutions are enacted

across time and space, through a variety of modalities Modalities: Forms of

“knowledgeability” Operate at different levels (action,

structure, institution) Modalities “interpenetrate” by

“mediating” or contradicting one another

Structuration of Group Arguments

Links two traditions:– cognitive-informational: Argument as

individual thoughts (cognitions) that group members present to each other

– social-interactional perspective: Argument is a language game (collaboratively produced in interaction) with rules and institutions

Adaptive Structuration Theory

Uses technology to study group processes–GDSS (group decision support

system)Technology:

– facilitates anonymous communication– equalizes participation– removes undue influence of particular

group members

Adaptive Structuration Theory

Appropriation: Group members adapt the structural features of the technology to their own group purposes–Faithful appropriation (consistent

with spirit of tech.) vs. ironic appropriation (contrary to intended use)

–There are a variety of possible “appropriation moves” (Table 13.4)

Symbolic Convergence Theory:Key Concepts

Fantasy theme: A “dramatizing message” that ignites group interaction. (e.g., joke or story)

Fantasy chain: When group members “pick up” (add to) on a dramatizing message

Group fantasy (fantasy theme): Once “chaining out” has occurred, a sense of community & shared identities emerge

Symbolic Convergence Theory:Key Concepts (cont.)

Fantasy type: Fantasies become linked with each other in group interaction, forming a prototype

Rhetorical vision: Fantasy types become linked at a more abstract or cultural level collection of fantasies (Master Analogues)– Righteous (right/wrong; moral/immoral)– Social (humanity, community, caring)– Pragmatic (effective, efficient, utility)

Bona Fide Groups The theories considered in this

chapter have been critiqued on several grounds– Often task-related groups– Often zero-history groups (studies often

use university students to constitute the groups)

Theorists have proposed a new approach: The bona fide group perspective (e.g., church & community groups)

Characteristics of Bona Fide Groups

Bona fide groups have shifting members and permeable boundaries

As a result, individuals within bona fide groups must deal with multiple group memberships

Bona fide groups are highly interdependent with their context

Embedded within larger organizational and institutional systems

12 angry men: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8trhBy2DLE&feature=related

Proexample (exercise): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyWxjNECRBE&feature=related

Reality show group discussion? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0Z_tK_kodI&feature=related

Questions for Reflection What is the typical zero history or ad

hoc group among college students? Based on what you learned in this

chapter about small groups, is the classroom a small group?– If some are and some are not, what

makes them different? Can you think of any fantasy themes

(e.g., joke or story) that have emerged in your social groups or classrooms?