El presente artículo revisa el paradigma experimental de contraste de la polarización grupal desde el punto de vista del análisis estadístico, discute e ilustra las serias deficiencias metodológicas del análisis estadístico utilizado comúnmente en la literatura para contrastar el fenómeno de la polarización grupal (pruebas t y ANOVAS) y propone una vía alternativa de análisis para establecer la prevalencia del fenómeno utilizando análisis para datos categóricos. A la luz de la crítica efectuada la evidencia sobre polarización grupal necesita ser reanalizada desde el nuevo enfoque de análisis propuesto.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AgrestiA. (199O). Categorical data analysis.Nueva York: John Wiley & Sons.
2.
AtoM.LópezJ. J. (1996). Análisis estadístico para datos categóricos.Madrid: Síntesis.
3.
BakemanR.RobinsonB. F. (1994). Understanding log-linear analysis with ILOG. An Interactive Approach.Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
4.
BradleyG. L. (1995). Group influences upon preferences for personal protection: A simulation study. Journal of Safety Research, 26, 99–105.
5.
CrottH. W.SzilvasK.ZuberJ. A. (1991). Group decision, choice shift, and polarization in consulting, political, and local political scenarios: An experimental investigation and theoretical analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 49, 22–41.
6.
DemarisA. (1992). Logit modeling: Practical applications. Sage University Paper series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, 07-086. Newbury Park: Sage.
7.
ForgasJ. P. (1977). Polarization and moderation of person perception judgements as a function of group interaction style.European Journal of Social Psychology, 7, 175–187.
8.
FraserC.GougeC.BilligM. (1971). Risky shifts, cautions shifts and group polarization. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1, 7–30.
9.
IsozakiM. (1984). The effect of discussion on polarization of judgments. Japanese Psychological Research, 26, 187–193.
10.
JesuinoJ. C. (1986). Influence of leadership processes on group polarization. European Journal of Social Psychology, 16, 413–423
11.
KaplanM. F.MillerC. E. (1987). Group decision making and normative versus informational influence: Effects of type of issue and assigned decision rule. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 306–313.
12.
KnokeD.BurkeP. J. (1980). Log-linear models. Sage University Paper series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, series no.07-020. Beverly Hills y Londres: Sage.
13.
LaughlinP. R.EarleyP.C. (1982). Social combination models, persuasive arguments theory, social comparison theory, and choice shift. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 273–280.
14.
McgartyC.TurnerJ. C.HoggM. A.DavidB.WetherellM. S. (1992). Group polarization as conformity to the prototypical group member. British Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 1–20.
15.
MoralesJ. C. (1985). La polarización grupal. EnHuiciC. (Ed.), Estructura y Procesos de grupo.Madrid: UNED.
16.
MoscoviciS.LecuyerR. (1972). Studies in group decision I: Social space, patterns of communication and group consensus. European Journal of Social Psychology, 2, 221–244.
17.
MoscoviciS.ZavalloniM. (1969). The group as a polarizer of attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 12, 125–135.
18.
MyersJ. L. (1966). Fundamentals of experimental design.Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.
19.
StonerJ. A. F. (1961). A comparison of individual and group dimensions involving risk. Tesis doctoral no publicada, School of Industrial Management, MIT.
20.
TurnerJ. C. (1987). Rediscovering the social group. A self-categorization theory.Oxford: Basil Blackwell. (Versión española en Editorial Morata, Madrid, 1989).
21.
WetherellM. (1987). Identidad social y polarización de grupo. EnTurnerJ. C., Rediscovering the social group. A self-categorization theory.Oxford: Basil Blackwell. (Versión española en Editorial Morata, Madrid, 1989).
22.
ZaleskaM. (1980). Climat des relations interpersonnelles et polarisation des attitudes dans les groupes.Psychologie Française, 25, 183–193.
23.
ZuberJ. A.CrottH. W.WernerJ. (1992). Choice shift and group polarization: An analysis of the status of arguments and social decision schemes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 50–61.
