The claim that a group's communication plays a significant role in the outcomes of its discussion presupposes that the members of the group were in actuality communicating with one another; in other words, they were conducting a coherent discussion. Past research attempting to relate discussion and outcomes has almost universally failed to test this presumption. The present study indicates that a sample of 62 groups met quantitative criteria on both the group and individual level for coherent discussion and thus can be presumed to be engaging in communication.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Auld, F., Jr.
, & White, A. M. (1956). Rules for dividing interviews into sentences. Journal of Psychology, 42, 273-281.
2.
Bales, R. F.
, & Strodtbeck, F. L. (1951). Phases in group problem-solving. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 46, 485-495.
3.
Berg, D. M.
(1967). A descriptive analysis of the distribution and duration of themes discussed by task-oriented, small groups. Speech Monographs, 34, 172-176.
4.
Bormann, E. G.
(1970). The paradox and promise of small group research. Speech Monographs, 37, 211-217.
5.
Cappella, J. N.
(1987). Interpersonal communication: Definitions and fundamental questions. In C. R. Berger & S. H. Chaffee (Eds.), Handbook of communication science (pp. 184-238). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
6.
Clark, H. H.
, & Haviland, S. E. (1977). Comprehension and the given-new contract. In R. O. Freedle (Ed.), Discourse production and comprehension (pp. 1-40). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
7.
Corman, S. R.
(1996). Cellular automata as models of unintended consequences of organizational communication. In J. J. Watt & C. A. VanLear (Eds.), Dynamic patterns in communication processes (pp. 191-212). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8.
Cragan, J. F.
, & Wright, D. W. (1980). Small group communication research of the 1970s: A synthesis and critique. Central States Speech Journal, 31, 197-213.
9.
Craig, R. T.
, & Tracy, K. (1983). Introduction. In R. T. Craig & K. Tracy (Eds.), Conversational coherence (pp. 10-22). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
10.
Crow, B. K.
(1983). Topic shifts in couples' conversations. In R. T. Craig & K. Tracy (Eds.), Conversational coherence (pp. 136-156). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
11.
Edmondson, W. J.
(1981). Spoken discourse. London: Longman.
12.
Ellis, D. G.
(1979). Relational control in two group systems. Communication Monographs, 46, 153-166.
13.
Ellis, D. G.
, & Fisher, A. B. (1994). Small group decision making (4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
14.
Fisher, A. B.
(1970a). Decision emergence: Phases in group decision-making. Speech Monographs, 37, 53-66.
15.
Fisher, A. B.
(1970b). The process of decision modification in small discussion groups. Journal of Communication, 20, 51-64.
16.
Fisher, A. B.
(1971). Communication research and the task-oriented group. Journal of Communication, 21, 136-149.
17.
Folger, J. P.
, Hewes, D. E., & Poole, M. S. (1984). Coding social interaction. In B. Dervin & M. J. Voigt (Eds.), Progress in communication sciences (pp. 115-161). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
18.
Goldberg, J. A.
(1983). A move toward describing conversational coherence. In R. T. Craig & K. Tracy (Eds.), Conversational coherence (pp. 25-45). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
19.
Gouran, D. S.
(1973). Group communication: Perspectives and priorities for future research. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 59, 22-29.
20.
Grice, H. P.
(1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics, Vol. 3: Speech acts (pp. 41-58). New York: Academic Press.
21.
Guetzkow, H.
(1950). Unitizing and categorizing problems in coding qualitative data. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 6, 47-58.
22.
Haslett, B. J.
(1987). Communication, strategic action in context. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
23.
Hewes, D. E.
(1986). A socio-egocentric model of group decision making. In R. Y. Hirokawa & M. S. Poole (Eds.), Communication and group decision making (pp. 265-291). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
24.
Hewes, D. E.
(1996). Small group communication may not influence decision making: An amplification of socio-egocentric theory. In R. Y. Hirokawa & M. S. Poole (Eds.), Communication and group decision making (2nd ed., pp. 179-212). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
25.
Hewes, D. E.
, Planalp, S., & Streibel, M. (1980). Analyzing social interaction: Some excruciating models and exhilarating results. In D. Nimmo (Ed.), Communication yearbook 4 (pp. 123-141). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
26.
Hirokawa, R. Y.
(1980). A comparative analysis of communication patterns within effective and ineffective decision-making groups. Communication Monographs, 47, 312-321.
27.
Hirokawa, R. Y.
(1982). Group communication and problem-solving effectiveness 1: A critical review of inconsistent findings. Communication Quarterly, 30, 134-141.
28.
Hirokawa, R. Y.
(1983). Group communication and problem-solving effectiveness: An investigation of group phases. Human Communication Research, 9, 291-305.
29.
Hirokawa, R. Y.
(1985). Discussion procedures and decision-making performance. Human Communication Research, 12, 203-224.
30.
Hopper, R.
(1983). Interpretation as coherence production. In R. T. Craig & K. Tracy (Eds.), Conversational coherence (pp. 81-98). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
31.
Jarboe, S.
(1988). A comparison of input-output, process-output, and input-process-output models of small group problem-solving effectiveness. Communication Monographs, 55, 121-142.
32.
Kibler, R. J.
, & Barker, L. L. (Eds.). (1969). Conceptual frontiers in speech-communication. New York: Speech Association of America.
33.
McLaughlin, M. L.
(1984). Conversation. Beverly Hills; CA: Sage.
34.
Pavitt, C.
(1992). Describing know-how about group discussion procedure: Must the representation be recursive?Communication Studies, 43, 150-170.
35.
Pavitt, C.
(in press). Theorizing about the group communication-leadership relationship: Input-process-output and functional models. In L. R. Frey, D. Gouran, & M. S. Poole (Eds.), The handbook of group communication theory and research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
36.
Pavitt, C.
, Whitchurch, G. G., Siple, H., & Petersen, N. (1997). Communication and emergent group leadership: Does content count?Communication Research Reports, 14, 470-480.
37.
Planalp, S.
, & Hewes, D. E. (1982). A cognitive approach to communication theory: Cogito ergo dico? In M. Burgoon (Ed.), Communication yearbook 5 (pp. 49-77). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
38.
Planalp, S.
, & Tracy, K. (1980). Not to change the topic but...: A cognitive approach to the study of conversation. In D. Nimmo (Ed.), Communication yearbook 4 (pp. 237-258). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
39.
Poole, M. S.
(1981). Decision development in small groups I: A comparison of two models. Communication Monographs, 48, 1-24.
40.
Putnam, L. L.
, & Stohl, C. (1990). Bona fide groups: A reconceptualization of groups in context. Communication Studies, 41, 248-265.
41.
Reynolds, H. T.
(1977). Analysis of nominal data. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
42.
Salazar, A. J.
, Hirokawa, R. Y., Propp, K. M., Julian, K. M., & Leatham, G. B. (1994). In search of true causes: Examination of the effect of group potential and group interaction on decision performance. Human Communication Research, 20, 529-559.
43.
Sanders, R. E.
(1983). Tools for cohering discourse and their strategic utilization. In R. T. Craig & K. Tracy (Eds.), Conversational coherence (pp. 67-80). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
44.
Schank, R. G.
(1977). Rules and topics in conversation. Cognitive Science, 1, 421-444.
45.
Schegloff, E. A.
, & Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica, 8, 289-327.
46.
Scheidel, T. M.
, & Crowell, L. (1964). Idea development in small discussion groups. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 50, 140-145.
47.
Scheidel, T. M.
, & Crowell, L. (1979). Discussing and deciding. New York: Macmillan.
48.
Sigman, S. J.
(1983). Some multiple constraints placed on conversational topics. In R. T. Craig & K. Tracy (Eds.), Conversational coherence (pp. 174-195). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
49.
Tracy, K.
(1982). On getting the point: Distinguishing “issues” and “events,” an aspect of conversational coherence. In M. Burgoon (Ed.), Communication yearbook 5 (pp. 279-301). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
50.
van Dijk, T. A.
(1980). Macrostructures. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
51.
Whitchurch, G. G., & Pavitt, C. (1990). Auld and White revisited: Expanded and updated rules for unitizing verbal interaction. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Communication Studies, Indiana University-Indianapolis.
