The assumption that the quality of group decisions depends on satisfying certain requisite communication functions underpins much research on small groups. Paradoxically, even when groups are knowledgeable about required functions, interactional and situational constraints can interfere with their use. This study tested whether imposing a reminder function into the group ensures a decision process that optimizes group effectiveness. Results indicate that groups trained in decision processes produce higher quality decisions than do untrained groups but that trained groups with nonleader reminders produce significantly higher quality decisions than do either trained or untrained groups.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bayless, O. L. (1967). An alternative pattern for problem-solving discussion. Journal of Communication, 17, 188-198.
2.
Brett, J. M. (1991). Negotiating group decisions. Negotiation Journal, 7, 308-308.
3.
Brilhart, J. K. , & Jochem, L. M. (1964). Effects of different patterns on outcomes of problem-solving discussions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 48, 175-178.
4.
Cragan, J. F. , & Wright, D. W. (1986). Communication in small group discussion: An integrated approach (2nd ed.). St. Paul, MN: West.
5.
Cragan, J. F. , & Wright, D. W. (1990). Small group communication research of the 1980s: A synthesis and critique. Communication Studies, 41, 212-236.
6.
Delbecq, A. K. , Vande Ven, A. H., &Gustafson, D. H. (1975). Group techniquesforprogram planning. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
7.
Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Boston: Heath.
8.
Fisher, B. A. (1986). Leadership: When does the difference make a difference? In R. Y Hirokawa & M. A. Poole (Eds.), Communication and group decision-making (pp. 197-215). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
9.
Geier, J. (1967). A trait approach to the study of leadership in small groups. Journal of Communication, 17, 316-323.
10.
Gouran, D. S. (1982). Making decisions in groups: Choices and consequences. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
11.
Gouran, D. S. (1984). Communicative influences related to the Watergate coverup: The failure of collective judgments. Central States Speech Journal, 35, 260-268.
12.
Gouran, D. S. (1989). Functions of argument in decision-making discussion: Some prescriptions for increasing the probability of rational choice. In B. E. Graonbeck (Ed.), Proceedings of the sixth SCA/AFA conference on argumentation (pp. 481-488). Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association.
13.
Gouran, D. S. (1991). Rational approaches to decision-making and problem-solving discussion. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 77, 343-358.
14.
Gouran, D. S. , & Hirokawa, R. Y (1986). Counteractive functions of communication in effective group decision-making. In R. Y Hirokawa & M. S. Poole (Eds.), Communication and group decision-making (pp. 81-90). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
15.
Harnack, R. V. (1963). A study of the effect of an organized minority upon a discussion group. Journal of Communication, 13, 12-24.
16.
Hirokawa, R. Y. (1985). Discussion procedures and decision-making performance: A test of a functional perspective. Human Communication Research, 12, 203-224.
17.
Hirokawa, R. Y. (1987). Why informed groups make faulty decisions: An investigation of possible interaction-based explanations. Small Group Behavior, 18, 3-29.
18.
Hirokawa, R. Y. (1988). Group communication and decision-making performance: A continued test of the functional perspective. Human Communication Research, 14, 487-515.
19.
Hirokawa, R. Y. , & Pace, R. C. (1983). A descriptive investigation of the possible communication-based reasons for effective and ineffective group decision-making. Communication Monographs, 50, 363-379.
20.
Hirokawa, R. Y , & Rost, K. M. (1992). Effective group decision making in organizations: Field test of the vigilant interaction theory. Management Communication Quarterly, 5(3), 267-288.
21.
Hirokawa, R. Y , & Scheerhom, D. R. (1986). The role of communication in faulty group decision-making. In R. Y. Hirokawa & M. S. Poole (Eds.), Communication and group decision-making (pp. 63-80). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
22.
Janis, I. L. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological studies of policy decision andfiascoes (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
23.
Janis, I. L. , & Mann, L. (1977). Decision-making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and commitment. New York: Free Press.
24.
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.
25.
Ketrow, S. M. (1991). Valued leadership behaviors and perceptions of contribution: The unsung hero. In D. W. Parson (Ed.), Proceedings of the seventh SCA/AFA conference on argwnentation (pp. 229-236). Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association.
26.
Larson, C. E. (1969). Forms of analysis and small group problem-solving. Speech Monographs, 36,452-455.
27.
Levine, J. M. , & Moreland, R. L. (1990). Progress in small group research. Annual Review of Psychology, 416, 525-634.
28.
Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics. Hwnan Relations, 1, 1-20.
29.
Maier, N.R.F. , & Hoffman, L. R. (1960a). Quality of first and second solutions in group dynamics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 44, 278-283.
30.
Maier, N.R.F. , & Hoffman, L. R. (1960b). Using trained "developmental" discussion leaders to improve further the quality of group dynamics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 44, 247-251.
31.
Maier, N.R.F. , & Maier, R. A. (1957). An experimental test of theeffects of "developmental" vs. "free" discussions on the quality of group decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 41, 320-323.
32.
Morris, C. G. , & Hackman, J. R. (1969). Behavioral correlates of perceived leadership. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13, 350-369.
33.
Poole, M. S. (1983). Decision development in small groups II: Astudy of multiple sequences in decision making. Communication Monographs, 50, 206-232.
34.
Schultz, B. (1982). Argumentativeness: Its effect in group decision-making and its role in leadership perception. Communication Quarterly, 30, 368-375.
35.
Schultz, B. , Ketrow, S. M., & Urban, D. M. (1992, November). Improving decision quality in the small group: A role for a reminder. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Chicago.
36.
Schweiger, D. M. , Sandberg, W. R., & Ragan, J. W. (1986). Group approaches for improving strategic decision making: A comparative analysis of dialectical inquiry, devil's advocacy, and consensus. Academy of Management Journal, 28, 51-71.
37.
Valentine, I. B. , & Fisher, B. A. (1974). An interaction analysis of innovative deviance in small groups. Speech Monographs, 41, 413-420.
