At its 50-year milestone, we assess the Small Group Research ( SGR) corpus to reflect on the development of group research over the past half century. To do this, we examine the evolution of the corpus’s context and content. We examine its context by assessing its impact, which journals it communicates with, and the internationality of its authors. We examine its content—the topics discussed in its articles—using keyword clustering and co-occurrence network analysis. We identify 10 research communities and track their relationships over the four editorial periods associated with the SGR corpus (lagged 2 years for influence): 1970–1981, 1982–1991, 1992–2010, and 2011–2019. Our analyses indicate that the global and local study of group dynamics has fluctuated over time and that phenomenologically based topics connect theoretical topics and stimulate theoretical development. We also provide three criteria to identify communities and topics of group research most likely to benefit from future integration.

No abstract

Richard Kettner-Polley and Charles Gavin founded Small Group Research ( SGR) to present research, build theory, and generally advance the study of small groups by combining insights from multiple disciplines. Currently, we evaluate the extent to which this interdisciplinary mission has been upheld over time. To do this, we apply the perspective and tools of big data analytics to the nearly 3 million words that span the 829 articles that comprise the SGR corpus from February 1990 to June 2017. Keyword analysis, ontological ordering, and interdisciplinary content analyses identify intriguing patterns and detect latent trends. Our results speak to the consistent interdisciplinarity of SGR while identifying opportunities for further development and more complex disciplinary integration in research on small groups.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Previous research has concluded that ownership of economic resources that are politically valued leads to preferential outcomes during interactions with government officials. However, how the political context, and specifically the roles of the government actors involved, influences the relationship between political valued resources (PVRs) and desired outcomes has to date been relatively unexplored. In our paper, we argue that in interactions with elected legislators, PVRs are much more likely to lead to preferential outcomes. Conversely, due to the lack of power these resources have with bureaucrats in charge of regulatory enforcement, PVRs are less likely to lead to preferential outcomes. We provide some support for our arguments by looking for shifting patterns of effects in outcome variables that typically fall under the jurisdiction of each political role type. We find that large firms, export firms, and technology firms largely report having favorable influence over laws and regulations due to lobbying and increased foreign ownership, while also spending more days in inspections and more managerial time dealing with regulations.