Experimental studies of motivated group discussion∗

Personality, problem-solving procedure, and performance in small groups.

“…Second, we may be contrasting groups of a size that maximize the differences between individual and group work. There may be more rapidly diminishing returns as N increases in nominal groups than in real groups (see also, Thomas &Fink, 1963, andUtterback &Fotheringham, 1958). The data in this experiment suggest that this may very well be the case.…”

Effects of group size.

“…Taylor and Faust (1952) found that practice in playing Twenty Questions enhanced the individual's ability to solve such problems, but it did not matter whether the practice was obtained alone, as a member of a twoperson group, or as a member of a fourperson group. By contrast, positive results were reported by Utterback and Fotheringham (1958) in regard to the quality of solutions to human relations problems. Individual answers were recorded both before and after a discussion in groups of 3, 6, 9, or 12 members.…”

“…A negative effect of group size was found by Hare (1952) with groups of 5 and 12 Boy Scouts, with two measures showing that consensus increased more in the smaller groups. Finally, Utterback and Fotheringham (1958) reported a significant interaction between group size and the amount of intervention by the discussion moderator. Increase in consensus was greatest in 12-person groups under full moderation, but greatest in 3-person groups under partial moderation.…”

Speaking

“…Slight but significant correlations were found between some of the pairs. With a somewhat different approach, Utterback and Fotheringham (1958) found inconclusive relationships to exist among discussion-group size, length of discussion, and degree of moderation. With a somewhat different approach, Utterback and Fotheringham (1958) found inconclusive relationships to exist among discussion-group size, length of discussion, and degree of moderation.…”