Independent variables in the conference situation

Utterback, William E.

doi:10.1080/00335635409382003

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On attitude toward capital punishment, to which students were initially opposed, there was a significant shift to even stronger opposition. Most other studies predating the contemporary group shift literature also evidence some degree of polarization effect (Geier, Forston, & Larson, 1970;Hopkins, 1964, p. 131;Utterback, 1954), but not Miller and Biggs (1958).…”

Section: Attitude Studiesmentioning

confidence: 93%

The group polarization phenomenon.

Myers

Lamm²

1976

Psychological Bulletin

896

501

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Experiments exploring the effects of group discussion on attitudes, jury decisions, ethical decisions, judgments, person perceptions, negotiations, and risk taking (other than the choice-dilemmas task) are generally consistent with a "group polarization" hypothesis, derived from the risky-shift literature. Recent attempts to explain the phenomenon fall mostly into one of three theoretical approaches: (a) group decision rules, especially majority rule (which is contradicted by available data), (b) interpersonal comparisons (for which there is mixed support), and (c) informational influence (for which there is strong support). A conceptual scheme is presented which integrates the latter two viewpoints and suggests how attitudes develop in a social context.

show abstract

Section: Attitude Studiesmentioning

confidence: 93%

The group polarization phenomenon.

Myers

Lamm²

1976

Psychological Bulletin

896

501

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ruja (87) studied discussion vs. lecture in college teaching; discussion was not superior in regard to subject-matter mastery and emotional adjustment of students. Utterback (97) reported intelligence and sex as nonsignificant factors in effecting shift of opinion in discussion.…”

Section: Quantitative Studiesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Chapter IV: Speaking

Fotheringham¹,

Berquist²

1958

Review of Educational Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

THREE principal bases of selection were employed for materials here reviewed. First, items central to speaking and communication as a social act were included. Other chapters in this issue deal with listening, linguistics, communication theory, and speech disorders. Second, items which were speculative, discursive, theoretical, or anecdotal in approach were omitted. Finally, publications relatively accessible to the reader were emphasized. Unpublished dissertations and items in foreign journals were considered generally unaccessible.The research selected for review was organized into four broad categories: (a) bibliographies and reviews; (b) tests, measurements, and instruments for research; (c) quantitative studies; and (d) historicalcritical studies. Bibliographies and ReviewsAuer (3), Knower (67), and Dow (33) continued their indexes and abstracts of doctoral dissertations. Gray (45) compiled an index of doctoral dissertations in areas contiguous to speech. Bass (5) reviewed research in leaderless group discussion. Karstetter (62) and Kelley and Thibaut (64) reviewed studies in group dynamics. Hovland (59) summarized the major studies on mass media of communication. Black (9) reviewed recent research on intelligibility.Caplan and King (19) compiled an extensive bibliography of studies dealing with pulpit eloquence from 1500 to the present. Haberman and others (51) continued their annotated bibliographies of studies in rhetoric and public address. Gunderson (49) compiled a bibliography of studies in historical journals relevant to public address. Auer (2) prepared a bibliography of studies in American public address. Eubanks, Baker, and Golden (36) developed a bibliography stressing studies relevant to the Southern states. Tests, Measures, Instruments of ResearchEfforts to develop the instruments of research appeared to be considerably more limited than studies devoted to the testing of hypotheses. In the area of discussion and small-group behavior, two formulas were developed to quantify some outcomes of discussion. Matthews and Bendig (77) developed an Index of Agreement designed to quantify the degree of agreement among discussants. The index is computed simply. Dickens (30) presented and discussed the usefulness of a measure of the "spread of participation" occurring in a discussion.

show abstract

The influence of style of moderation on the outcomes of discussion

Utterback

1958

Quarterly Journal of Speech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Independent variables in the conference situation

Cited by 6 publications

References 2 publications

The group polarization phenomenon.

The group polarization phenomenon.

Chapter IV: Speaking

The influence of style of moderation on the outcomes of discussion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About