Small group communication research of the 1980s: A synthesis and critique

Communication motives (state vs. trait?) and task group outcomes

“…One reason for the interest in the effects of input variables on outcomes is to achieve a greater understanding of how they contribute to group development and process as task group members try to balance the tensions between tasks and relationships (see, e.g., Barge & Frey, 1997;Keyton, 1999;Pavitt & Curtis, 1998). In particular, the outcome measures of satisfaction and cohesion are viewed as significant indicators of a group's goal achievement and successful members' relations (see Cragan & Wright, 1990).…”

Statusgefälle und Intragruppenprozesse in Schülerarbeitsgruppen

“…Eine Zusammenschau der Literatur zum Gruppenunterricht in den 80er Jahren in Amerika zeigt, dass nur 13 Prozent aller Studien außerhalb des Labors durchgeführt wurden (Cragan & Wright, 1990). Das bedeutet, dass Theorien und Erkenntnisse über Gruppenprozesse zumeist auf Beobachtungen aktuell zusammengestellter Laborgruppen beruhen und dann erst auf natür-liche Gruppen übertragen werden.…”

Jurors' intuitive rules for deliberation: A structurational approach to communication injury decision making

“…While the lack of theory guiding the study of groups was initially a primary criticism (Cragan & Wright, 1980), subsequent reviews have acknowledged that group communication researchers in the 1980s responded to early theory-building calls (Cragan & Wright, 1990;Frey, 1996;Propp & Kreps, 1994). Structurational theory has emerged as one of the major theories guiding small group study and offering a focus on the developmental processes behind the emergence of group decisions (Frey, 1996).…”

“…As with traditional jury research, small group research has been pointedly censured for its reliance on the study of student, zero-history groups solving artificial tasks in a laboratory setting (Frey, 1994a). The plea for real-world significance by studying groups embedded in natural contexts was consolidated in a series of articles published in Communication Studies (Cragan & Wright, 1990;Poole, 1990;Putnam & Stohl, 1990;Sykes, 1990) and culminated in a volume of original research reports investigating groups in context (Frey, 1994a). A touchstone for much of this research was the realization that positivistically oriented researchers have neglected the voices of the group members themselves, which, in turn, suggests a need to create and employ methodologies that illuminate the ways in which group members construct their group (Frey 1994b).…”