Territorial dominance in a dyadic conversation as a function of similarity of opinion.

Conroy, Joseph; Sundstrom, Eric

doi:10.1037/0022-3514.35.8.570

Cited by 14 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The two studies (Conroy & Sundstrom, 1977;Martindale, 1971) that treated territorial dominance as the dominance measure yielded three independent effect sizes (r = -.35, r = .29, r = .43). Territorial dominance means that a person who is familiar with the environment in which the interaction takes place has a dominance advantage and is so-called territorially dominant.…”

Section: Limitations Of the Present Meta-analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Dominance as Expressed and Inferred Through Speaking Time.

Mast

2002

Human Comm Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Differences in speaking time during a group interaction are hypothesized to reflect differences in individual dominance. In order to test this assumption and to identify potential moderator variables influencing the strength of the predicted association, a meta-analysis was conducted. Whether speaking time is used to convey dominance to the same extent that it is used in inferring dominance was tested by contrasting studies concerned with dominance expressed in speaking time with studies of inferred dominance based on speaking time. Overall, and for the investigated subcategories of studies, the relationship between dominance and speaking time was significant. The strength of the associations, however, differed considerably due to the influence of moderator variables. The results showed that inferred dominance studies showed stronger associations between speaking time and dominance as opposed to the expressed dominance studies. Additionally, if dominance was expressed due to dominance-role assignments, the association between speaking time and dominance was stronger than if individuals with different levels of trait dominance interacted. For men, the association between speaking time and dominance was stronger than for women, and same-gender groups showed stronger associations than opposite-gender groups. Also, increasing group size intensified the strength of the association linearly.

show abstract

Section: Limitations Of the Present Meta-analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Dominance as Expressed and Inferred Through Speaking Time.

Mast

2002

Human Comm Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The distinction among these three types of territories is not based on the physical dimensions of the environments in question but on the user's attitudes and perceptions about these environments in relation to others. Altman's (1975) typology has received empirical support: Subjects have experienced greater feelings of control in more central territories (Edney, 1975;Taylor & Stough, 1978) and, while in their home territories, exhibited more dominance behaviors than visitors (Conroy & Sundstrom, 1977;Taylor & Lanni, 198 1 ). The purpose of the present study was to assess further the validity of distinguishing different types of territory according to the amount of control that people experience in those territories.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Territoriality and Compliance: The Influence of Gender and Location on Willingness to Sign Petitions

Harris

McAndrew

1986

The Journal of Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Although the initial studies focused on competitive exchanges, Conroy & Sundstrom (1977) The use of strangers as the subjects in the dyads and triads in previous empirical work, when seen from the perspective of reciprocal role relationships between host and guest, has the effect of intensifying the reliance on culturally defined norms, since there are no other rules to guide the exchange. With familiarity, on the other hand, personal norms may arise which are to one degree or another at variance with the cultural norms.…”

Section: Yoram Bar-tal and Philip E Kubzanskymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Martindale, 1971;Conroy & Sundstrom, 1977;Taylor & Lanni, 1981). Martindale, 1971;Conroy & Sundstrom, 1977;Taylor & Lanni, 1981).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Resident advantage as social role performance

Bar‐Tal

Kubzansky

1987

British J Social Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Past research and theory on territorial dominance and resident advantage (RA) explains the resident's dominance over an outsider as arising from the place in which the interaction occurs (the host's turf). The present study evaluates the relative explanatory value of social role factors vs. that of place in accounting for RA. Fifty-eight subjects answered questionnaires simulating four interactions, host with guest (HG), host with host (HH), guest with host (GH) and guest with guest (GG). Interactions involving reciprocal roles (GH and HG) were taken to indicate the contribution of role and place, while the other interactions (HH and GG) indicate the effect of place alone. Subtracting the effect of place from that of role and place reveals the contribution of social role. The data showed social role factors to have greater impact than did place. Social role analysis also helps understand moderating variables such as familiarity-unfamiliarity and agreement-disagreement between the interactants.

show abstract

Territorial dominance in a dyadic conversation as a function of similarity of opinion.

Cited by 14 publications

References 8 publications

Dominance as Expressed and Inferred Through Speaking Time.

Dominance as Expressed and Inferred Through Speaking Time.

Territoriality and Compliance: The Influence of Gender and Location on Willingness to Sign Petitions

Resident advantage as social role performance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About