Transcript Dennis Gouran Communication in Groups

Dennis Gouran
Communication in Groups
The Emergence and Evolution of a
Field of Study
1914-1920s
• Pedagogical concerns about how to prepare
students for effective performance in decisionmaking and problem-solving groups animated
early interests in group communication by speech
scholars.
– Group discussion pedagogy was often justified as
preparing students for participation in public life and
democracy.
– Theory--when it came to such pedagogy--was drawn
from John Dewey’s philosophical account of reflective
thinking (How We Think 1910).
1930s-1940s
• Speech scholars began to realize the need for
more sophisticated theories in the 1930s (e.g.,
regarding disruptive group members and
effective use of rational procedures).
• However, little research by speech scholars was
directed toward the subject of group
communication before 1950.
– After that time, effective task performance by groups
was significantly represented in research studies.
– But major advances in communication inquiry were
increasingly concerned with the role of relational
communication in groups.
1950s
• Early research on group communication explored
questions related to effectiveness of individual
and group decision-making. Topics included:
–
–
–
–
–
–
effects on decision-making of critical thinking ability
utility of meeting agendas
group-members’ personalities
competition and cooperation
self-concept and group-member performance
effects of cooperative thinking in groups
1950s
• Research in this decade, says Gouran,
“contributed to the view that characteristics of
members and groups have an important
bearing on their performance. Mastery of
discussion methods alone was insufficient to
ensure that groups, especially task-oriented
ones, would function effectively” (8).
1960s
• Research in this decade attended chiefly to
functional and developmental perspectives on
group communication.
1960s
• The functional perspective explored “how such
variables as members’ abilities and styles of behavior-including communicative behavior--as well as groups’
satisfaction of task requirements to the outcomes that
members and groups achieve” (9).
– This perspective presumed a linear process of task-related
communication.
– It also presupposed that the most effective way to make
decisions and solve problems was to follow a sequence based
on Dewey (1910) as adapted to group tasks: “definition of
problem, analysis of the problem, proposing possible
solutions, testing solutions against criteria, and selecting or
constructing a solution” (Phillips 1966).
1960s
• The developmental perspective attended to the content of
group-member utterances and how the group interaction
they create develops and defines the relationships among
group members.
– Results in this perspective questioned findings about predictable
phases of interaction sequences. In opposition to Bales and
Strotbeck (1951), Scheidel and Crowell (1964, 1966) found that
interactions do not unfold in linear developmental sequences.
– Other research found that themes in task-oriented group
discussions reflected emerging group culture (Berg 1967) and
that particular characteristics of discussion statements served to
disrupt decision-making in groups (Leathers 1969).
1960s
• According to Gouran, the major achievement
of this decade was a “unprecedented
attention to what members say to one
another, how the content of speech acts
affects relationships among members, and
what, in particular, such acts have to do with
the outcomes that groups achieve” (11).
1970s
• This decade represented a “diversification of
topics, issues, and contexts of investigation,”
though without consensus on a theoretical
framework to guide research.
• Despite the lack of consensus, Gouran believes
that many studies were grounded in a “Systems
Perspective, in that they were concerned with the
ways in which both the flow and characteristics of
interaction were interrelated” (11)
1970s
• Task-oriented group communication was
studied with a view toward improving
performance.
– However, group communication in public (social or
political) venues was less emphasized.
– Researchers recognized the importance of group
communication in professional arenas, such as
organizations.
1970s
• Group interaction was studied in relation to
numerous variables, not least in relation to
the relation to leadership (emergence and
impact).
• However there was increasing dissatisfaction
with the lack of theory to guide and integrate
inquiry, often concerning interaction in zerohistory groups.
1980s
• The 1980s saw a remarkable proliferation of
theories related to group communication,
some of which represented formalization of
outlooks that had been significant in research
for some time (15).
– Functional Theory: “concerned with explaining
how interaction affects group outcomes-especially the quality of decision and effectiveness
of solutions to problems.”
1980s
– Developmental Theory: concerned with “how
group interaction unfolds and shapes itself over
time.”
– Structuration Theory: “shared some concerns
addressed by Developmental theory. It differed,
however, in its inclusion of internal factors (rules
and resources) that shape and are shaped by
patterns of group interaction, as well as its
identification of structures as the generative
mechanisms underlying interaction in groups.
1980s
– Symbolic Convergence Theory: “concerned with
“processes of meaning construction that originate
at the dyadic and group level and culminate--and
even influence occurrences--at the organizational,
institutional, and societal levels.”
– Socio-Egocentric Theory: “predicts group
decisions on the basis of prediscussion
preferences of group members.” This theory
reflects skepticism that task-oriented
communication in groups affects decisions made
by the group.
1990s
• Major changes in group communication
research during the 1990s include the
following.
– Reduction of attention to group decision-making
and problem solving.
• Skepticism about the efficacy and technical
characterization of communication in task-oriented
groups
• Skepticism about the relevance of rational models for
explaining groups decision making.
1990s
– Broadening research to include more types of
groups.
– Bona Fide Groups perspective, which
comprehends natural groups in their contexts
(organizational, institutional, social), considers
how multiple roles and role boundaries along with
shifting borders and group membership influence
the behavior of group members.
– Naturalistic Paradigm, which takes a quasi-cultural
perspective on natural groups and employs
qualitative empirical methods.