Argument in initial group decision‐making discussions: Refinement of a coding scheme and a descriptive quantitative analysis

Studies of the function and process of interactive argument in group contexts have become increasingly prevalent in the last decade. A prominent program of research in this domain is work associated with the structurational perspective on group decision‐making. To date, much of this research has been theoretical and qualitative in nature. This investigation extends prior work in pursuing two objectives: (a) refinement of the structurational argument coding scheme, and (b) preliminary quantitative analysis of argument in decision‐making groups. Following a review of past structurational argument research, the coding scheme is evaluated and revised. Forty‐five decision‐making discussions were coded using the revised coding scheme and these results were evaluated via descriptive statistics. Findings revealed that (a) the groups’ arguments consisted mainly of Assertions, Elaborations, and Agreement, and (b) the revisions to the coding scheme provided increased conceptual clarity. Implications of each finding ...

[1]  C. Nemeth,et al.  CREATING THE PERCEPTIONS OF CONSISTENCY AND CONFIDENCE. A NECESSARY CONDITION FOR MINORITY INFLUENCE , 1974 .

[2]  Renee A. Meyers,et al.  Testing persuasive argument theory's predictor model: Alternative interactional accounts of group argument and influence , 1989 .

[3]  Malcom O. Sillars,et al.  Argument and social practice : proceedings of the Forth SCA/AFA Conference on Argumentation , 1985 .

[4]  C. Nemeth.  Differential contributions of majority and minority influence , 1986 .

[5]  S. Moscovici,et al.  Social Influence, Conformity Bias, and the Study of Active Minorities , 1972 .

[6]  F. Auld,et al.  Rules for Dividing Interviews Into Sentences , 1956 .

[7]  S. Jackson,et al.  Structure of conversational argument: Pragmatic bases for the enthymeme , 1980 .

[8]  S. Toulmin.  The uses of argument , 1960 .

[9]  Marshall Scott Poole,et al.  A comparison of normative and interactional explanations of group decision‐making: Social decision schemes versus valence distributions , 1982 .

[10]  Edward J. Murray,et al.  A content-analysis method for studying psychotherapy. , 1956 .

[11]  B. Schultz,et al.  Argumentativeness: Its effect in group decision‐making and its role in leadership perception , 1982 .

[12]  Renee A. Meyers,et al.  Persuasive arguments theory: a test of assumptions , 1989 .

[13]  C. Nemeth,et al.  Interactions between jurors as a function of majority vs. unanimity decision rules. , 1977 .

[14]  Randy Hirokawa,et al.  A descriptive investigation of the possible communication‐based reasons for effective and ineffective group decision making , 1983 .

[15]  John D. Hatfield,et al.  The Comparative Utility of Three Types of Behavioral Units for Interaction Analysis. , 1978 .

[16]  Klaus Krippendorff,et al.  Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology , 1980 .

[17]  Colleen M. Keough.  The nature and function of argument in organizational bargaining research , 1987 .

[18]  Locus of control‐based argumentation as a predictor of group polarization , 1982 .

[19]  B. Schultz.  Communicative Correlates of Perceived Leaders , 1980 .

[20]  David R. Seibold,et al.  Argument structures in decision‐making groups , 1987 .

[21]  B. Kanki,et al.  Patterning of the minority's responses and their influence on the majority , 1974 .

[22]  A. Kellerman,et al.  The Constitution of Society : Outline of the Theory of Structuration , 2015 .

[23]  Barry O'Neill,et al.  The Group problem solving process : studies of a valence model , 1982 .

[24]  Daniel J. Canary,et al.  An observational analysis of argument structures: The case of Nightline , 1990 .

[25]  Ch. Perelman,et al.  The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation , 1971 .

[26]  S. Moscovici,et al.  Influence of a consistent minority on the responses of a majority in a color perception task. , 1969, Sociometry.

[27]  W. D. Perreault,et al.  Reliability of Nominal Data Based on Qualitative Judgments , 1989 .

[28]  Majority Influence on Group Choices Among Bets. , 1976 .

[29]  Lawrence R. Frey,et al.  Effects of reactions to arguments on group outcome: The case of group polarization , 1983 .