Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Group Interaction Analysis
- The Cambridge Handbook of Group Interaction Analysis
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Editors’ Preface
- Organization of This Handbook
- How to Work with This Handbook
- Part I Background and Theory
- Part II Application Areas of Interaction Analysis
- Part III Methodology and Procedures of Interaction Analysis
- Part IV Data Analysis and Data Presentation
- Part V Coding Schemes for Interaction Research
- General Group Process Systems
- Argument, Conflict, and Negotiations
- Coordination and Coherence
- Cognition and Metacognition
- 33 CASoRL
- 34 Coding Scheme for Group Creativity
- 35 Analyzing Critical Thinking in Group Constellations
- 36 Identifying Teacher and Student Contributions during Assessment Conversations
- 37 Hidden Profile Discussion Coding
- 38 TRAWIS
- Personality and Team Behavior
- Roles and Relationships
- Appendix
- Index
- References
34 - Coding Scheme for Group Creativity
from Cognition and Metacognition
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 July 2018
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Group Interaction Analysis
- The Cambridge Handbook of Group Interaction Analysis
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Editors’ Preface
- Organization of This Handbook
- How to Work with This Handbook
- Part I Background and Theory
- Part II Application Areas of Interaction Analysis
- Part III Methodology and Procedures of Interaction Analysis
- Part IV Data Analysis and Data Presentation
- Part V Coding Schemes for Interaction Research
- General Group Process Systems
- Argument, Conflict, and Negotiations
- Coordination and Coherence
- Cognition and Metacognition
- 33 CASoRL
- 34 Coding Scheme for Group Creativity
- 35 Analyzing Critical Thinking in Group Constellations
- 36 Identifying Teacher and Student Contributions during Assessment Conversations
- 37 Hidden Profile Discussion Coding
- 38 TRAWIS
- Personality and Team Behavior
- Roles and Relationships
- Appendix
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Group Interaction Analysis , pp. 537 - 546Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2018
References
Primary Sources
Harvey, S., & Kou, C. Y. (2013). Collective engagement in creative tasks: The role of evaluation in the creative process in groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58, 346–386. doi:10.1177/0001839213498591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Secondary Sources
Bales, R. F. (1950). A set of categories for the analysis of small group interaction. American Sociological Review, 15, 257–263. doi:10.2307/2086790CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bales, R. F., & Cohen, S. P. (1979). SYMLOG: A system for the multiple level observation of groups. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
Collins, A., & Loftus, E. (1975) The spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 82, 407–428. doi:dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.82.6.407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diehl, M., & Stroebe, S. (1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 497–509. doi:dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.53.3.497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diehl, M., & Stroebe, S. (1991). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Tracking down the blocking effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 392–403. doi:dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.61.3.392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fahy, P. J. (2006). Online and face-to-face group interaction processes compared using Bales’ Interaction Process Analysis (IPA). European Journal of Open, Distance, and E-learning, 1. Retrieved July 7, 2016 from www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2006/Patrick_J_Fahy.htmGoogle Scholar
George, J. M. (2007). Creativity in organizations. Academy of Management Annals, 1, 439–477. doi:doi.org/10.1080/078559814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gersick, C. J. (1988). Time and transition in work teams: Toward a new model of group development. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 9–41. doi:10.2307/256496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hargadon, A. B., & Bechky, B. A. (2006). When collections of creative become creative collectives: A field study of problem solving at work. Organization Science, 17, 484–500. doi:doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1060.0200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, S., Currall, S. C., & Hammer, T. (in press). Decision diversion in diverse teams: Findings from inside a corporate boardroom. Academy of Management Discoveries. doi:10.5465/amd.2015.0129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, M. H., & Poole, M. S. (2003). Idea-generation in naturally occurring contexts. Human Communication Research, 29, 560–591. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2003.tb00856.xGoogle Scholar
Kauffeld, S., & Lehmann-Willenbrock, N. (2012). Meetings matter: Effects of team meetings on organizational success. Small Group Research, 43, 130–158. doi:doi.org/10.1177/1046496411429599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurtzberg, T. R. & Amabile, T. M. (2000). From Guilford to creative synergy: Opening the black box of team-level creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 13, 285–294. doi:doi-org.ucd.idm.oclc.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1334_06CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observers agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174. doi:10.2307/2529310CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Langley, A. (1999). Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24, 691–710. doi:10.5465/AMR.1999.2553248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Litchfield, R. (2008). Brainstorming reconsidered: A goal-based view. Academy of Management Review, 33, 649–668. doi:10.5465/AMR.2008.32465708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long-Lingo, E., & O’Mahony, S. (2010). Nexus work: Brokerage on creative projects. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55, 47–81. doi:doi.org/10.2189/asqu.2010.55.1.47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mannix, E., & Neale, M. A. 2005. What differences make a difference? The promise and reality of diverse teams in organizations. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 6, 31–55. doi:10.1111/j.1529-1006.2005.00022.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McGrath, J. (1984). Groups: Interaction and performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Milliken, F. J., & Martins, L. L. 1996. Searching for common threads: Understanding the multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups. Academy of Management Review, 21, 402–433. doi:10.5465/AMR.1996.9605060217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nemeth, C. J. (1986). Differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psychological Review, 93(1), 23–32. doi:dx.doi.org.ucd.idm.oclc.org/10.1037/0033-295X.93.1.23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nemeth, C. J. (1997). Managing innovation: When less is more. California Management Review, 40, 59–74. doi:doi.org/10.2307/41165922CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paulus, P. B., & Yang, H. (2000). Idea generation in groups: A basis for creativity in organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82, 76–87. doi:10.1006/obhd.2000.2888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sacramento, C. A, Dawson, J. F., & West, M. A. (2008). Team creativity: More than the sum of its parts? In Mumford, M. D., Hunter, S. T., & Bedell-Avers, K. E. (Eds.), Research in multi-level issues, vol. 7: Multi-level issues in creativity and innovation (pp. 269–287). Bingley, UK: Emerald Books.Google Scholar
- 1
- Cited by