Kauffeld, S. (2006a). Kompetenzen messen, bewerten, entwickeln [Measuring, evaluating, and developing competencies]. Stuttgart, Germany: Schäffer-Poeschel.Google Scholar

Kauffeld, S., Grote, S., & Frieling, E. (2000). Die Diagnose beruflicher Handlungskompetenz: Das Kasseler-Kompetenz-Raster [Diagnosis of professional competence: The Cassel competency grid]. In Geißler, K. A. & Loos, W. (Eds.), Handbuch Personalentwicklung (pp. 1–22). Cologne, Germany: Deutscher Wirtschaftsdienst.Google Scholar

Meinecke, A. L., & Lehmann-Willenbrock, N. (2015). Social dynamics at work: Meetings as a gateway. In Allen, J. A., Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., & Rogelberg, S. G. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of meeting science (pp. 325–356). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google 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

Fisch, F. (1994). Eine Methode zur Analyse von Interaktionsprozessen beim Problemlösen in Gruppen [A method for the analysis of interaction processes during group problem solving]. Gruppendynamik, 25, 149–168.Google Scholar

Kauffeld, S. (2006b). Self-directed work groups and team competence. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 79, 1–21. doi:10.1348/096317905X53237CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kauffeld, S. (2007). Jammern oder Lösungsexploration: Eine sequenzanalytische Betrachtung des Interaktionsprozesses in betrieblichen Gruppen bei der Bewältigung von Optimierungsaufgaben [Complaining or exploration of solutions: A sequential examination of interaction processes in work groups when completing optimization tasks]. German Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 51, 55–67. doi:10.1026/0932-4089.51.2.55Google Scholar

Kauffeld, S. (2010). Das Kasseler-Kompetenz-Raster [The Cassel competency grid]. In Sarges, W., Wottawa, H., & Roos, C. (Eds.), Handbuch wirtschaftspsychologischer Testverfahren, Band II: Organisationspsychologische Instrumente (2nd edn., pp. 165–173). Lengerich, Germany: Pabst.Google Scholar

Kauffeld, S., Grote, S., & Frieling, E. (2000). Die Diagnose beruflicher Handlungskompetenz: Das Kasseler-Kompetenz-Raster [Diagnosis of professional competence: The Cassel competency grid]. In Geißler, K. A. & Loos, W. (Eds.), Handbuch Personalentwicklung (pp. 1–22). Cologne, Germany: Deutscher Wirtschaftsdienst.Google Scholar

Kauffeld, S., & Lehmann-Willenbrock, N. (2012). Meetings matter: Effects of team meeting communication on team and organizational success. Small Group Research, 43, 128–156. doi:10.1177/1046496411429599CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kauffeld, S., & Meyers, R. (2009). Complaint and solution-oriented circles: Interaction patterns in work group discussions. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 18, 267–294. doi:10.1080/13594320701693209CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Klonek, F. E., Quera, V., Burba, M., & Kauffeld, S. (2016). Group interactions and time: Using sequential analysis to study group dynamics in project meetings. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 20, 209–222. doi:10.1037/gdn0000052CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., & Allen, J. A. (2014). How fun are your meetings? Investigating the relationship between humor patterns in team interactions and team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99, 1278–1287. doi:10.1037/a0038083CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., & Allen, J. A. (2017). Well, now what do we do? Wait … : A group process analysis of meeting lateness. International Journal of Business Communication. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/2329488417696725CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., Allen, J. A., & Meinecke, A. L. (2014). Observing culture: Differences in U.S.-American and German team meeting behaviors. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 17, 252–271. doi:10.1177/1368430213497066CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., Beck, S. J., & Kauffeld, S. (2016). Emergent team roles in organizational meetings: Identifying communication patterns via cluster analysis. Communication Studies, 67, 37–57. doi:10.1080/10510974.2015.1074087CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., Chiu, M. M., Lei, Z., & Kauffeld, S. (2017). Understanding positivity within dynamic team interactions: A statistical discourse analysis. Group & Organization Management, 42, 39–78. doi:10.1177/1059601116628720CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., & Kauffeld, S. (2010). The downside of communication: Complaining cycles in group discussions. In Schuman, S. (Ed.), The handbook for working with difficult groups: How they are difficult, why they are difficult, what you can do (pp. 33–54). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Wiley.Google Scholar

Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., Meinecke, A. L., Rowold, J., & Kauffeld, S. (2015). How transformational leadership works during team interactions: A behavioral process analysis. The Leadership Quarterly, 26, 1017–1033. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.07.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mangold. (2014). INTERACT user manual. Retrieved from www.mangold-international.comGoogle Scholar

van der Haar, S., Koeslag-Kreunen, M., Euwe, E., & Segers, M. (2017). Team leader structuring for team effectiveness and team learning in command-and-control teams. Small Group Research, 48, 215–248. doi:10.1177/1046496417689897CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schermuly, C. C., & Scholl, W. (2011). Instrument zur Kodierung von Diskussionen (IKD) [Discussion Coding System (DCS)]. Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe.Google Scholar

Schermuly, C. C., & Scholl, W. (2012). The Discussion Coding System (DCS). A new instrument for analyzing communication processes. Communication Methods and Measures, 6, 12–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis. A method for the study of small groups. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar

Boos, M. (1995). Die sequentielle Strukturierung sozialer Interaktion [The sequential structure of social interaction]. In Langenthaler, W. & Schiepek, G. (Hrsg.), Selbstorganisation und Dynamik in Gruppen (pp. 209–221). Münster: Lit.Google Scholar

Brauner, E. (2006). Kodierung transaktiver Wissensprozesse (TRAWIS). Ein Verfahren zur Erfassung von Wissenstransfers in Interaktionen [Transactive Knowledge Coding System (TRAWIS): A schema for the assessment of knowledge transfer in interactions]. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 37, 99–112. doi:10.1024/0044-3514.37.2.99CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fisch, R. (1994). Eine Methode zur Analyse von Interaktionsprozessen beim Problemlösen in Gruppen [A method for the analysis of interaction processes during group problem solving]. Gruppendynamik, 25, 149–168.Google Scholar

Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Glick, P. (2006). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 77–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.005CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Heise, D. R. (2007). Expressive order. Confirming sentiments in social action. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar

Ianiro, P. M., & Kauffeld, S. (2014). Take care what you bring with you: How coaches’ mood and interpersonal behavior affect coaching success. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 66, 231–257. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/cpb0000012CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ianiro, P. M., Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., & Kauffeld, S. (2015). Coaches and clients in action: A sequential analysis of interpersonal coach and client behavior. Journal of Business and Psychology, 30, 435–456. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10869-014-9374-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ianiro, P. M., Schermuly, C. C., & Kauffeld, S. (2013). Why interpersonal affiliation and dominance matter: An interaction analysis of the coach-client relationship. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research & Practice, 6, 25–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17521882.2012.740489Google Scholar

Jacobs, I., & Scholl, W. (2005). Interpersonale Adjektivliste (IAL): Die empirische Umsetzung theoretischer Circumplex-Eigenschaften für die Messung interpersonaler Stile [Interpersonal Adjective List (IAL): The empirical implementation of theoretical circumplex characteristics for the measurement of interpersonal styles]. Diagnostica, 51, 145–155. http://dx.doi.org/10.1026/0012-1924.51.3.145CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kämmer, J. E., Gaissmaier, W., Reimer, T., & Schermuly, C. C. (2014). The adaptive use of recognition in group decision making. Cognitive Science, 38, 911–942. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12110CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kolbe, M. (2007). Koordination von Entscheidungsprozessen in Gruppen. Die Bedeutung expliziter Koordinationsmechanismen. [Process coordination in decision making groups. The meaning of explicit coordination mechanisms]. Saarbrücken, Germany: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller.Google Scholar

Luxen, M. F. (2005). Gender differences in dominance and affiliation during a demanding interaction. The Journal of Psychology, 139, 331–347. http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JRLP.139.4.331-347CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Meyer, B., Burtscher, M. J., Jonas, K., Feese, S., Arnrich, B., Tröster, G., & Schermuly, C. C. (2016). What good leaders actually do: Micro-level leadership behavior, leader evaluations, and team decision quality. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 25(6), 773–789. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2016.1189903CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Meyer, B., & Schermuly, C. C. (2012). When beliefs are not enough: Examining the interaction of diversity faultlines, task motivation, and diversity beliefs on team performance. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 21, 456–487. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2011.560383CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Sachs, L. (1999). Angewandte Statistik. Anwendung statistischer Methoden (Applied statistics. Application of statistical methods). Berlin, Germany: Springer.Google Scholar

Scharpf, U., & Fisch, R. (1989). Das Schicksal von Vorschlägen in Beratungs- und Entscheidungssitzungen. Ein Beitrag zur Analyse inhaltlicher Aspekte der Interaktion bei der Entscheidungsfindung in Gruppen [The fate of proposals in consultation and decision situations. A contribution to the analysis of content aspects of interaction in group decision-making]. Gruppendynamik, 20, 283–296.Google Scholar

Schermuly, C. C., Schröder, T., Nachtwei, J. & Scholl, W. (2010). Das Instrument zur Kodierung von Diskussionen (IKD): Ein Verfahren zur zeitökonomischen und validen Kodierung von Interaktionen in Organisationen [The Discussion Coding System (DCS): An instrument for valid and time-efficient coding of interactions in organizations]. Zeitschrift für Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie, 54, 149–170. http://dx.doi.org/10.1026/0932-4089/a000026CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schröder, T., Netzel, J., Schermuly, C. C., & Scholl, W. (2013). Culture-constrained affective consistency of interpersonal behavior. A test of affect control theory with nonverbal expressions. Social Psychology, 44, 47–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sjøvold, E. (2007). Systematizing person-group relations (SPGR). A field theory of social interaction. Small Group Research, 38, 615–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bales, R. F. (1950b). Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar

Allen, W. R., Comerford, R. A., & Ruhe, J. A. (1989). Factor analytic study of Bales’ Interaction Process Analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 49, 701–707. doi:10.1177/001316448904900325CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bales, R. F. (1950a). A set of categories for the analysis of small group interaction. American Sociological Review, 15, 257–263.CrossRefGoogle 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

Bales, R. F., & Strodtbeck, F. L. (1951). Phases in group problem-solving. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 44, 485–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beck, D., & Fisch, R. (2000). Argumentation and emotional processes in group decision-making: Illustration of a multilevel interaction process analysis approach. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 3, 183–201. doi:10.1177/1368430200003002005CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beck, S. J., & Keyton, J. (2009). Perceiving strategic meeting interaction. Small Group Research, 40, 223–246. doi:10.1177/1046496408330084CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beck, S. J., & Keyton, J. (2012). Team cognition, communication, and message interdependence. In Salas, E., Fiore, S. F., & Letsky, M. (Eds.), Theories of team cognition: Cross-disciplinary perspectives (pp. 471–494). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar

Beck, S. J., & Keyton, J. (2014). Facilitating social support: Member-leader communication in a breast cancer support group. Cancer Nursing, 37, E36–43. doi:10.1097/NCC.0b013e3182813829CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beck, S. J., Paskewitz, E. A., Anderson, W. A., Bourdeaux, , & Currie-Mueller, J. (2017). The task and relational dimensions of online social support. Health Communication, 32, 347–355. doi:10.1080/10410236.2016.1138383CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Choi, K. S., Im, I., & Hofstede, G. J. (2016). A cross-cultural comparative analysis of small group collaboration using mobile twitter. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 308–318. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.043CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dennis, M. R., Kunkel, A., & Keyton, J. (2008). Problematic integration theory, appraisal theory, and the Bosom Buddies Breast Cancer Support Group. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 36, 415–436. doi:10.1080/00909880802094315CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ervin, J., Bonito, J., & Keyton, J. (2017). Convergence of intrapersonal and interpersonal processes across group meetings. Communication Monographs, 84, 200–220. doi:10.1080/03637751.2016.1185136CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fahy, , P. (2005). Online and face-to-face group interaction processes compared using Bales’ Interaction Process Analysis (IPA). Retrieved February 14, 2018, from www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2006/Patrick_J_Fahy.htmGoogle Scholar

Fisher, B. A. (1970). Decision emergence: Phases in group decision‐making. Speech Monographs, 7, 53–66. doi:10.1080/03637757009375649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Guo, H., & Goh, D.H-L. (2014). ‘‘I Have AIDS”: Content analysis of postings in HIV/AIDS support group on a Chinese microblog, 34, 219–226. Retrieved February 14, 2018, from www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2006/Patrick_J_Fahyhtm.Google Scholar

Hackman, J. R. (1975). Group tasks, group interaction process, and group performance effectiveness: A review and proposed integration. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 8, 45–99. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60248-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hiltz, S. R., Johnson, K., & Turoff, M. (1986). Experiments in group decision making communication process and outcome in face-to-face versus computerized conferences. Human Communication Research, 13, 225–252 doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1986.tb00104.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4, 39–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Keyton, J. (1997). Coding communication in decision-making groups: Assessing effective and ineffective process. In Frey, L. R. & Barge, J. K. (Eds.), Managing group life: Communication in decision-making groups (pp. 236–269). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar

Keyton, J. (2003). Observing group interaction. In Hirokawa, R. Y., Cathcart, R. S., Samovar, L. A., & Henman, L. D., Small group communication: Theory and practice (8th edn., pp. 256–266). Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury.Google Scholar

Keyton, J., & Beck, S. J. (2009). The influential role of relational messages in group interaction. Group Dynamics, 13, 14–30. doi:10.1037/a0013495CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd edn.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Lewin, K. (1939). Field theory and experiment in social psychology. American Journal of Sociology, 44, 868–896. doi:10.1086/218177CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Li, Y., Rau, P-L. P., Li, H., & Maedche, A. (2017). Effects of a dyad’s cultural intelligence on global virtual collaboration. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 60, 56–75. doi:10.1109/TPC.2016.2632842.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lofstrand, P., & Zakrisson, I. (2014). Competitive versus non-competitive goals in group decision-making. Small Group Research, 45, 451–464. doi:10.1177/1046496414532954CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mabry, E. A. (1975). An instrument for assessing content themes in group interaction. Speech Monographs, 42, 191–297. doi:10.1080/03637757509375904CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maloney-Krichmar, D., & Preece, J. (2002). The meaning of an online health community in the lives of its members: Roles, relationships and group dynamics. Published in the proceedings of the IEEE 2002 International Symposium on Technology and Society: Social Implications of Information and Communication Technology. doi:10.1109/ISTAS.2002.1013791CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maloney-Krichmar, D., & Preece, J. (2005). Multilevel analysis of sociability, usability, and community dynamics in an online health community. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 12, 201–232. doi:10.1145/1067860.1067864CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Pena, J., & Hancock, J. T. (2006). An analysis of socioemotional and task communication in online multiplayer video games. Communication Research, 33, 92–109. doi:10.1177/0093650205283103CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Poole, M. S., & Folger, J. P. (1981). A method for establishing the representational validity of interaction coding systems: Do we see what they see? Human Communication Research, 8, 26–42. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1981.tb00654.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rourke, L., & Anderson, T. (2004). Validity in quantitative content analysis. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(1), 5–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Futoran, G. C., Kelly, J. R., & McGrath, J. E. (1989). TEMPO: A time-based system for analysis of group interaction process. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 10, 211–232. doi:10.1207/2s15324834basp1003.2CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar

Karau, S. J., & Kelly, J. R. (1992). The effects of time scarcity and time abundance on group performance quality and interaction process. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 542–571. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(92)90045-LCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kauffeld, S., & Lehmann-Willenbrock, N. (2012). Meetings matter: Effects of team meetings on team and organizational success. Small Group Research, 43, 130–158. doi:10 1177/1046496411429599CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kolbe, M., Strack, M., Stein, A., & Boos, M. (2011). Effective coordination in human group decision making: MICRO_CO: A micro-analytical taxonomy for analyzing explicit coordination mechanisms in decision-making groups. In Boos, M. et al. (Eds.), Coordination in Human and Primate Groups (pp. 199–219). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-15355-6_11CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Liu, Y. C., & Burn, J. M. (2007). Improving the performance of online learning teams – A discourse analysis. Journal of Information Systems Education, 18, 369–379.Google Scholar

McGrath, J. E. (1991). Time, interaction, and performance (TIP): A theory of groups. Small Group Research, 22, 147–174. doi:10.1177/1046496491222001CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nordback, E., & Sivunen, A. (2013). Leadership behaviors in virtual team meetings taking place in a 3D virtual world. 46th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. doi:10.1109/HICSS.2013.380CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Straus, S. G. (1997). Technology, group process, and group outcomes: Testing the connections in computer-mediated and face-to-face groups. Human-Computer Interaction, 12, 227–266. doi:10.1207/s15327051hci1203_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Straus, S. G. (1999). Testing a typology of tasks: An empirical validation of McGrath’s (1984) Group Task Circumplex. Small Group Research, 30, 166–187. doi:10.1177/104649649903000202CrossRefGoogle Scholar