Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T18:13:20.364Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Cognition and Metacognition

from Part V - Coding Schemes for Interaction Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 July 2018

Edited by
Elisabeth Brauner ,
Margarete Boos  and
Michaela Kolbe
Elisabeth Brauner
Affiliation:
Brooklyn College, City University of New York
Margarete Boos
Affiliation:
University of Göttingen
Michaela Kolbe
Affiliation:
ETH Zürich
Get access

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.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Group Interaction Analysis , pp. 527 - 582
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2018

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

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
Osborn, A. (1953). Applied imagination. New York, NY: Scribner.Google 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
Schulz-Hardt, S., Brodbeck, F. C., Mojzisch, A., Kerschreiter, R., & Frey, D. (2006). Group decision making in hidden profile situations: Dissent as a facilitator for decision quality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 1080–1093. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.91.6.1080CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brodbeck, F. C., Kerschreiter, R., Mojzisch, A., & Schulz-Hardt, S. (2007). Group decision making under conditions of distributed knowledge: The information asymmetries model. Academy of Management Review, 32, 459–479. doi:10.5465/AMR.2007.24351441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, J. H. (1973). Group decision and social interaction: A theory of social decision schemes. Psychological Review, 80, 97–125. doi:10.1037/h0033951CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Wilde, T. R. W., Ten Velden, F. S., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2017). The neuropeptide oxytocin enhances information sharing and group decision making quality. Nature: Scientific Reports, 7, 40622. doi:10.1038/srep40622Google ScholarPubMed
Greitemeyer, T., Schulz-Hardt, S., Brodbeck, F. C., & Frey, D. (2006). Information sampling and group decision making: The effects of an advocacy decision procedure and task experience. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 12, 31–42. doi:10.1037/1076-898x.12.1.31Google ScholarPubMed
Kolb, M. R., & van Swol, L. M. (2016). Manipulating a synchronous or separatist group orientation to improve performance on a hidden profile task. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. doi:10.1177/1368430216647188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larson, J. R. Jr., Foster-Fishman, P. G., & Keys, C. B. (1994). Discussion of shared and unshared information in decision-making groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 446–461. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.67.3.446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lightle, J. P., Kagel, J. H., & Arkes, H. R. (2009). Information exchange in group decision making: The hidden profile problem reconsidered. Management Science, 55, 568–581. doi:10.1287/mnsc.1080.0975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lu, L., Yuan, Y. C., & McLeod, P. L. (2012). Twenty-five years of hidden profiles in group decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16, 54–75. doi:10.1177/1088868311417243CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maciejovsky, B., & Budescu, D. V. (2013). Markets as a structural solution to knowledge-sharing dilemmas. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 120, 154–167. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.04.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Microsoft. (2016). Microsoft Office Excel.Google Scholar
Nevicka, B., Ten Velden, F. S., De Hoogh, A. H. B., & Van Vianen, A. E. M. (2011). Reality at odds with perceptions. Psychological Science, 22, 1259–1264. doi:10.1177/ 0956797611417259CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sassenberg, K., Landkammer, F., & Jacoby, J. (2014). The influence of regulatory focus and group vs. individual goals on the evaluation bias in the context of group decision making. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 54, 153–164. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2014.05.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schulz-Hardt, S., Giersiepen, A., & Mojzisch, A. (2016). Preference-consistent information repetitions during discussion: Do they affect subsequent judgments and decisions? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 64, 41–49. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2016.01.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schulz-Hardt, S., & Mojzisch, A. (2012). How to achieve synergy in group decision making: Lessons to be learned from the hidden profile paradigm. European Review of Social Psychology, 23, 305–343. doi:10.1080/10463283.2012.744440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sohrab, S. G., Waller, M. J., & Kaplan, S. (2015). Exploring the hidden-profile paradigm: A literature review and analysis. Small Group Research, 46, 489–535. doi:10.1177/1046496415599068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stasser, G., Abele, S., & Parsons, S. V. (2012). Information flow and influence in collective choice. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 15, 619–635. doi:10.1177/1368430212453631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stasser, G., & Davis, J. H. (1981). Group decision making and social influence: A social interaction sequence model. Psychological Review, 88, 523–551. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.88.6.523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stasser, G., & Stewart, D. (1992). Discovery of hidden profiles by decision-making groups: Solving a problem versus making a judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 426–434. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.63.3.426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stasser, G., Taylor, L. A., & Hanna, C. (1989). Information sampling in structured and unstructured discussions of three- and six-person groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 67–78. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.57.1.67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1467–1478. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.48.6.1467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (2003). Hidden profiles: A brief history. Psychological Inquiry, 14, 304–313. doi:10.1080/1047840X.2003.9682897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stasser, G., Vaughan, S. I., & Stewart, D. D. (2000). Pooling unshared information: The benefits of knowing how access to information is distributed among group members. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82, 102–116. doi:10.1006/obhd.2000.2890CrossRefGoogle Scholar
The Document Foundation. (2017). LibreOffice Calc. Retrieved from www.libreoffice.orgGoogle Scholar
Thürmer, J. L., Wieber, F., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2015). A self-regulation perspective on hidden-profile problems: If–then planning to review information improves group decisions. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 28, 101–113. doi:10.1002/bdm.1832CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winquist, J. R., & Larson, J. R. Jr. (1998). Information pooling: When it impacts group decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 371–377. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.2.371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brauner, E. (2006). Kodierung transaktiver Wissensprozesse (TRAWIS). Ein Verfahren zur Erfassung von Wissenstransfer in Interaktionen [Transactive Knowledge Coding System (TRAWIS): A schema for the assessment of knowledge transfer in interactions]. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie [Journal of Social Psychology], 37, 99–112. [Available in English from the author] http://dx.doi.org/10.1024/0044-3514.37.2.99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakeman, R., & Gottman, J. M. (1997). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brauner, E. (2002). Transactive knowledge systems in groups and organizations. Habilitationsschrift, Germany: Humboldt-University in Berlin.Google Scholar
Brauner, E., Kauffeld, S., Siem, B. & Buschek, S. (unpublished data). Competencies in transactive knowledge systems in groups of practitioners. Process analyses with the Cassel Competence Grid and Transactive Knowledge Coding (TRAWIS).Google Scholar
Landis, R. D., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moreland, R. L., Argote, L., & Krishnan, R. (1996). Socially shared cognition at work: Transactive memory and group performance. In Nye, J. L. & Brower, A. M. (Eds.), What’s social about social cognition? Research on socially shared cognition in small groups (pp. 57–84). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piontkowski, U., Böing-Messing, E., Hartmann, J., Keil, W., & Laus, F. (2003). Transaktives Gedächtnis, Informationsintegration und Entscheidungsfindung im Medienvergleich [Transactive memory, knowledge integration, and decision making in a comparison of media]. Zeitschrift für Medienpsychologie, 15, 60–68. https://doi.org/10.1026//1617-6383.15.2.60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stachowski, A. A., Kaplan, S. A., & Waller, M. J. (2009). The benefits of flexible team interaction during crisis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1536–1543. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0016903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wegner, D. M. (1995). A computer network model of human transactive memory. Social Cognition, 13, 319–339. http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/soco.1995.13.3.319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wegner, D. M., Giuliano, T., & Hertel, P. T. (1985). Cognitive interdependence in close relationships. In Ickes, W. I. (Ed.), Compatible and incompatible relationships (pp. 253–276). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×