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
- Personality and Team Behavior
- 39 The Behavior Analysis Coding System
- 40 Groupness/Entitativity Observational Coding (GEOC)
- 41 Assessing Group Interactions in Personality Psychology
- Roles and Relationships
- Appendix
- Index
- References
39 - The Behavior Analysis Coding System
An Applied, Real-time Approach for Measuring and Improving Interactive Skills
from Personality and Team Behavior
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
- Personality and Team Behavior
- 39 The Behavior Analysis Coding System
- 40 Groupness/Entitativity Observational Coding (GEOC)
- 41 Assessing Group Interactions in Personality Psychology
- 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. 584 - 593Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2018
References
Primary Sources
Rackham, N., Honey, P., & Colbert, M. (1971). Developing interactive skills. Guilsborough, Northants: Wellens Publishing.Google Scholar
Rackham, N., & Morgan, T. (1977). Behaviour analysis in training. Maidenhead, Berkshire: McGraw-Hill Book Co Ltd.Google Scholar
Secondary Sources
Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Cambridge, MA: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
DeShon, R. P., Kozlowski, S. W., Schmidt, A. M., Milner, K. R., & Wiechmann, D. (2004). A multiple-goal, multilevel model of feedback effects on the regulation of individual and team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 1035–1056. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.6.1035CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Evison, R., & Ronaldson, J. B. (1975). A behaviour category instrument for analysing counselling interactions. British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 3(1), 82–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03069887508256301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farley, S., Nicolson, R., Rackham, N., Evison, R., & Dawson, J. (2016). The Behaviour in Teams (BIT) approach to providing team process feedback in meetings: A pilot study and research proposal. The Institute of Work Psychology International Conference, June, 23–21, 2016. Sheffield, United Kingdom.Google 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(3), 211–232. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15324834basp1003_2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gabelica, C., Van den Bossche, P., De Maeyer, S., Segers, M., & Gijselaers, W. (2014). The effect of team feedback and guided reflexivity on team performance change. Learning and Instruction, 34, 86–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.09.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gabelica, C., Van den Bossche, P., Segers, M., & Gijselaers, W. (2012). Feedback, a powerful lever in teams: A review. Educational Research Review, 7(2), 123–144. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2011.11.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, R. S. (2006). Benefits and problems with student teams: Suggestions for improving team projects. Journal of Education for Business, 82(1), 11–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.82.1.11-19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hey, A. H., Pietruschka, S., Bungard, W., & Joens, I. (2000). Feedback as a supporting system for work groups. In Vartiainen, M., Avallone, F., & Anderson, N. (Eds.), 67 Innovative theories, tools, and practices in work and organizational psychology (pp. 125–140). Seattle, WA: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers.Google Scholar
Heyns, R. W., & Zander, A. F. (1953). Observation of group behavior. In Festinger, L. & Katz, D. (Eds.), Research methods in the behavioral sciences (pp. 381–417). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Hughes, A. M., Gregory, M. E., Joseph, D. L., Sonesh, S. C., Marlow, S. L., Lacerenza, C. N., Benishek, L.E., King, H.B., & Salas, E. (2016). Saving lives: A meta-analysis of team training in healthcare. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(9), 1266–1304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/apl0000120CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, M. D., Hollenbeck, J. R., Scott DeRue, D., Barnes, C. M., & Jundt, D. (2013). Functional versus dysfunctional team change: Problem diagnosis and structural feedback for self-managed teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 122(1), 1–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.03.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kauffeld, S. (2006). Self‐directed work groups and team competence. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 79(1), 1–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/096317905X53237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kauffeld, S., & Lehmann-Willenbrock, N. (2012). Meetings matter: Effects of team meetings on team and organizational success. Small Group Research, 43(2), 130–158. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1046496411429599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Konradt, U., Schippers, M. C., Garbers, Y., & Steenfatt, C. (2015). Effects of guided reflexivity and team feedback on team performance improvement: The role of team regulatory processes and cognitive emergent states. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24(5), 777–795. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2015.1005608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leshed, G., Perez, D., Hancock, J. T., Cosley, D., Birnholtz, J., Lee, S., McLeod, P. L., & Gay, G. (2009). Visualizing real-time language-based feedback on teamwork behavior in computer-mediated groups. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 537–546). ACM. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1518701.1518784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
London, M., & Sessa, V. I. (2006). Group feedback for continuous learning. Human Resource Development Review, 5(3), 303–329. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1534484306290226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marks, M. A., Mathieu, J. E., & Zaccaro, S. J. (2001). A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy of Management Review, 26(3), 356–376. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2001.4845785CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, T., Rackham, N., & Hudson, H. (1974). DIS: Three years on. Industrial and Commercial Training, 6(6), 248–257. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb003406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rackham, N., & Carlisle, J. (1978a). The effective negotiator-Part I: The Behaviour of Successful Negotiators. Journal of European Industrial Training, 2(6), 6–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb002297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rackham, N., & Carlisle, J. (1978b). The effective negotiator-Part 2: Planning for negotiations. Journal of European Industrial Training, 2(7), 2–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb002302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rackham, N., Honey, P., & Colbert, M. (1971). Developing interactive skills. Guilsborough, Northants: Wellens Publishing.Google Scholar
Rackham, N., & Morgan, T. (1977). Behaviour analysis in training. Maidenhead, Berkshire: McGraw-Hill Book Co Ltd.Google Scholar
Vik, G. N. (2001). Doing more to teach teamwork than telling students to sink or swim. Business Communication Quarterly, 64(4), 112–119. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/108056990106400413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3
- Cited by