IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/grdene/v27y2018i5d10.1007_s10726-018-9560-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring and Evaluating Convergence Processes Across a Series of Group Discussions

Author

Listed:
  • Sarah M. Staggs

    (Arizona State University)

  • Joseph A. Bonito

    (University of Arizona)

  • Jennifer N. Ervin

    (University of Pittsburgh)

Abstract

As groups develop, members’ knowledge and expectations regarding the task and the group tend to converge. Such convergence allows members to anticipate and coordinate their own and others’ actions, facilitating productive group work. Using zero-history laboratory groups, this study analyzes the presence and trajectory of cognitive convergence as groups worked on a series of three similar tasks. We focus on two types of convergence: anticipatory expectations for future work, and reflective assessments regarding previous group discussions. Results indicate immediate convergence for reflective cognitions but delayed convergence for anticipatory cognitions. Associations among the different types of convergence also vary at the group- and individual-levels of analysis. The discussion addresses measurement implications of both types of convergence in regard to emergence of group-like cognitive structures.

Suggested Citation

  • Sarah M. Staggs & Joseph A. Bonito & Jennifer N. Ervin, 2018. "Measuring and Evaluating Convergence Processes Across a Series of Group Discussions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(5), pages 715-733, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:27:y:2018:i:5:d:10.1007_s10726-018-9560-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s10726-018-9560-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10726-018-9560-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10726-018-9560-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. L A Franco & M Meadows, 2007. "Exploring new directions for research in problem structuring methods: on the role of cognitive style," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(12), pages 1621-1629, December.
    2. Laura M. Stapleton & Ji Seung Yang & Gregory R. Hancock, 2016. "Construct Meaning in Multilevel Settings," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 41(5), pages 481-520, October.
    3. Gersick, Connie J. G. & Hackman, J. Richard, 1990. "Habitual routines in task-performing groups," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 65-97, October.
    4. Mingers, John & Rosenhead, Jonathan, 2004. "Problem structuring methods in action," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 152(3), pages 530-554, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. F. Ackermann & M. Yearworth & L. White, 2018. "Micro-processes in Group Decision and Negotiation: Practices and Routines for Supporting Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(5), pages 709-713, October.
    2. Timothy C. Dunne, 2018. "Friend or Foe? A Reversal of Ingroup Bias," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 593-610, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. G A Hindle & L A Franco, 2009. "Combining problem structuring methods to conduct applied research: a mixed methods approach to studying fitness-to-drive in the UK," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(12), pages 1637-1648, December.
    2. von Winterfeldt, Detlof & Fasolo, Barbara, 2009. "Structuring decision problems: A case study and reflections for practitioners," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 199(3), pages 857-866, December.
    3. White, Leroy, 2016. "Behavioural operational research: Towards a framework for understanding behaviour in OR interventions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 827-841.
    4. Ion Georgiou & Joaquim Heck, 2021. "The emergence of problem structuring methods, 1950s–1989: An atlas of the journal literature," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(6), pages 756-796, November.
    5. Durugbo, Christopher M., 2020. "Affordance-based problem structuring for workplace innovation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 284(2), pages 617-631.
    6. Steven M. Gray & Andrew P. Knight & Markus Baer, 2020. "On the Emergence of Collective Psychological Ownership in New Creative Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 141-164, January.
    7. Driouchi, Tarik & Leseure, Michel & Bennett, David, 2009. "A robustness framework for monitoring real options under uncertainty," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 698-710, June.
    8. Giada Baldessarelli & Nathalie Lazaric & Michele Pezzoni, 2022. "Organizational routines: Evolution in the research landscape of two core communities," Post-Print halshs-03718851, HAL.
    9. Nina Tura & Lea Hannola & Mikko Pynnönen, 2017. "Agile Methods for Boosting the Commercialization Process of New Technology," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(03), pages 1-23, June.
    10. Abuabara, Leila & Paucar-Caceres, Alberto, 2021. "Surveying applications of Strategic Options Development and Analysis (SODA) from 1989 to 2018," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 292(3), pages 1051-1065.
    11. Beersma, Bianca & Hollenbeck, John R. & Conlon, Donald E. & Humphrey, Stephen E. & Moon, Henry & Ilgen, Daniel R., 2009. "Cutthroat cooperation: The effects of team role decisions on adaptation to alternative reward structures," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 131-142, January.
    12. Sébastien Damart, 2010. "A Cognitive Mapping Approach to Organizing the Participation of Multiple Actors in a Problem Structuring Process," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 19(5), pages 505-526, September.
    13. Kristan Cockerill & Lacy Daniel & Leonard Malczynski & Vincent Tidwell, 2009. "A fresh look at a policy sciences methodology: collaborative modeling for more effective policy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(3), pages 211-225, August.
    14. Joseph R. Kakeneno & Cathal MacSwiney Brugha, 2017. "Usability of Nomology-based methodologies in supporting problem structuring across cultures: the case of participatory decision-making in Tanzania rural communities," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 25(2), pages 393-415, June.
    15. Arash Golnam & Paavo Ritala & Alain Wegmann, 2014. "Coopetition within and between value networks - a typology and a modelling framework," International Journal of Business Environment, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 6(1), pages 47-68.
    16. Midgley, Gerald & Cavana, Robert Y. & Brocklesby, John & Foote, Jeff L. & Wood, David R.R. & Ahuriri-Driscoll, Annabel, 2013. "Towards a new framework for evaluating systemic problem structuring methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 229(1), pages 143-154.
    17. Osório, António (António Miguel), 2017. "Self-interest and Equity Concerns: A Behavioural Allocation Rule for Operational Problems," Working Papers 2072/290757, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    18. Gu, Jifa & Tang, Xijin, 2005. "Meta-synthesis approach to complex system modeling," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 166(3), pages 597-614, November.
    19. Davies, Andrew & Manning, Stephan & Söderlund, Jonas, 2018. "When neighboring disciplines fail to learn from each other: The case of innovation and project management research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 965-979.
    20. Etienne Rouwette & Ingrid Bastings & Hans Blokker, 2011. "A Comparison of Group Model Building and Strategic Options Development and Analysis," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 20(6), pages 781-803, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:27:y:2018:i:5:d:10.1007_s10726-018-9560-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.