Publication Date
| In 2026 | 0 |
| Since 2025 | 0 |
| Since 2022 (last 5 years) | 2 |
| Since 2017 (last 10 years) | 8 |
| Since 2007 (last 20 years) | 76 |
Descriptor
Source
Author
Publication Type
Education Level
Location
| Australia | 10 |
| Canada | 6 |
| California | 4 |
| Sweden | 4 |
| New Zealand | 3 |
| Texas (Austin) | 3 |
| United Kingdom | 3 |
| Denmark | 2 |
| Finland | 2 |
| Germany | 2 |
| Hong Kong | 2 |
| More ▼ | |
Laws, Policies, & Programs
| First Amendment | 1 |
| School to Work Opportunities… | 1 |
Assessments and Surveys
| Flanders System of… | 3 |
| Personal Orientation Inventory | 1 |
| Tennessee Self Concept Scale | 1 |
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Peer reviewedJacobs, Marion; And Others – Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1973
Positive feedback was found to be more desirable and tended to be more believable than negative feedback. A third group, which received a mixture of positive and negative feedback, rated the T group lowest as a learning experience. No significant differences in cohesion resulted from the different feedback conditions. (Author)
Descriptors: Feedback, Group Dynamics, Individual Development, Interaction Process Analysis
Gibson, Dennis L. – 1970
The Hill Interaction Matrix-G (HIM-G), a 72 item questionnaire, is a shorter method for the analysis of verbal interaction in small groups. Intended as a substitute for the more precise Hill Interaction Matrix Rating System (HIM-SS) this version can be rated within twenty minutes after observation of the group. A Fortran computer scoring program…
Descriptors: Group Dynamics, Group Therapy, Interaction Process Analysis, Measurement Instruments
Peer reviewedGigliotti, Richard J. – Teaching Sociology, 1987
Examines the expectations that students bring to an introductory sociology course and analyzes how they affect general course evaluation items. Results show that students' gender, year in school, and grade point average are associated with different levels of expectancy and expectancy violation, affecting general course evaluation items.…
Descriptors: Course Evaluation, Expectation, Group Dynamics, Higher Education
Peer reviewedTrujillo, Nick – Small Group Behavior, 1986
Presents an exploratory taxonomy of small group interaction-coding systems. Six dimensions that characterize interaction-coding schemes are presented in a hierarchical order ranging from abstract conceptual issues to specific methodological ones. These dimensions are: philosophical perspective, conceptual and operational focus, observer inference,…
Descriptors: Classification, Communication Research, Group Dynamics, Interaction
Peer reviewedRoark, Albert E.; Radl, Myrna C. – Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 1984
Identifies components of group process and describes leader functions. Discusses personal elements, focus of interaction/psychological distance, group development, content, quality of interaction, and self-reflective/meaning attribution, illustrated by a case study of a group of persons (N=5) arrested for drunk driving. (JAC)
Descriptors: Counselor Role, Group Counseling, Group Dynamics, Interaction Process Analysis
Peer reviewedBuchanan, Lyle J.; Lindgren, Henry Clay – Journal of Psychology, 1973
Descriptors: Creativity Research, Grade 4, Group Dynamics, Interaction Process Analysis
Peer reviewedKemp, C. Gratton – Counseling and Values, 1972
Descriptors: Group Dynamics, Group Therapy, Interaction Process Analysis, Interpersonal Relationship
Peer reviewedNorton, Robert W. – Small Group Behavior, 1979
Maintains that coalitions form as a function of the popularity of an individual and the reciprocation between individuals. An algorithm is introduced, incorporating both popularity and reciprocation components, to generate units of analysis for coalition identification. The algorithm reflects aspects of the whole group and intensity of dyads.…
Descriptors: Algorithms, Group Behavior, Group Dynamics, Interaction Process Analysis
Bauer, Connie L.; And Others – 1980
A theory of group interaction with a focus on the trajectories of relevant variables as they change over time is developed in this paper. The four major components of the group interaction process (communication, conflict, involvement, and centralization) are presented and conceptually defined, and the nature of their interdependence is discussed.…
Descriptors: Communication Research, Group Dynamics, Interaction, Interaction Process Analysis
Beach, Wayne A. – 1980
The activities involved in coding conversation sequences and the lack of attention given to their systematic validation within the field of speech communication are discussed in this paper. The paper first reviews briefly the assumptions underlying relational coding and the implications of viewing these activities as practical accomplishments. It…
Descriptors: Communication Research, Group Dynamics, Interaction, Interaction Process Analysis
Nelson, Frank Gustav Gordon – 1968
Twelve experimental groups were organized using ability and mutually positive attitudes among the three members of each group as criteria. Mutually positive attitudes were defined as group cohesiveness. Three different interaction patterns--competitive, competitive-supportive, and supportive--were established through instructions read to the…
Descriptors: Affective Behavior, Attitudes, Educational Research, Group Dynamics
Werbel, Wayne S.; And Others – 1974
The purpose of this paper is to suggest a comparative morphology of groups which would be applicable to the whole of social scientific research. The key to the morphological classes suggested is not a focus on the group system itself but on its relationship with the next higher system--the group system's environment. The information exchange…
Descriptors: Educational Research, Group Dynamics, Group Structure, Interaction
Peer reviewedMayhew, Bruce H.; Levinger, Roger L. – American Journal of Sociology, 1976
This study examines how group size affects power structure. Elementary conditions under which human interaction generally occurs constrain power to equalize as the length of the interaction sequence increases and to polarize as the size of the group increases. (Author/DE)
Descriptors: Group Dynamics, Group Structure, Interaction Process Analysis, Power Structure
Peer reviewedKing, Andrew A. – Quarterly Journal of Speech, 1976
Descriptors: Group Dynamics, Group Norms, Higher Education, Interaction Process Analysis
Peer reviewedCunningham, P. G.; Parker, A. J. – Sociology and Social Research, 1978
Based upon research conducted aboard a ship, this article substantiates the hypothesis that whether or not homosexuality is excused will depend upon the compatibility of such tolerance with the prevailing terms being used to rationalize the experience of differential power. (Author/JC)
Descriptors: Group Dynamics, Group Structure, Homosexuality, Interaction Process Analysis


