The relationship between the quality of communication cycles and performance was tested for triad and dyads, and the relationship between thought cycles and performance was tested for individuals. High-quality cycles conform to an ideal structure. This means that they start with action preparatory functions (orientation or planning) and end with the evaluation of a behavior performed. It was hypothesized that quality of cycles predicts performance above and beyond other process variables. For triads, a significant amount of additional variance in performance was explained by cycle quality after accounting for the effect of number of cycles communicated and cycle length (Study 1). The main findings are replicated for dyads (Study 2). In Study 3, individual actors performing the same task were asked to think aloud, and the protocols were analyzed in the same manner as group communication. Again, quality of thought cycles was related to higher performance, indicating similar functions of thinking for individual action and of communication for groups.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Arrow, H. , McGrath, J. E., & Berdahl, J. L. (2000). Small groups as complex systems: Formation, coordination, development, and adaptation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
2.
Carver, C. S. , & Scheier, M. F. (1998). On the self-regulation of behavior. New York: Cambridge University Press.
3.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. Boston: D. C. Heath.
4.
Ericsson, K. A. , & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data (Rev. ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5.
Fisher, B. A. (1974). Small group decision making: Communication and the group process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
6.
Fleiss, J. L. (1981). Statistical methods for rates and proportions (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley.
7.
Frese, M. , & Zapf, D. (1994). Action as the core of work psychology: A German approach. In H. C. Triandis, M. D. Dunnette, & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 271-340). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
8.
Futoran, G. C. , Kelly, J. R., & McGrath, J. E. (1989). TEMPO: A time-based system for analysis of group interaction processes. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 10, 211-232.
9.
Gundlach, W. , & Schultz, G. (1987). Ist die Effektivitaet von Problemloesungen aus Diskussionen voraussagbar? [Predicting problem-solving by analyzing discussions]. Psychologie fuer die Praxis, 4, 350-368.
10.
Hacker, W. (1998). Allgemeine Arbeitspsychologie: Psychische Regulation von Arbeitstätigkeiten [Psychology of work: Behavior regulation]. Bern, Switzerland: Hans Huber.
11.
Hackman, R. J. (1969). Toward understanding the role of tasks in behavioral research. Acta Psychologica, 31, 97-128.
12.
Hinsz, V. B. , Tindale, R. S., & Vollrath, D. A. (1997). The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processors. Psychology Bulletin, 121(1), 43-64.
13.
Hirokawa, R. Y. (1983). Group communication and problem-solving effectiveness 2: An exploratory investigation of procedural functions. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 47, 59-74.
14.
Janis, I. L. , & Mann, L. (1977). Decision making. A psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and commitment. New York: Free Press.
15.
Jarboe, S. (1996). Procedures for enhancing group decision making. In R. Y. Hirokawa & M. S. Poole (Eds.), Communication and group decision making (2nd ed., pp. 345-383). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
16.
Kanki, B. G. , & Foushee, H. C. (1989). Communication as group process mediator of aircrew performance. Aviation, Space and Environmental Medicine, 4, 402-410.
17.
Kerr, N. L. , Niedermeier, K. E., & Kaplan, M. F. (2000). On the virtues of assuming minimal differences in information processing in individuals and groups. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 3, 203-217.
18.
Larson, J. R. , & Christensen, C. (1993). Groups as problem-solving units: Toward a new meaning of social cognition. British Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 5-30.
19.
Levine, J. M. , & Moreland, R. L. (1998). Small groups. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (4th ed., pp. 415-469). New York: McGraw-Hill.
20.
McGrath, J. E. (1984). Groups, interaction and performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
21.
McGrath, J. E. , & Altermatt, T. W. (2001). Observation and analysis of group interaction over time: Some methodological and strategic choices. In M. A. Hogg & R. S. Tindale (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Group processes (pp. 525-556). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
22.
McGrath, J. E. , & Tschan, F. (in press). Dynamics in groups and teams: Groups as complex action systems. In M. S. Poole (Ed.), Handbook of organizational change and development. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
23.
Miller, G. A. , Galanter, E., & Pribram, K. H. (1960). Plans and the structure of behavior. New York: Holt.
24.
Miller, J. G. , & Miller, J. L. (1990). Introduction: The nature of living systems. Behavioral Science, 35, 157-163.
25.
Moesch, K. (1990). Praedikatzentrierte Einheiten als Basissegmente zur Analyse von Diskursen: Ein pragmatischer Loesungsversuch [Predicate-related units as basic segments for the analysis of discourses]. Unpublished working paper, University of Bern, Department of Psychology.
26.
Moreland, R. L. , Hogg, M. A., & Hains, S. C. (1994). Back to the future: Social psychological research on groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 527-555.
27.
Morris, C. G. (1970). Changes in group interaction during problem solving. Journal of Social Psychology, 81, 157-165.
28.
Newell, A. , & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
29.
Poole, M. S. (1983). Decision development in small groups II: A study of multiple sequences in decision making. Communication Monographs, 50, 206-232.
30.
Poole, M. S. , & Baldwin, C. L. (1996). Developmental processes in group decision making. In R. Y. Hirokawa & M. S. Poole (Eds.), Communication and group decision making (2nd ed., pp. 215-268). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
31.
Predmore, S. C. (1995). Microcoding of communications in accident investigation: Crew coordination in United 811 and United 232. In B. G. Kanki & O. V. Prinzo (Eds.), Methods and metrics of voice communications (pp. A45-A50). San Antonio, TX: Federal Aviation Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Department of Defense.
32.
Russo, E. , Johnson, E. J., & Stephens, D. L. (1989). The validity of verbal protocols. Memory & Cognition, 17, 759-769.
33.
Shepherd, A. (2001). Hierarchical task analysis. London: Taylor & Francis.
34.
Short, E. J. , Evans, S. W., Friebert, S. E., & Schatschneider, C. W. (1991). Thinking aloud during problem solving: Facilitation effects. Learning and Individual Differences, 3, 109-122.
35.
Stratman, J. F. , & Hamp-Lyons, L. (1994). Reactivity in concurrent think-aloud protocols: Issues for research. In P. Smagorinsky (Ed.), Speaking about writing: Reflections on research methodology (Vol. 8, pp. 89-111). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
36.
Tindale, R. S. , Meisenhelder, H. M., Dykema-Engblade, A. A., & Hogg, M. A. (2001). Shared cognition in small groups. In M. A. Hogg & R. S. Tindale (Eds.), Blackwell handbook on social psychology: Group processes (pp. 1-30). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
37.
Tschan, F. (1995). Communication enhances small group performance if it conforms to task requirements: The concept of ideal communications cycles. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 371-393.
38.
Tschan, F. (2000). Produktivität in Kleingruppen [Small group productivity]. Bern, Switzerland: Huber.
39.
Tschan, F. , Semmer, N. K., Nägele, C., & Gurtner, A. (2000). Task adaptive behavior and performance in groups. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 3, 367-386.
40.
Tschan, F. , & von Cranach, M. (1996). Group task structure, processes and outcome. In M. West (Ed.), Handbook of work group psychology (pp. 95-121). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
41.
Volpert, W. (1982). The model of the hierarchical-sequential organization of action. In W. Hacker, W. Volpert, & M. von Cranach (Eds.), Cognitive and motivational aspects of action (pp. 35-51). Berlin, Germany: Huething Verlagsgemeinschaft GmbH.
42.
von Cranach, M. (1996). Towards a theory of the acting group. In E. Witte & J. Davis (Eds.), Understanding group behavior: Vol. 2. Small group processes and interpersonal relations (pp. 152-205). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
43.
von Cranach, M. , Kalbermatten, U., Indermuehle, K., & Gugler, B. (1982). Goal-directed action. London: Academic Press.
44.
von Cranach, M. , Ochsenbein, G., & Valach, L. (1986). The group as a self-active system. European Journal of Social Psychology, 16, 193-229.
45.
Weingart, L. R. (1997). How did they do that? The ways and means of studying group process. Research in Organizational Behavior, 19, 189-239.
