Information similarity as a moderator of the effect of gender on participation in small groups: A multilevel analysis

Small Group Research

Volumn 36, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 139-165

  Bonito, Joseph A ^a   Lambert, Bruce L ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

Decision making; Information processing; Interdependence; Local management; Multilevel analysis; Participation

Indexed keywords

EID: 16244411355     PISSN: 10464964     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1046496404266164     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
2. Bales, R. F. (1970). Personality and interpersonal behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
3. Balkwell, J. W. (1994). Status. In M. F. Lawler (Ed.), Group processes: Sociological analyses (pp. 119-148). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
4. Balkwell, J. W., & Berger, J. (1996). Gender, status, and behavior in task situations. Social Psychology Quarterly, 59, 273-283.
5. Berger, J., & Zelditch, M., Jr. (1977). Status characteristics and social interaction: The status-organizing process. In J. Berger, M. H. Fisek, R. Z. Norman, & M. Zelditch, Jr. (Eds.), Status characteristics and social interaction: An expectation-states approach (pp. 3-87). New York: Elsevier.
6. Bonito, J. A. (2000). The effect of contributing substantively on perceptions of participation. Small Group Research, 31, 528-553.
7. Bonito, J. A. (2001). An information-processing approach to participation in small groups. Communication Research, 28, 275-303.
8. Bonito, J. A. (2002). The analysis of participation in small groups: Methodological and conceptual issues related to interdependence. Small Group Research, 33, 412-438.
9. Bonito, J. A. (2003a). A social relations analysis of participation in small groups. Communication Monographs, 70, 83-97.
10. Bonito, J. A. (2003b, November). A social relations model of participation in small groups. Paper presented at the National Communication Association, Miami, FL.
11. Bonito, J. A., & Hollingshead, A. B. (1997). Participation in small groups. In B. R. Burleson (Ed.), Communication yearbook 20 (pp. 227-261). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
12. Brashers, D. E., Adkins, M., & Meyers, R. A. (1994). Argumentation and computer-mediated group decision making. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), Group communication in context: Studies of natural groups (pp. 263-282). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Campbell, L., & Kashy, D. A. (2002). Estimating actor, partner, and interaction effects for dyadic data using PROC MIXED and HLM: A user-friendly guide. Personal Relationships, 9, 327-342.
14. Chaiken, S. (1987). The heuristic model of persuasion. In M. P. Zanna, J. M. Olson, & C. P. Herman (Eds.), Social influence: The Ontario Symposium (pp. 3-40). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
15. Cruz, M. G., Henningsen, D. D., & Williams, M. L. M. (2000). The presence of norms in the absence of groups? The impact of normative influence under hidden-profile conditions. Human Communication Research, 26, 104-124.
16. DeVellis, R. F. (1991). Scale development: Theory and applications. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
17. Fararo, T. J. (1989). The meaning of general theoretical sociology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
18. Fisek, M. H., & Ofshe, R. (1970). The process of status evolution. Sociometry, 33, 327-335.
19. Folger, J. P., Hewes, D. E., & Poole, M. S. (1984). Coding social interaction. In B. Dervin & M. J. Voight (Eds.), Progress in communication sciences (Vol. 4, pp. 115-161). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
20. Forsyth, D. R., & Kelley, K. N. (1996). Heuristic-based biases in estimations of personal contributions to collective endeavors. In J. L. Nye & A. M. Brower (Eds.), What's social about social cognition ? Research on socially shared cognition in small groups (pp. 106-123). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
21. Foschi, M. (1996). Double standards in the evaluation of men and women. Social Psychology Quarterly, 59, 237-254.
22. Foschi, M. (1998). Double standards: Types, conditions, and consequences. In J. Skvoretz & J. Szmatka (Eds.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 15, pp. 59-80). Stamford, CT: JAI Press.
23. Foschi, M. (2000). Double standards for competence: Theory and research. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 21-42.
24. Foschi, M., & Foddy, M. (1988). Standards, performances, and the formation of self-other expectations. In M. Webster, Jr., & M. Foschi (Eds.), Status generalization: New theory and research (pp. 248-260). Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
25. Gabriel, S., & Gardner, W. L. (1999). Are there "his" and "hers" types of interdependence? The implications of gender differences in collective versus relational interdependence for affect, behavior, and cognition. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 77, 642-655.
26. Gill, S. J., Menlo, A., & Keel, L. P. (1984). Antecedents to member participation within small groups: A review of theory and research. Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 9, 68-76.
27. Guetzkow, H. (1950). Unitizing and categorizing problems in coding qualitative data. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 6, 47-58.
28. Hinsz, V. B., Tindale, R. S., & Vollrath, D. A. (1997). The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processors. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 43-64.
29. Hollenbeck, J. R., Ilgen, D. R., Sego, D. J., Hedlund, J., Major, D. A., & Phillips, J. (1995). Multilevel theory of team decision making: Decision performance in teams incorporating distributed expertise. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 292-316.
30. Kashy, D. A., & Kenny, D. A. (2000). The analysis of data from dyads and groups. In H. T. Reis & C. M. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social psychology (pp. 451-477). New York: Cambridge University Press.
31. Kenny, D. A. (1994). Interpersonal perception: A social relations analysis. New York: Guilford Press.
32. Kenny, D. A., & Cook, W. (1999). Partner effects in relationship research: Conceptual issues, analytic difficulties, and illustrations. Personal Relationships, 6, 433-448.
33. Kenny, D. A., Mannetti, L., Pierro, A., Livi, S., & Kashy, D. A. (2002). The statistical analysis of data from small groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 126-137.
34. Knottnerus, J. D. (1997). Social structural analysis and status generalization: The contributions and potential of expectation states theory. In J. Szmatka, J. Skvoretz, & J. Berger (Eds.), Status, network, and structure: Theory development in group processes (pp. 119-136). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
35. Kreft, I. G. G., de Leeuw, J., & Aiken, L. S. (1995). The effect of different forms of centering in hierarchical linear models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 30, 1-21.
36. Lambert, B. L. (2001). Automatic content analysis of pharmacist-patient interactions using the Theme Machine document clustering system. In M. West (Ed.), Progress in communication sciences, Volume 17: Applications of computer content analysis (pp. 103-122). New York: Ablex.
37. Larson, J. R. (1997). Modeling the entry of shared and unshared information into group discussion: A review and BASIC language computer program. Small Group Research, 28, 454-479.
38. Larson, J. R., Sargis, E. G., Elstein, A. S., & Schwartz, A. (2002). Holding shared versus unshared information: Its impact on perceived member influence in decision-making groups. Basic & Applied Social Psychology, 24, 145-155.
39. Laughlin, P. R., & Ellis, A. L. (1986). Demonstrability and social combination processes on mathematical intellective tasks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 177-189.
40. Marcus, D. K., & Kashy, D. A. (1995). The social relations model: A tool for group psychotherapy research. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 42, 383-389.
41. Meyers, R. A., & Brashers, D. E. (1998). Argument in group decision making: Explicating a process model and investigating the argument-outcome link. Communication Monographs, 65, 261-281.
42. Pavitt, C. (1993). Does communication matter in social influence during small group discussion? Five positions. Communication Studies, 44, 216-227.
43. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag.
44. Poole, M. S., & Hirokawa, R. Y. (1996). Introduction: Communication and group decision making. In R. Y. Hirokawa & M. S. Poole (Eds.), Communication and group decision making (2nd ed., pp. 3-18). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
45. Ridgeway, C. L. (1982). Status in groups: The importance of motivation. American Sociological Review, 47, 76-88.
46. Ridgeway, C. L., & Smith-Lovin, L. (1999). The gender system and interaction. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 191-216.
47. Singer, J. D. (1998). Using SAS PROC MIXED to fit multilevel models, hierarchical models, and individual growth models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 24, 323-355.
48. 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.
49. 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.
50. 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.
51. Stasser, G., & Vaughan, S. I. (1996). Models of participation during face-to-face unstructured discussion. In E. H. Witte & J. H. Davis (Eds.), Understanding group behavior (Vol. 1, pp. 165-192). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
52. 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.
53. Weiner, S. L., & Goodenough, D. R. (1977). A move toward a psychology of conversation. In R. O. Freedle (Ed.), Discourse production and comprehension (pp. 213-225). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
54. Wittenbaum, G. M., Hubbell, A. P., & Zuckerman, C. (1999). Mutual enhancement: Toward an understanding of the collective preference for shared information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 967-978.
55. Wood, W. (1987). Meta-analytic review of sex differences in group performance. Psychological Bulletin, 102, 53-71.