Touchstones: A framework for comparing premises of nine integrative perspectives on groups

Theories of Small Groups: Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Volumn , Issue , 2005, Pages 397-426

  Fulk, Janet ^a   McGrath, Joseph E ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33646458675     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4135/9781483328935.n11     Document Type: Chapter

References (7)

1. Arrow, H., McGrath, J., & Berdahl, J. (2000). Small groups as complex systems: Formation, coordination, development, and adaptation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. doi:10.4135/9781452204666 http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452204666
2. Barley, S. (1986). Technology as an occasion for structuring: Evidence from observations of CT scanners and the social ordering of radiology departments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31, 78-108. doi:10.2307/2392767 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2392767
3. Kraut, R. E., Galegher, J., & Egido, C. (1990). Patterns of contact and communication in scientific research collaboration. In J.Galegher, R. E.Kraut, & C.Egido (Eds.), Intellectual teamwork: Social and technological foundations of cooperative work. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4. McGrath, J. E., & Hollingshead, A. B. (1994). Groups interacting with technology: Ideas, evidence, issues, and an agenda. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5. Postmes, T. (1996). Social influence in computer-mediated groups. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.
6. Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1992). Social influence and the influence of the "social" in computer-mediated communication. In M.Lea (Ed.), Contexts of computer-mediated communication (pp. 30-65). Hemel Hempstead, UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
7. Steiner, I.D. (1974). Whatever happened to the group in social psychology? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 94-108. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(74)90058-4 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031%2874%2990058-4