Deliberation and diversity: Perceptions of small group discussions by race and ethnicity

Small Group Research

Volumn 41, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 746-776

  Abdel Monem, Tarik ^a   Bingham, Shereen ^b   Marincic, Jamie ^a   Tomkins, Alan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA AT OMAHA   (United States)

Author keywords

Communication theory; Deliberation; Ethnicity; Race; Small group discussion

Indexed keywords

EID: 78349249499     PISSN: 10464964     EISSN: 15528278     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1046496410377359     Document Type: Article

References (106)

1. Andrews, P.H. (2006). Gendered differences in persuasive communication and attribution of success and failure. Human Communication Research, 13, 372-385.
2. Barabas, J. (2004). How deliberation affects policy opinions. American Political Science Review, 98, 687-701.
3. Baxter, L.A., & Babbie. E. (2004). The basics of communication research. Belmont, CA: Thompson/ Wadsworth.
4. Bezrukova, K., Jehn, K.A., Zanutto, E.L., & Thatcher, S. M. B. (2009). Do workgroup faultlines help or hurt? A moderated model of faultlines, team identification, and group performance. Organization Science, 20, 35-50.
5. Bingham, S.G., & McNamara, P. (2008). The promise of public dialogue in service-learning courses. Reflections: A Journal of Writing, Service-Learning, and Community Literacy, 8, 56-84.
6. Black, L.W. (2005). Building connections while thinking together: By-products of employee training in dialogue. Western Journal of Communication, 69, 273-292.
7. Brown, A., & Mistry, T. (2005). Group work with mixed membership groups: Issues of race and gender. Social Work With Groups, 28, 133-148.
8. Brown, B., Long, H., Gould, H., Weitz, T., & Milliken, N. (2000). A conceptual model for the recruitment of diverse women into research studies. Journal of Women's Health and Gender-based Medicine, 9, 625-632.
9. Buber, M. (1947). Between man and man (R. G. Smith, Trans.). New York: Macmillan.
10. Buber, M. (1971). I and thou (W. Kaufmann, Trans.). New York: Free Press. (Original work published 1923).
11. Burkhalter, S., Gastil, J., & Kelshaw, T. (2002). A conceptual definition and theoretical model of public deliberation in small face-to-face groups. Communication Theory, 12, 398-422.
12. Button, M., & Mattson, K. (1999). Deliberative democracy in practice: Challenges and prospects for civic deliberation. Polity, 31, 609-637.
13. Carte, T., & Chidambaram, L. (2004). A capabilities-based theory of technology deployment in diverse teams: Leapfrogging the pitfalls of diversity and leveraging its potential with collaborative technology. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 5, 448-471.
14. Chambers, S. (2003). Deliberative democratic theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 6, 307-326.
15. Clark, M.A., Anand, V., & Roberson, L. (2000). Resolving meaning: Interpretation in diverse decision-making groups. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 4, 211-221.
16. Cobb, S. (1993). Empowerment and mediation: A narrative perspective. Negotiation Journal, 9, 245-255.
17. Connolly, T., Jessup, L.M., & Valacich, J.S. (1990). Effects of anonymity and evaluative tone on idea generation in computer-mediated groups. Management Science, 36, 689-703.
18. Creswell, J.W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19. Creswell, J.W., & Miller, D.L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Into Practice, 39, 124-130.
20. Dahlberg, L. (2005). The Habermasian public sphere: Taking difference seriously? Theory and Society, 34, 111-136.
21. De Dreu, C., & Weingart, L. (2003). Task versus relationship conflict, team effectiveness, and team member satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 741-749.
22. Delli Carpini, M.X., Cook, F.L., & Jacobs, L.R. (2004). Public deliberation, discursive participation, and citizen engagement: A review of the empirical literature. Annual Review of Political Science, 7, 315-344.
23. Elshtain, J.B. (1995). Democracy on trial. New York: Basic Books.
24. Fagre, L., & Littlejohn, J. (2006). Difficult dialogues at the University of Nebraska at Omaha: Resource guide. Unpublished manuscript, Public Dialogue Consortium.
25. Fearon, J. (1998). Deliberation as discussion. In J. Elster (Ed.), Deliberative democracy (pp. 44-68). New York: Cambridge University Press.
26. Fishkin, J. (1991). Democracy and deliberation: New directions for democratic reform. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
27. Fishkin, J. (1995). The voice of the people. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
28. Fraser, N. (1992). Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. In C. Calhoun (Ed.), Habermas and the public sphere (pp. 109-142). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
29. Frey, L.R. (2000). Diversifying our understanding of diversity and communication in groups: Dialoguing with Clark, Anand, and Roberson. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 4, 222-229.
30. Gastil, J. (1993). Democracy in small groups: Participation, decision-making and communication. Philadelphia, PA: Library Company of Philadelphia.
31. Gastil, J., & Black, L. (2008). Public deliberation as the organizing principle of political communication research. Journal of Public Deliberation, 4(1). Retrieved fromhttp://services.bepress.com/jpd/vol4/iss1/art3/.
32. Gastil, J., Deess, E.P., Weiser, P., & Simmons, C. (in press). The jury and democracy: How jury deliberation promotes civic engagement and political participation. New York: Oxford University Press.
33. Gibson, C., & Vermeulen, F. (2003). A healthy divide: Subgroups as a stimulus for team learning behavior. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 202-239.
34. Goidel, R.K., Freeman, C.M., Procopio, S., & Zewe, C.F. (2008). Who participates in the Public Square and does it matter? Public Opinion Quarterly, 72, 792-803.
35. Goodin, R.E., & Niemeyer, S.J. (2003). When does deliberation begin? Internal reflection versus public discussion in deliberative democracy. Political Studies, 51, 627-649.
36. Grogan, C.M., & Gusmano, M.K. (2005). Deliberative democracy in theory and practice: Connecticut's Medicaid managed care council. State Politics & Policy Quarterly, 5, 126-146.
37. Habermas, J. (1989). The structured transformation of the public sphere. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
38. Hagen, B.H., & Burch, G. (1985). The relationship of group process and group task accomplishment to group member satisfaction. Small Group Research, 16, 211-233.
39. Hawkins, K. (1999). Gender differences in questions asked during small decision-making group discussions. Small Group Research, 30, 235-256.
40. Heierbacher, S. (2009). Taking our work to the next level: Addressing challenges facing the dialogue and deliberation community. International Journal of Public Participation, 3, 108-131.
41. Hickerson, A., & Gastil, J. (2008). Assessing the difference critique of deliberation: Gender, emotion, and the gender experience. Communication Theory, 18, 281-303.
42. Huckfeldt, R.R., & Sprague, J. (1995). Citizens, politics, and social communication: Information and influence in an election campaign. New York: Cambridge University Press.
43. Hyde, C., & Deal, K. (2003). Does gender matter? Male and female participation in social work classrooms. Affilia, 18, 192-209.
44. Jehn, K.A. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 256-282.
45. Jehn, K.A., Northcraft, G., & Neale, M. (1999). Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 741-763.
46. Karpowitz, C., & Mendelberg, T. (2007). Groups and deliberation. Swiss Political Science Review, 13, 645-662.
47. Kirchmeyer, C., & Cohen, A., (1992). Multicultural groups: Their performance and reactions with constructive conflict. Group & Organization Management, 17, 153-170.
48. Kramarae, C. (1981). Women and men speaking: Frameworks for analysis. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
49. Kramer, M.W., Benoit, P.J., Dixon, M.A., & Benoit-Bryan, J. (2007). Group processes in a teaching renewal retreat: Communication functions and dialectical tensions. Southern Communication Journal, 72, 145-168.
50. Kramer, M.W., Kuo, C.L., & Dailey, J.C. (1997). The impact of brainstorming techniques on subsequent group processes: Beyond generating ideas. Small Group Research, 28, 218-242.
51. Lau, D.C., & Murningham, J.K. (1998). Demographic diversity and faultlines: The compositional dynamics of organizational groups. Academy of Management Review, 23, 325-340.
52. Lau, D.C., & Murningham, J.K. (2005). Interactions within groups and subgroups: The dynamic effects of demographic faultlines. Academy of Management Review, 48, 645-659.
53. Li, J., & Hambrick, D.C. (2005). Factional groups: A new vantage on demographic faultiness, conflict, and disintegration in work teams. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 763-776.
54. Li, J., Karakowsy, L., & Siegel, J.P. (1999). The effects of proportional representation on intragroup behavior in mixed-race decision-making groups. Small Group Research, 30, 259-279.
55. Lindlof, T.R., & Taylor, B.C. (2002). Qualitative communication research methods (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
56. Makau, J.M., & Marty, D.L. (2001). Cooperative argumentation: A model for deliberative community. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.
57. Marder, N. (1987). Gender dynamics and jury deliberations. Yale Law Journal, 96, 593-612.
58. Matsunaga, M., & Torigoe, C. (2008). Looking at the Japan-residing Korean identities through the eyes of the outsider within: Application and extension of co-cultural theory. Western Journal of Communication, 72, 349-373.
59. Matthews, D. (1998). Politics for people: Finding a responsible public voice (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
60. Matthews, D. (2002). For communities to work. Dayton, OH: Kettering Foundation Press.
61. Maznevski, M.L. (1994). Understanding our differences: Performance in decision-making groups with diverse members. Human Relations, 47, 531-552.
62. McLeod, P.L., & Lobel, S.A. (1992). The effects of ethnic diversity on idea generation in small groups. In Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings (pp. 227-231). Briarcliff Manor, NY: Academy of Management.
63. McLeod, P.L., Lobel, S.A., & Cox, T.H. (1996). Ethnic diversity and creativity in small groups. Small Group Research, 27, 248-264.
64. Mendelberg, T. (2006, August). Group deliberation. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of American Political Science Association, Philadelphia, PA. Retrieved fromhttp://www.allacademic.com/meta/p152462_index.html.
65. Mendelberg, T., & Karpowitz, C. (2006, February). How people deliberate about justice: Groups, gender, and decision rules. Princeton, NJ: Department of Politics, Princeton University.
66. Mendelberg, T., & Oleske, J. (2000). Race and public deliberation. Political Communication, 17, 169-191.
67. Miller, K. (2002). Communication theories: Perspectives, processes, and contexts. New York: McGraw-Hill.
68. Mullen, B., & Copper, C. (1994). The relation between group cohesiveness and performance: An integration. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 210-227.
69. Mutz, D.C., & Martin, P.S. (2001). Facilitating communication across lines of political difference: The role of mass media. American Political Science Review, 95, 97-114.
70. Mutz, D.C., & Mondak, J.J. (2006). The workplace as a context for cross-cutting political discourse. Journal of Politics, 68, 140-155.
71. National Coalition for Dialogue and Deliberation. (2008). What are dialogue and deliberation? Retrieved fromhttp://www.thataway.org.
72. Oetzel, J.G. (2001). Self-construals, communication processes, and group outcomes in homogeneous and heterogeneous groups. Small Group Research, 32, 19-54.
73. Orbe, M. (1996). Laying the foundation for co-cultural theory: An inductive approach to studying non-dominant communication strategies and the factors that influence them. Communication Studies, 47, 157-176.
74. Orbe, M. (1998). Constructing co-cultural theory: An explication of culture, power, and communication. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
75. PBS. (2007). By the people: Dialogues in democracy-Local communities host citizen deliberations. Retrieved fromhttp://www.pbs.org/newshour/btp/projects/did2.html.
76. Pearce, W.B., & Littlejohn, S.W. (1997). Moral conflict: When social worlds collide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
77. Pearce, W.B., & Pearce, K.A. (2004). Taking a communication perspective on dialogue. In R. Anderson, L. A. Baxter, & K. N. Cissna (Eds.), Dialogue: Theorizing difference in communication studies (pp. 39-56). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
78. Pelled, L., Eisenhardt, K., & Xin, K. (1999). Exploring the black box: An analysis of work group diversity, conflict, and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 1-28.
79. Phillips, K.A., Mannix, E.A., Neale, M.A., & Gruenfeld, D.H. (2004). Diverse groups and information sharing: The effects of congruent ties. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 497-510.
80. Przeworski, A. (1998). Deliberation and ideological domination. In J. Elster (Ed.), Deliberative democracy (pp. 140-160). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
81. Rawls, J. (1997). The idea of public reason revisited. University of Chicago Law Review, 64, 765-807.
82. Rose, M.R. (2009). Access to juries: Some puzzles regarding race and jury participation. In R. L. Sandefur (Ed.), Sociology of crime, law and deviance: Access to justice (Vol. 12, pp. 119-144). Bingly, England: Emerald.
83. Rubin, H.J., & Rubin, I.S. (2005). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
84. Ryfe, D. (2005). Does deliberative democracy work? Annual Review of Political Science, 8, 49-71.
85. Ryfe, D. (2006). Narrative and deliberation in small group forums. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 34, 72-93.
86. Sanders, L.M. (1997). Against deliberation. Political Theory, 25, 347-376.
87. Shaw, J.B., & Barrett-Power, E. (1998). The effects of diversity on small work group processes and performance. Human Relations, 51, 1307-1325.
88. Siu, A. (2009). Look who's talking: Examining social influence, opinion change, and argument quality in deliberation (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3343885).
89. Smith, D.E. (1987). The everyday world as problematic: A feminist sociology of knowledge. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.
90. Smith, G., & Wales, C. (2002). Citizens' juries and deliberative democracy. Political Studies, 48, 51-65.
91. Snijders, T., & Bosker, R. (1999). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. London, England: Sage.
92. Sommers, S.R. (2006). On racial diversity and group decision making: Identifying multiple effects of racial composition on jury deliberations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 597-612.
93. Staples, D.S., & Zhao, L. (2006). The effects of cultural diversity in virtual teams versus face-to-face teams. Group Decision and Negotiation, 15, 389-406.
94. Stewart, J., Zediker, K.E., & Black, L. (2004). Relationships among philosophies of dialogue. In R. Anderson, L. A. Baxter, & K. N. Cissna (Eds.), Dialogue: Theorizing difference in communication studies (pp. 21-38). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
95. Streich, G. (2002). Constructing multiracial democracy: To deliberate or not to deliberate? Constellations, 9, 127-153.
96. Sunstein, C. (2000). Deliberative trouble? Why groups go to extremes. Yale Law Journal, 110, 71-119.
97. Sunstein, C. (2002). The law of group polarization. Journal of Political Philosophy, 10, 175-195.
98. Thomas, D.C. (1999). Cultural diversity and work group effectiveness: An experimental study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30, 242-263.
99. Thomas, D.C., Ravlin, E.C., & Wallace, A. (1996). Effect of cultural diversity in work groups. In P. A. Bamberger, M. Erez & S. B. Bacharach (Eds.), Research in the sociology of organizations (Vol. 14, pp. 1-33). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
100. Timmerman, T. (2000). Racial diversity, age diversity, interdependence, and team performance. Small Group Research, 31, 592-606.
101. U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Population Projections. (2008). National population projections. Table 6. Percent of the projected population by race and Hispanic origin for the United States: 2010 to 2050. Retrieved fromhttp://www.census.gov/population/www./projections/summarytables.html.
102. Van Stokkom, B. (2005). Deliberative group dynamics: Power, status and affect in interactive policy making. Policy & Politics, 33, 387-409.
103. Watson, W.E., Johnson, L., & Zgourides, G.D. (2002). The influence of ethnic diversity on leadership, group process, and performance: An examination of learning teams. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 26, 1-16.
104. Watson, W.E., Kumar, K., & Michaelson, L.K. (1993). Cultural diversity's impact on interaction processes and performance: Comparing homogeneous and diverse task groups. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 590-602.
105. Williams, K., & O'Reilly, C. (1998). Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. In B. Staw & L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 20, pp. 77-140). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
106. Young, I.M. (1996). Communication and the other: Beyond deliberative democracy. In S. Benhabib (Ed.), Democracy and difference: Contesting the boundaries of the political (pp. 120-135). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.