Argument structures in decision‐making groups

D. Canary, Brent Brossmann, D. Seibold
{"title":"Argument structures in decision‐making groups","authors":"D. Canary, Brent Brossmann, D. Seibold","doi":"10.1080/10417948709372710","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Within the context of a continuing research program on argument and group decision‐making, this study reports refinements in an existing coding scheme of interpersonal argument, and an analysis of argument structures in consensus and dissensus groups. Four argument structures were identified: simple, compound, eroded, and convergent. In addition, consensus groups had a greater proportion of convergent arguments than did dissensus groups. Discussion focuses on future directions for interpersonal and small‐group argument research.","PeriodicalId":234061,"journal":{"name":"Southern Speech Communication Journal","volume":"62 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1987-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"58","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Southern Speech Communication Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10417948709372710","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 58

Abstract

Within the context of a continuing research program on argument and group decision‐making, this study reports refinements in an existing coding scheme of interpersonal argument, and an analysis of argument structures in consensus and dissensus groups. Four argument structures were identified: simple, compound, eroded, and convergent. In addition, consensus groups had a greater proportion of convergent arguments than did dissensus groups. Discussion focuses on future directions for interpersonal and small‐group argument research.
决策小组中的论证结构
在一个关于争论和群体决策的持续研究项目的背景下,本研究报告了现有的人际争论编码方案的改进,并分析了共识群体和非共识群体的争论结构。确定了四种论证结构:简单、复合、侵蚀和收敛。此外,达成共识的群体比持不同意见的群体有更大比例的趋同论点。讨论的重点是人际和小群体争论研究的未来方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信