Abstract
Zusammenfassung: In Experimenten mit Kleingruppen fallen Daten auf Person- und Gruppenebene an, die ebenenspezifische Konstrukte und Indikatoren erfordern. Bei einer Analyse auf Person- oder Gruppenebene muss berücksichtigt werden, dass die anfallenden Daten oft nicht unabhängig sind, wobei zugleich die Interdependenz ein sinnvoller und wichtiger Gegenstand der Analyse von Gruppenprozessen ist. In den letzten Jahren sind vermehrt Vorschläge sowohl zur Konzeptualisierung ebenenspezifischer Indikatoren als auch zur statistischen Analyse von Daten aus Experimenten mit interagierenden Gruppen gemacht worden. Am Beispiel eines Experiments zum computer-mediierten Informationsaustausch und zur Informationsintegration in Gruppen wird gezeigt, wie eine inhaltlich sinnvolle Interdependenz von Individuum und Gruppe modelliert und überprüft werden kann. Darüber hinaus werden die Möglichkeiten von Analyseverfahren mit Datenaggregierung oder mit statistischen Methoden, wie etwa gemischten Modellen, diskutiert.
Abstract: In experiments conducted with small groups data are gathered on individual and group level. These data require level specific constructs and indicators. When analysing data on individual or group level the fact must be taken into account that oftentimes the gathered data are non-independent. However, non-independence is a meaningful and important subject of the analysis of group processes. Within the past few years several proposals were made for conceptualising the level-specific constructs as well as for the analysis of the data collected in small group experiments. A study on computer-mediated information exchange and information integration in groups is used to show how the meaningful interdependence of the individual and the group can be modelled and examined. Further, possibilities of analysing approaches using data aggregation or improved statistical methods such as mixed models are discussed.
References
Bliese, P.D. , Hanges, P.J. (2004). Being both too liberal and too conservative: The perils of treating grouped data as though they were independent.. Organizational Research Methods, 4, 400– 417 .Bonito, J.A. (2002). The analysis of participation in small groups: Methodological and conceptual issues related to interdependence.. Small Group Research, 33, 412– 438 .Bonito, J.A. (2004). Shared cognition and participation in small groups: Similarity of member prototypes.. Communication Research, 31, 704– 730 .Diehl, M. , Stroebe, W. (1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle.. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 497– 509 .Dennis, A.R. (1996). Information exchange in group decision making: You can lead a group to information, but you can't make it think.. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 20, 433– 458 .Greitemeyer, T., , Schulz-Hardt, S. , Frey, D. (2003). Präferenzkonsistenz und Geteiltheit von Information als Einflussfaktoren auf Informationsbewertung und intendiertes Diskussionsverhalten bei Gruppenentscheidungen.. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 34, 9– 23 .Heninger, W.G., , Dennis, A.R. , Hilmer, K.M. (2003). Cognitive interference in computer-mediated group decision making. TR142-1 . Indiana University. [ www.indiana.edu/~isdept/research/workingpapers.html] .Hollingshead, A.B. , McGrath, J.E. (1995). Computer-assisted groups: A critical review of the empirical research. In R.A. Guzzo & E. Salas (Eds), Team reflectiveness and decision making in organizations (pp. 46-78). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass .Hoyle, R.H., , Georgesen, J.C. , Webster, J.M. (2001). Analyzing data from individuals in groups: The past, the present, and the future.. Group Dynamics, 5, 41– 47 .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 and personality psychology (pp. 451-477). New York: Cambridge University Press .Kenny, D.A. , Judd, C.M. (1986). Consequences of violating the independence assumption in analysis of variance.. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 422– 431 .Kenny, D.A., , Kashy, D.A. , Bolger, N. (1998). Data analysis in social psychology. In D.T. Gilbert, S.T. Fiske & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 233-265). New York, US: McGraw-Hill .Kenny, D.A., , Mannetti, L., , Pierro, A., , Livi, S. , Kashy, D.A. (2002). Statistical analysis of data from small group.. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 126– 137 .Kozlowski, S.W.J. , Klein, K.J. (2000). A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent processes. In K.J. Klein & S.W.J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations (pp. 3-90). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc .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 and Applied Social Psychology, 24, 145– 155 .Laus, F.O. (o.J.). Kollabs . [ www-psy.uni-muenster.de/inst3/AEKeil/laus/kollabs-doc/interna.html] .Leyland, A.H. (2004). A review of multilevel modeling in SPSS . [ multilevel.ioe.ac.uk/softrev/reviewspss.pdf] .Littell, R.C., , Milliken, G.A., , Stroup, W.W. , Wolfinger, R.D. (1996). SAS System for Mixed Models . SAS Institute, Inc .Maindonald, J.H. , Braun, W.J. (2003). Data analysis and graphics using R - an example-based approach . Cambridge University Press .Nezlek, J.B. , Zyzniewski, L.E. (1998). Using hierarchical linear modeling to analyze grouped data.. Group Dynamics, 2, 313– 320 .Pinheiro, J. , Bates, D.M. (2000). Linear and nonlinear mixed-effects models in S and S-Plus . New York: Springer .Piontkowski, U., , Keil, W., , Hartmann, J. , Münzer, S. (2005). Voraussetzungen und Möglichkeiten der Wissensintegration in computer-mediierten Gruppen. In E. Kruse, K. Küchler & M. Kuhl. (Hg.), “Unbegrenztes Lernen - Lernen über Grenzen” (S. 153-165). Münster: Lit .Rashbash, J. (2004). Mixed models in SPSS.. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 57, 189– 190 .Snijders, T. (2004, February). Introduction to Multilevel Analysis . ICS Department of Sociology, University of Groningen .Steiner, I.D. (1972). Group process and productivity . New York: Academic Press .Stevens, J. (2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences . Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum .Straus, S.G. (1996). Getting a clue: The effects of communication media and information distribution on participation and performance in computer-mediated and face-to-face groups.. Small Group Research, 27, 115– 142 .Strijbos, J.W., , Martens, R.L. , Jochems, W.M.G. , Broers, N.J. (2001). The effect of functional roles on group efficiency: Using multilevel modeling and content analysis to investigate computer-supported collaboration in small groups.. Small Group Research, 35, 195– 229 .Stroebe, W. , Nijstad, B.A. (2004). Warum Brainstorming in Gruppen Kreativität vermindert: Eine kognitive Theorie der Leistungsverluste beim Brainstorming.. Psychologische Rundschau, 55, 2– 10 .Tesluk, P.E., , Zaccaro, S., , Marks, M. , Mathieu, J. (1997). Task and aggregation issues in the analysis and assessment of team performance. In M. Brannick & E. Salas (Eds.), Assessment and measurement of team performance: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 197-226). Mahwah, NJ: LEA .Walczuch, R.M. , Watson, R.T. (2001). Analyzing Group Data in MIS Research: Including the Effect of the Group.. Group Decision and Negotiation, 10, 83– 94 .Wegner, D.M. (1995). A computer network model of human transactive memory.. Social Cognition, 13, 319– 339 .Witte, E. , Engelhardt, G. (2003). Gruppenentscheidungen bei Hidden Profiles. “Shared view”-effekt oder kollektiver “primacy”-effekt? Empirische Ergebnisse und theoretische Anmerkungen . HAFOS Nr. 47, Psychologisches Institut I der Universität Hamburg .
