Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Group Interaction Analysis
- The Cambridge Handbook of Group Interaction Analysis
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Editors’ Preface
- Organization of This Handbook
- How to Work with This Handbook
- Part I Background and Theory
- Part II Application Areas of Interaction Analysis
- Part III Methodology and Procedures of Interaction Analysis
- Part IV Data Analysis and Data Presentation
- Part V Coding Schemes for Interaction Research
- General Group Process Systems
- Argument, Conflict, and Negotiations
- 25 ARGUMENT
- 26 Group Working Relationships Coding System
- 27 Micro-Conflict Coding Scheme
- 28 OFFER
- 29 VTCS
- Coordination and Coherence
- Cognition and Metacognition
- Personality and Team Behavior
- Roles and Relationships
- Appendix
- Index
- References
27 - Micro-Conflict Coding Scheme
from Argument, Conflict, and Negotiations
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 July 2018
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Group Interaction Analysis
- The Cambridge Handbook of Group Interaction Analysis
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Editors’ Preface
- Organization of This Handbook
- How to Work with This Handbook
- Part I Background and Theory
- Part II Application Areas of Interaction Analysis
- Part III Methodology and Procedures of Interaction Analysis
- Part IV Data Analysis and Data Presentation
- Part V Coding Schemes for Interaction Research
- General Group Process Systems
- Argument, Conflict, and Negotiations
- 25 ARGUMENT
- 26 Group Working Relationships Coding System
- 27 Micro-Conflict Coding Scheme
- 28 OFFER
- 29 VTCS
- Coordination and Coherence
- Cognition and Metacognition
- Personality and Team Behavior
- Roles and Relationships
- Appendix
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Group Interaction Analysis , pp. 472 - 482Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2018
References
Primary Sources
Paletz, S. B. F., Schunn, C. D., & Kim, K. H. (2011). Conflict under the microscope: Micro-conflicts in naturalistic team discussions. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 4, 314–351. doi:10.1111/j.1750-4716.2011.00085.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paletz, S. B. F., Chan, J., & Schunn, C. D. (2017). The dynamics of micro-conflicts and uncertainty in successful and unsuccessful design teams. Design Studies, 50, 39–69. doi:10.1016/j.destud.2017.02.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paletz, S. B. F., Sumer, A., & Miron-Spektor, E. (2017). Psychological factors surrounding disagreement in multicultural design team meetings. CoDesign. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2017.1378685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Secondary Sources
Amason, A. (1996). Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 123–143. doi:10.2307/256633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakeman, R., Quera, V., McArthur, D., & Robinson, B. F. (1997). Detecting sequential patterns and determining their reliability with fallible observers. Psychological Methods, 2, 357–370. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.2.4.357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bales, R. F. (1951). Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley Press.Google Scholar
Barki, H., & Hartwick, J. (2004). Conceptualizing the construct of interpersonal conflict. International Journal of Conflict Management, 15, 216–244. doi:10.1108/eb022913CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bearman, C. R., Paletz, S. B. F., Orasanu, J., & Thomas, M. J. W. (2010). The breakdown of coordinated decision making in distributed systems. Human Factors, 52, 173–188. doi:10.1177/0018720810372104CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bendersky, C., Bear, J., Behfar, K. J., Weingart, L. R., Todorova, G., & Jehn, K. A. (2014). Identifying gaps between the conceptualization of conflict and its measurement. In Ashkanasy, N., Ayoko, O., & Jehn, K. A. (Eds.), Handbook of research in conflict management (pp. 79–89). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. doi:10.4337/9781781006948Google Scholar
Chan, J., Paletz, S. B. F., & Schunn, C. D. (2012). Analogy as a strategy for supporting complex problem solving under uncertainty. Memory and Cognition, 40, 1352–1365. doi:10.3758/s13421-012-0227-zCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analysis of verbal data: A practical guide. Journal of Learning Sciences, 6, 271–315. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls0603_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, B. T., & Schunn, C. D. (2009). The role and impact of mental simulation in design. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 327–344. doi:10.1002/acp.1464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coan, J. A., & Gottman, J. M. (2007). The Specific Affect (SPAFF) coding system. In Coan, J. A. & Allen, J. J. B. (Eds.) Handbook of emotion elicitation and assessment (pp. 106–123), New York, NY: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gottman, J. M., & Notarius, C. I. (2000). Decade review: Observing marital interaction. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 927–947. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00927.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jehn, K. A. (1997). A qualitative analysis of conflict types and dimensions in organizational groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 530–557. doi:10.2307/2393737CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jehn, K. A., & Bendersky, C. (2003). Intragroup conflict in organizations: A contingency perspective on the conflict-outcome relationship. Research in Organizational Behavior, 25, 187–242. doi:10.1016/s0191-3085(03)25005-xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jehn, K. A., & Mannix, E. A. (2001). The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal study of intragroup conflict and group performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 238–251. doi:10.2307/3069453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kauffeld, S. (2006). Self-directed work groups and team competence. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 79, 1–21. doi:10.1348/096317905X53237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kauffeld, S., & Lehmann-Willenbrock, N. (2012). Meetings matter: Effects of team meetings on team and organizational success. Small Group Research, 43, 130–158. doi:10.1177/1046496411429599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, T., & Poole, M. S. (2000). Do conflict management styles affect group decision making? Evidence from a longitudinal field study. Human Communication Research, 26, 558–590. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2000.tb00769.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174. doi:10.2307/2529310CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Neff, R., Jankovic, S., Wolf, M., Tacey, P., Paletz, S. B. F., & Schunn, C. D. (2012). Affect and conflict in student engineering teams. Poster presented at the International Society for the Psychology of Science and Technology Conference, Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
Paletz, S. B. F., Chan, J., & Schunn, C. D. (2016). Uncovering uncertainty through disagreement. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 30, 387–400. doi:10.1002/acp.3213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paletz, S. B. F., Schunn, C. D., & Kim, K. H. (2013). The interplay of conflict and analogy in multidisciplinary teams. Cognition, 126, 1–19. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2012.07.020CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pennebaker, J. W., Boyd, R. L., Jordan, K., & Blackburn, K. (2015). The development and psychometric properties of LIWC2015. Austin, TX: University of Texas at Austin. Retrieved February 14, 2018, from http://liwc.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/LIWC2015_LanguageManual.pdf. doi:10.15781/T29G6Z.Google Scholar
Smith, C. P. (2000). Content analysis and narrative analysis. In Reis, H. T. & Judd, C. M. (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology (pp. 313–335). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Srikanth, K., Harvey, S., & Peterson, R. (2016). A dynamic perspective on diverse teams: Moving from the dual-process model to a dynamic coordination-based model of diverse team performance. Academy of Management Annals, 10, 453–493. doi:10.1080/19416520.2016.1120973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Staw, B. M. (1975). Attribution of the ‘‘causes’’ of performance: A general alternative interpretation of cross-sectional research on organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 13, 414–432. doi:10.1016/0030-5073(75)90060-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Todorova, G., Bear, J. B., & Weingart, L. R. (2014). Can conflict be energizing? A study of task conflict, positive emotions, and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99, 451–467. doi:10.1037/a0035134CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vuchinich, S. (1987). Starting and stopping spontaneous family conflicts. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 49, 591–601. doi:10.2307/352204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weingart, L. R., Behfar, K. J., Bendersky, C., Todorova, G., & Jehn, K. A. (2015). The directness and oppositional intensity of conflict expression. Academy of Management Review, 40, 235–262. doi:10.5465/amr.2013-0124CrossRefGoogle Scholar