Search results

Group communication as an area of intellectual interest had its beginnings in communication pedagogy with the goal of helping students to become more effective decision makers. A by-product is that group decision making became and remained a central research focus for many years. In the last 20 years, group communication research has facilitated the development of theory, research methods, and technology. Since 2000, group communication scholars have developed research lines on (1) virtual/digital team communication; (2) information sharing, hidden profile, and transactive memory systems; and (3) group participation. This chapter also explores the way in which group communication scholars have become connected with other disciplines that study groups and teams. The chapter concludes with current research methods trends, including interaction analysis, multilevel modeling, and qualitative methods.

Work groups and teams are common across all types of organizations. After providing both practical and scholarly definitions, this chapter examines work team processes common across groups (groupthink and bullying) that largely constrain group work both in and out of meetings. The chapter concludes with attention to work team evaluations (satisfaction with group process and continuity), meeting evaluations, and an overview of relational byproducts of task accomplishment.

Relationship development is required for any group working together. As members coordinate to accomplish tasks, some level of relationship is created through interaction between group members. However, most group development models focus on task accomplishment and may briefly address relational concerns. Communication research has furthered our understanding of group relationship development based on communicative changes that demonstrate emerging relationships among members. This chapter summarizes research on relationship development in groups. First, the chapter reviews research on group relational messages and relational outcomes. Second, the chapter outlines a framework for explaining group relationship development based on group interaction and development research. Four progressive stages (investigating, initiating, integrating, and interconnecting) are presented that show the communicative changes in group relationship development. Investigating focuses on testing boundaries and getting to know members, while initiating highlights how members become more direct about individual goals and handle conflict. During integrating, members shift to a group mind and tentatively form relationships with members, whereas interconnecting is a sense of we-ness among members and the use of shared group symbols. Future research directions for relational development and the four stages are presented at the end.

This volume is an in-depth analysis of group communication research. By considering processual, structural, methodological, and theoretical aspects of group communication, this handbook establishes the current state of group communication scholarship. Establishing this premise is important, as the handbook concludes with a look toward our future. In doing this, the handbook not only synthesizes and critiques the current state of the field but also creates a road map for future group communication research.

This chapter explores communication processes within online support groups. Online support group researchers have drawn upon a variety of theories in the decades of empirical research that has been conducted within this context. The chapter focuses on motivations for using online support groups, key theoretical frameworks that have been applied to the study of online support groups, supportive messages and communication processes within these groups, and the relationship between social support and health outcomes for online support group participants. The chapter concludes with several key limitations of previous work as well as a number of areas for theory development and future research studies.

Multicommunicating, the practice of using technology to carry on multiple near-simultaneous conversations, has been studied for almost two decades. This practice has new meaning today as more people carry a mobile device with them, remote working is prominent, and teams are looking for ways to be more productive. This chapter establishes why multicommunicating is an important communication concept that can help scholars interested in teams. After distinguishing multicommunicating from related concepts, such as multitasking, this chapter reviews key findings from literature and highlights the conundrum around whether this is a productive, acceptable practice or one that is rude and increases inefficiency. In conclusion, the proposed research agenda invites studies of multicommunicating in contexts where actual responses to the practice can be observed. Additionally, there are growing opportunities to include mobile communication and human–technology interactions in the multicommunicating mix.

This chapter provides a definition of group as used by group communication scholars or inferred by articles published by group communication scholars. The chapter considers group size, group identity, group member interdependence, group goal, and group structure as fundamental to groups. Additionally, the chapter examines the distinction between the use of the group and team labels, and the role of context in defining groups.

The term context has been utilized in scholarship to reference a variety of phenomena and settings across the communication discipline and field of group communication. This chapter examines journal articles and book chapters to explore how the word context is used in group communication scholarship. The hope is that by considering how context is used in academic writing, scholars may find ways to better specify the influences and features of group communication studies. If not, the term context may continue to be used in reference to almost anything, which means the word may be unhelpful or prevent meaningful conversations across journal articles.

The chapter defines practice approaches and considers the several ways the concept of practice has functioned in the academic and practitioner literatures. As “practice” has been a minor term in prior group studies, the next section argues that foregrounding practice in future group research is a promising direction. Not only does a practice approach privilege interactional messages, which are at the heart of communication, but foregrounding practices can help actual groups function better. A practice approach to group research can accomplish three things: (1) offer guidance about how to design and implement sensitive activities; (2) identify contextual aspects of dispersed practices such as giving information; and (3) make visible how key group norms are interactionally accomplished in nonstraightforward ways. Examples of each of these activities are illustrated.

In this chapter, we examine social influence in groups by considering three distinct aspects of the complex process: the force, the source, and the message. The force instantiates the internal drivers that are activated to change group members' public and private positions. These drivers relate to a desire for accuracy (i.e., informational influence) or a desire for group harmony (i.e., normative influence). The source of social influence includes influence attempts from a majority or a minority of group members. Finally, influence messages can contain evidence in support of a position (i.e., informational statements) or group member preferences (i.e., normative statements). These aspects are frequently conflated with informational influence strongly linked to minorities and informational statements and normative influence similarly linked to majorities and normative statements. We review research consistent with this position. However, we argue that each aspect should be considered separately. Thus, we also explore how majorities and normative statements generate informational influence and how minorities and informational statements lead to normative influence.