Interaction Process Analysis (IPA)

doi:10.1017/9781316286302.024

23 - Interaction Process Analysis (IPA)

from General Group Process Systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 July 2018

Edited by

Margarete Boos and

Elisabeth Brauner: Affiliation:
Brooklyn College, City University of New York
Margarete Boos: Affiliation:
University of Göttingen
Michaela Kolbe: Affiliation:
ETH Zürich

Book contents

Get access

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.

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'

Type: Chapter
Information: The Cambridge Handbook of Group Interaction Analysis , pp. 441 - 450

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316286302.024 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2018

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Primary Sources

Bales, R. F. (1950b). Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar

Secondary Sources

Allen, W. R., Comerford, R. A., & Ruhe, J. A. (1989). Factor analytic study of Bales’ Interaction Process Analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 49, 701–707. doi:10.1177/001316448904900325CrossRef Google Scholar

Bales, R. F. (1950a). A set of categories for the analysis of small group interaction. American Sociological Review, 15, 257–263.CrossRef Google Scholar

Bales, R. F., & Cohen, S. P. (1979). SYMLOG: A system for the multiple level observation of groups. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar

Bales, R. F., & Strodtbeck, F. L. (1951). Phases in group problem-solving. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 44, 485–495.CrossRef Google Scholar

Beck, D., & Fisch, R. (2000). Argumentation and emotional processes in group decision-making: Illustration of a multilevel interaction process analysis approach. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 3, 183–201. doi:10.1177/1368430200003002005CrossRef Google Scholar

Beck, S. J., & Keyton, J. (2009). Perceiving strategic meeting interaction. Small Group Research, 40, 223–246. doi:10.1177/1046496408330084CrossRef Google Scholar

Beck, S. J., & Keyton, J. (2012). Team cognition, communication, and message interdependence. In Salas, E., Fiore, S. F., & Letsky, M. (Eds.), Theories of team cognition: Cross-disciplinary perspectives (pp. 471–494). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar

Beck, S. J., & Keyton, J. (2014). Facilitating social support: Member-leader communication in a breast cancer support group. Cancer Nursing, 37, E36–43. doi:10.1097/NCC.0b013e3182813829CrossRef Google Scholar

Beck, S. J., Paskewitz, E. A., Anderson, W. A., Bourdeaux, , & Currie-Mueller, J. (2017). The task and relational dimensions of online social support. Health Communication, 32, 347–355. doi:10.1080/10410236.2016.1138383CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Choi, K. S., Im, I., & Hofstede, G. J. (2016). A cross-cultural comparative analysis of small group collaboration using mobile twitter. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 308–318. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.043CrossRef Google Scholar

Dennis, M. R., Kunkel, A., & Keyton, J. (2008). Problematic integration theory, appraisal theory, and the Bosom Buddies Breast Cancer Support Group. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 36, 415–436. doi:10.1080/00909880802094315CrossRef Google Scholar

Ervin, J., Bonito, J., & Keyton, J. (2017). Convergence of intrapersonal and interpersonal processes across group meetings. Communication Monographs, 84, 200–220. doi:10.1080/03637751.2016.1185136CrossRef Google Scholar

Fahy, , P. (2005). Online and face-to-face group interaction processes compared using Bales’ Interaction Process Analysis (IPA). Retrieved February 14, 2018, from www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2006/Patrick_J_Fahy.htm Google Scholar

Fisher, B. A. (1970). Decision emergence: Phases in group decision‐making. Speech Monographs, 7, 53–66. doi:10.1080/03637757009375649.CrossRef Google Scholar

Guo, H., & Goh, D.H-L. (2014). ‘‘I Have AIDS”: Content analysis of postings in HIV/AIDS support group on a Chinese microblog, 34, 219–226. Retrieved February 14, 2018, from www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2006/Patrick_J_Fahyhtm.Google Scholar

Hackman, J. R. (1975). Group tasks, group interaction process, and group performance effectiveness: A review and proposed integration. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 8, 45–99. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60248-8CrossRef Google Scholar

Hiltz, S. R., Johnson, K., & Turoff, M. (1986). Experiments in group decision making communication process and outcome in face-to-face versus computerized conferences. Human Communication Research, 13, 225–252 doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1986.tb00104.xCrossRef Google Scholar

Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4, 39–103.CrossRef Google Scholar

Keyton, J. (1997). Coding communication in decision-making groups: Assessing effective and ineffective process. In Frey, L. R. & Barge, J. K. (Eds.), Managing group life: Communication in decision-making groups (pp. 236–269). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar

Keyton, J. (2003). Observing group interaction. In Hirokawa, R. Y., Cathcart, R. S., Samovar, L. A., & Henman, L. D., Small group communication: Theory and practice (8th edn., pp. 256–266). Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury.Google Scholar

Keyton, J., & Beck, S. J. (2009). The influential role of relational messages in group interaction. Group Dynamics, 13, 14–30. doi:10.1037/a0013495CrossRef Google Scholar

Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd edn.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Lewin, K. (1939). Field theory and experiment in social psychology. American Journal of Sociology, 44, 868–896. doi:10.1086/218177CrossRef Google Scholar

Li, Y., Rau, P-L. P., Li, H., & Maedche, A. (2017). Effects of a dyad’s cultural intelligence on global virtual collaboration. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 60, 56–75. doi:10.1109/TPC.2016.2632842.CrossRef Google Scholar

Lofstrand, P., & Zakrisson, I. (2014). Competitive versus non-competitive goals in group decision-making. Small Group Research, 45, 451–464. doi:10.1177/1046496414532954CrossRef Google Scholar

Mabry, E. A. (1975). An instrument for assessing content themes in group interaction. Speech Monographs, 42, 191–297. doi:10.1080/03637757509375904CrossRef Google Scholar

Maloney-Krichmar, D., & Preece, J. (2002). The meaning of an online health community in the lives of its members: Roles, relationships and group dynamics. Published in the proceedings of the IEEE 2002 International Symposium on Technology and Society: Social Implications of Information and Communication Technology. doi:10.1109/ISTAS.2002.1013791CrossRef Google Scholar

Maloney-Krichmar, D., & Preece, J. (2005). Multilevel analysis of sociability, usability, and community dynamics in an online health community. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 12, 201–232. doi:10.1145/1067860.1067864CrossRef Google Scholar

Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Pena, J., & Hancock, J. T. (2006). An analysis of socioemotional and task communication in online multiplayer video games. Communication Research, 33, 92–109. doi:10.1177/0093650205283103CrossRef Google Scholar

Poole, M. S., & Folger, J. P. (1981). A method for establishing the representational validity of interaction coding systems: Do we see what they see? Human Communication Research, 8, 26–42. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1981.tb00654.xCrossRef Google Scholar

Rourke, L., & Anderson, T. (2004). Validity in quantitative content analysis. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(1), 5–18.CrossRef Google Scholar