Two Types of Disagreement in Group Discussions of Japanese Undergraduates |
| |
Authors: | Etsuo Mizukami Ikuyo Morimoto Kana Suzuki Hiroko Otsuka Hideki Kashioka Satoshi Nakamura |
| |
Institution: | (1) National Institute of Information and Communications Technology, 3-5, Hikaridai, Seika-cho, Soraku-gun, Kyoto 619-0289, Japan;(2) Present address: Advanced Telecommunications Research Institute International, 2-2-2 Hikaridai Keihanna Science City, Kyoto 619-0288, Japan;(3) Kwansei Gakuin University, 1-155, Uegahara Ichiban-cho, Nishinomiya, Hyogo 662-8501, Japan;(4) The Institute of Behavioral Science, 2-9, Ichigaya Hommura-cho, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 162-0845, Japan |
| |
Abstract: | In this study we investigated the nature of disagreement, which is a necessary component of a good discussion. We obtained
27 group discussion scenes by Japanese undergraduates that were evaluated by two ways: impression rating and ranking. As a
result of factor analysis for the impression rating data, five factors were extracted: activeness, multidirection and unification
of discussion, relationships of participants, development and sophistication of discussion, and sincerity of the participants, and each factor scores of each scene was simultaneously calculated. Each scene’s rank score was also calculated by relative
comparisons. A significant positive correlation was found between the mean factor and the rank scores except for Factor 3
(relationships of participants). To consider the reason for the difference relating to Factor 3’s score, we scrutinized the discussion process of four scenes
of the different patterns of the factor and rank scores. From the analysis of conversations, we suggested that this difference
reflected ways of disagreement. By introducing a probative discourse tags for discussion (pDTD), we reasoned that the frequency
of disagreement made Factor 3’s score negative and the absence of the second part of adjacency pairs made the rank score worse.
The explicit speech and actions of blame such as emotional and aggressive expression, and neglect of treatment for the minor
opinion made also the discussion unfair, but we think that these behaviors might erupt from the ground made by the accumulated
implicit behaviors such as the absence of the second part. We finally concluded that the criticism type of disagreement increased the rank scores, and its censure type produced lower results, and the proper ways of disagreement in group discussions were discussed. |
| |
Keywords: | Group discussions Disagreement Factor scores Rank scores Discourse tags for discussion |
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|