Argument and Group Decision-Making: An Interactional Test of Persuasive Arguments Theory and an Alternative Structurational Perspective
This dissertation sought to answer the question: How do members' arguments concerning decision choices affect the practices and outcomes (especially polarization/choice shifts) of decision-making interaction? Three objectives imperative to answering that question were accomplished in this investigation. First, following explication of a historical foundation and context in Chapter One, Chapter Two proposed and delineated a metatheoretical framework useful for distinguishing and interpreting prominent contemporary research programs on interpersonal/group argument. This framework, and its distinction between cognitive-informational (CI) and social-interactional (SI) perspectives on argument, was utilized to contrast several noninteractional and interactional accounts of interpersonal/group argument.
University of Illinois - Urbana-Champaign
Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign