- The purpose of this study was to test the notion that communication competence exists in the naturalistic judgment of communication behavior and to determine if behavioral outcomes are related to perceptions of competence.
The task-oriented small group was the context of behavioral judgment. The SYMLOG methodology was adapted to construct a measure of group discussion behaviors. The sample consisted of 184 respondents divided into 24 task groups.
The results of the study indicated that respondents judged the behavior of fellow group members, but judgment was inconsistent and thus unreliable. This led to the conclusion that communication competence judgment was not the focus of behavioral evaluation within the sample groups. Attitudes, rather than communication competence standards, were speculated to have formed the basis of respondents' standards of judgment. Analysis demonstrated that three patterns of judgment emerged. Conflictual groups broke into subgroups, who conferred complementary ratings on colleagues, and noncomplementary ratings on adversaries in opposing subgroups. Scapegoat groups isolated one or two members, who were given noncomplementary ratings. Collusive groups conferred complementary ratings to all group members in an effort to present a harmonious image of the group to others.
- Dissertation Note:
- Ph.D. The Pennsylvania State University 1987.
- Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 48-10, Section: A, page: 2489.
View MARC record | catkey: 13613206