Page 369 - Effective group discussion theory and practice by Adams, Katherine H. Brilhart, John K. Galanes, Gloria J

352 Chapter 12

6. Beatrice Schultz, Sandra M. Ketrow, and Daphne completing a simplified SYMLOG-like diagram
M. Urban, “Improving Decision Quality in the so that students can have a better idea of what
Small Group: The Role of the Reminder,” Small SYMLOG does.
Group Research, 26 (November 1995): 521–41. 10. Lynne Kelly and Robert L. Duran note that, in
7. Greenbaum et al., “Evaluation of Problem-Solving some recent writings, Bales refers to the third
Groups.” dimension as acceptance versus nonacceptance of
8. Ibid., 137–39, 145. authority, a designation that seems more appropri-
9. Robert F. Bales and Stephen P. Cohen, SYMLOG: ate when assessing group member values as
A System for the Multiple Level Observation of opposed to behaviors; in “SYMLOG: Theory and
Groups (New York: Free Press, 1979). Space con- Measurement of Small Group Interaction,” Small
straints prevent including a complete description Group Communication: A Reader, 6th ed., eds.
of SYMLOG theory and methodology here; we Robert S. Cathcart and Larry A. Samovar
refer readers who are interested in learning to con- (Dubuque, IA: Wm. C. Brown, 992): 220–33.
struct a complete SYMLOG diagram for their 11. Carolyn M. Anderson, Matthew M. Martin, and
groups to the following workbook: R. F. Bales, Bruce L. Riddle, “Small Group Relational
SYMLOG Case Study Kit (New York: Free Press, Satisfaction Scale: Development, Reliability, and
1980). The Instructor’s Manual for this text Validity,” Communication Studies, 52 (Fall 2001):
includes instructions and necessary forms for 220–33.

gal37018_ch12_321_352.indd 352 3/28/18 12:38 PM