Modified Interaction Process Analysis as a Macroergonomic Method of Analyzing Communication Patterns in Construction

REFERENCES

• Abadi M. (2005). Issues and challenges in communication wIthin design teams in the construction industry. (PhD Thesis). The University of Manchester, Manchester, England.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, C. M., Riddle, B. L., & Martin, M. M. (1999). Socialization processes in groups. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), The handbook of group communication theory and research. London, England: Sage Publication.
   Google Scholar
• Armstrong, S. J., & Priola, V. (2001). Individual differences in cognitive style and their effects on task and social orientations of self-managed work teams. Small Group Research, 32(3), 283–312. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/104649640103200302
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Axley, S. (1984). Managerial and organizational communication in terms of the conduit metaphor. Academy of Management Review, 9, 428–437.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Bales, R. F. (1953). The equilibrium problem in small groups. In T. Parsons, R. F. Bales, & E. A. Snils (Eds.), Working papers in the theory of action (pp. 111–163). New York, NY: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bales, R. F. (1970). Personality and interpersonal behaviour. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
   Google Scholar
• Bales, R. F. (1976). Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bateman, R., & Gottman, J. M. (1997). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bechky, B. A. (2006). Gaffers, gifers, and grips: Role-based coordination in temporary organizations. Organization Science, 14(3), 312–330. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.14.3.312.15162
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bechky, B. A. (2003). Sharing meaning across occupational communities: The transformation of understanding on a production floor. Organization Science, 17(1), 3–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1050.0149
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck, S. J. (2008). The communicative creation of meetings: An interaction analysis of meeting thought units and meeting activities in three natural meeting contexts. (PhD Dissertation). University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Bell, L. (2001). Patterns of interaction in multidisciplinary child protection teams in New Jersey. Child Abuse and Neglect, 25, 65–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0145-2134(00)00224-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bellamy, T., Williams, A., Sher, W., Sherratt, S., & Gameson, R. (2005). Design communication: Issues confronting both co-located and virtual teams. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 21st Conference of the Association of Researchers in Construction Management, SOAS, London, England.
   Google Scholar
• Blake, R. R., & Moulton, J. S. (1964). The manangerial grid. Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing Co.
   Google Scholar
• Breslau, N., Peterson, E. L., & Schultz, L. R. (2008). A second look at prior trauma and the posttraumatic stress disorder effects of subsequent trauma: A prospective epidemiological study. Archives of General Psychiatry, 65(4), 431–437. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.65.4.431
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brownell, H., Pincus, D., Blum, A., Rehak, A., & Winner, E. (1997). The effects of right hemisphere brain damage on patients. Brain and Language, 57, 60–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/brln.1997.1834
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, R. A. (1991). Studying interpersonal communication, the research experience. London, England: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Cline, R. J. W. (1994). Groupthing and the Watergate cover-up: The illusion of unanimity. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), Group communication in context: Studies of natural groups (pp.199–223). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Dainty, A., Moore, D., & Murray, M. (2006). Communication in construction: Theory and practice. New York, NY: Taylor and Francis.
   Google Scholar
• den-Otter, A. (2005). Design team communication and performance using a project website. (PhD Dissertation). Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• Emmitt, S. (1997). The diffusion of innovations in the building industry. (PhD). University of Manchester, Manchester.
   Google Scholar
• Emmitt, S., & Gorse, C. A. (1998). Information management the heart of the design agenda. The International Journal of Architectural Management, Practice and Research, 14, 112–120.
   Google Scholar
• Emmitt, S., & Gorse, C. A. (2003). Construction communication. Oxford, England: Blackwell Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Emmitt, S., & Gorse, C. A. (2007). Communication in construction teams. Oxford, England: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Fahy, P. J. (2006). Online and face-to-face group interaction processes compared using Bales' interaction process analysis (IPA). European Journal of Open, Distance, and E-Learning. Retrieved from http://www.eurodl.org/?p=archives&year=2006&halfyear=1&article=216
   Google Scholar
• Fleiss, J. L. (1981). Statistical methods for rates and proportions. New York, NY, John Wiley and Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Fryer, B., Egbu, C., Ellis, R., & Gorse, C. (2004). The practice of construction management. Oxford, England: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Gameson, R. N. (1992). An investigation into the interaction between potential building clients and construction professionals. (PhD Dissertation). University of Reading, Reading, England.
   Google Scholar
• Gorse, C. A. (2002). Effective interpersonal communication and group interaction during construction management and design team meetings. (PhD). University of Leicester, Leicester, England.
   Google Scholar
• Gorse, C. A., & Emmitt, S. (2005). Small group interaction research methods. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the International Conference of Architectural Management, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark.
   Google Scholar
• Gorse, C. A., & Emmitt, S. (2007). Communication behaviour during management and design team meetings: A comparison of group interaction. Construction Management and Economics, 25(11), 1195–1211. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01446190701567413
   Google Scholar
• Hill, C. J. (1995). Communication on construction sites. Paper presented at the Association of Researchers in Construction Management, 11th Annual Conference, University of York, York, England.
   Google Scholar
• Hugill, D. (1999). Negotiating access: Presenting a credible project. Paper presented at the Proceedings of 15th Annual ARCOM Conference, Liverpool John Moores University. Liverpool, England.
   Google Scholar
• Hugill, D. (2001). An examination of project management team meetings in railway construction. (PhD Dissertation). University of Manchester, Manchester, England.
   Google Scholar
• Keyton, J. (1999). Relational communication in groups. In L. R. Frey, D. S. Gouran, & M. S. Poole (Eds.), The handbook of group communication theory & research (pp. 192–222). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Keyton, J. (2003). Observing group interaction. In R. Y. Hirokawa, R. S. Cathcart, L. A. Samovar, & L. D. Henman (Eds.), Small group communication: Theory and practices. Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury.
   Google Scholar
• Kreiner, K. (1976). The site organization: A study of social relationships on construction sites. (PhD Dissertation). Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark.
   Google Scholar
• Loosemore, M. (1996). Crisis management in building projects: A longitudinal investigation of communication behavior and patterns within a grounded framework. (PhD). University of Reading, Reading, England.
   Google Scholar
• Loosemore, M. (1998). The methodological challenges posed by the confrontational nature of the construction industry. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 3(5), 285–294. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb021082
   Google Scholar
• Macomber, H. (2004). Securing reliable promises on projects: A guide to developing a new practice. Retrieved from http://weblog.halmacomber.com
   Google Scholar
• Macomber, H., & Howell, G. (2001). Reforming project management: The role of reliable promising. Denver, CO: Lean Construction Institute's 2001 Implementation Workshop.
   Google Scholar
• McLeod, P. L., & Kettner-Polley, R. B. (2004). Contributions of psychodynamic theories to understanding small groups. Journal of Small Group Research, 35(3), 333–361. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1046496404264973
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norusis, M. J (2000). SPSS 10.0, guide to data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ, Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• O'Keefe, D. J. (2004). The unity of argument across methodological divides. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Interaction Communication Association, New Orleans, LA, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Pietroforte, R. (1992). Communication and information in the building delivery process. (PhD Thesis). Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Poole, M. S., Keyton, J., & Frey, L. R. (1999). Group communication methodology: Issues and considerations. In L. R. Frey, D. S. Gouran, & M. S. Poole (Eds.), The handbook of group communication theory and research (pp. 92–112). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Rashid, F., & Edmondson, A. C. (2011). Risky trust: How multi-entity teams develop trust in a high risk endeavor. Harvard Business School Technology & Operations Mgt. Unit Working Paper (11–089).
   Google Scholar
• Robson, C. (2002). Real world research: A resource for social scientists and practitioner-researchers. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Trujillo, N. (1986). Toward a taxonomy of small group interaction coding schemes. Small Group Research, 17, 371–394. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/104649648601700401
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wallace, W. A. (1987). The influence of design team communication content upon the architectural decision making process in the pre-contract design stages. (PhD Dissertation). Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, Scotland.
   Google Scholar