Effects of Group Discussion Attachment Styles and Facilitation on the Quality of Deliberation
Abstract
In this paper, we analyse the effects of group discussion
attachment styles and their influence in interactions
involving facilitation on the quality of the discussion process (according to deliberative prerequisites, such as equal participation, argumentation and respect). We conducted 26 deliberative discussions with 226 teachers from 13 primary schools on the topic of school discipline measures. The discussions, each including 7–12 participants, lasted 90 minutes; half of them were professionally facilitated in line with the deliberative criteria and half of them were non-facilitated. The higher an individual's group discussion attachment anxiety, the lower their self-assessment of the deliberative functioning and
assessment of the group's deliberative functioning.
Facilitation improved the assessment of individual
deliberative functioning in those individuals who scored
higher for group discussion attachment anxiety, while
facilitated individuals higher on group discussion
attachment avoidance assessed group deliberative
functioning lower than the non-facilitated ones.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Ainsworth, M., Blehar, M., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
Bächtiger, A., Shikano, S., Pedrini, S. & Ryser, M. (2009). Measuring deliberation 2.0: standards, discourse types, and sequenzialization. Available at: http://ash.harvard.edu/extension/ash/docs/baechtiger.pdf
Bächtiger, A., Steenbergen, M. R. (2004). The Real World of Deliberation. A. Comparative Study of Its Favorable Conditions in Legislatures. EUI Working Paper SPS No. 17. Available at: http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/2634/sps2004-17.pdf?sequence=1
Bartholomew, K. & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles among young adults: A test of a four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(2), 226–244.
Boccato, G., & Capozza, D. (2011). Attachment styles and social groups: Review of a decade. Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 18, 19–30.
Bowlby, J. (1991). Attachment and loss. London; New York: Penguin Books.
Cassidy, J. & Shaver, P. (2008). Handbook of Attachment: Theory, Research, and Clinical Applications. New York; London: The Guilford Press.
Darwall, S. L. (1977). Two kinds of respect. Ethics, 88(1), 36‒49.
Dillard, K. N. (2013). Envisioning the role of facilitation in public deliberation. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 41(3), 217–235. doi:10.1080/00909882.2013.826813
Duckitt, J. (2001). A dual process cognitive-motivational theory of ideology and prejudice. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 41–113. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(01)80004-6
Duckitt, J. (2006). Differential effects of Right Wing Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation on outgroup attitudes and their mediation by threat from competitiveness to outgroups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(5), 684-696. doi: 10.1177/0146167205284282
Ein-Dor, T. & Hirschberger, G. (2016). Rethinking Attachment Theory: From a Theory of Relationships to a Theory of Individual and Group Survival. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25(4), 223 –227. doi: 10.1177/0963721416650684
Fishkin, J, S. (2009). When the People speak. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fulwider, J. (2005). Do moderators matter? Answering a jury deliberation challenge to deliberative democracy. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott Wardman Park, Omni Shoreham, Washington Hilton, Washington, DC.
Gastil, J. & Dillard, J. P. (1999). The aims, methods, and effects of deliberative civic education through the National Issues Forums. Communication Education, 48, 1-14. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03634529909379168
Gastil, j. & Sager, K. (2002). Exploring the Psychological Foundations of Democratic Group Deliberation: Personality Factors, Confirming Interaction, and Democratic Decision Making. Communication Research Reports, 19(1), 56–66.
Gastil, J., Black, L. W. & Moscovitz, K. (2008). Ideology, attitude change, and deliberation in small face-to-face groups. Political Communication, 25, 347–376. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10584600701807836
Halvorsen, K. E. (2001). Assessing public participation techniques for comfort, convenience, satisfaction, and deliberation. Environmental management, 28(2), 179‒186.
Jost, J.T. (2006). The end of the end of ideology. American Psychologist, 61(7), 651-670. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.61.7.651
Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (Eds.) (2000). Choices, Values, and Frames. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kuhar, M. & Jeznik, K. (2017 in print). Deliberativno razpravljanje učiteljev o vzgojnih ukrepih v osnovni šoli / Primary school teachers' deliberative discussions on educational measures Journal of contemporary educational studies.
Kuhar, M. & Pušnik, T. (2017 in print). The impact of facilitation on attitude change and the quality of deliberation: A case study of Slovenian school teachers deliberating on school discipline measures. Journal of Applied Communication Research.
Kuhar, M. (2013). Exploring psychological factors influencing deliberation. Interdisciplinary description of complex systems, 11(4), 415–426. doi: 10.7906/indecs.11.4.6
Landwehr, C. (2014). Facilitating deliberation: The role of impartial intermediaries in deliberative mini-publics. In K. Grönlund, A. Bächtiger & M. Setälä (Eds.), Deliberative mini-publics: Involving citizens in the democratic process (pp. 77–92). Colchester: ECPR Press.
Lodge, M. & Taber, C. S. (2000). Three Steps Toward a Theory of Motivated Political Reasoning. In A. Lupia, M. McCubbins &S. Popkin (eds.) Elements of Reason (pp. 183–213). Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Lupia, A. (2002). Deliberation Disconnected: What it Takes to Improve Civic Competence. Law and Contemporary Problems, 65, 133–150.
Mannarini, T. (2011). Public involvement and competent communities: Towards a social psychology of public participation. The Special Issue on Behavioral and Social Science, 1(7), 66–72.
Marcus, G., Neuman, W. & MacKuen, M. (2000). Affective intelligence and political judgment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Mikulincer, M. & Shaver, P. R. (2001). Attachment theory and intergroup bias: Evidence that priming the secure base schema attenuates negative reactions to out-groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(1), 97-115.
Mikulincer, M. & Shaver, P. R. (2007). Attachment in adulthood: Structure, dynamics, and change. New York: Guilford Press.
Mikulincer, M. (1997). Adult attachment style and information processing: Individual differences in curisosity and cognitive closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(5), 1217-1230. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.5.1217
Nabatchi, T. (2007). Deliberative democracy: The effects of participation on political efficacy. (Ph.D.), Indiana University, Bloomington, IN.
Neblo, M. A., Esterling, K. M., Kennedy, R. P. & Laze, D. M. J. (2008). Who wants to deliberate, and why. Program on Networked Governance Working Paper PNG No. PNG08–002. Available at: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/div-classtitlewho-wants-to-deliberateand-whydiv/B918F30F1EF25FEE40DFD8313BD83B79
O'Doherty, K. C. (2013). Synthesising the outputs of deliberation: Extracting meaningful results from a public forum. Journal of Public Deliberation, 9(1), Article 8, 4–30.
Petrič, G. (2014). Perceived quality of conversations in online communities: conceptual framework, scale development, and empirical validation. Cyberpsychology, behavior, and social networking, 17(2), 82–90. doi:10.1089/cyber.2012.0483
Reykowski, J. (2006). Deliberative democracy and “human nature”: An empirical approach. Political Psychology, 27(3), 323–346.
Rom, E. & Mikulincer, M. (2003). Attachment theory and group processes: The association between attachment style and group-related representations, goals, memory, and functioning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(6), 1220-1235. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.84.6.1220
Shaver, P. R. & Mikulincer, M. (2003). The psychodynamics of social judgments: An attachment theory perspective. In J. P. Forgas, K. D. Williams, & W. von Hippel. (Eds.) Social judgments: Implicit and explicit processes (pp. 85-114). London, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Smith, E. R., Murphy, J. & Coats, S. (1999). Attachment to groups: Theory and measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(1), 94–110.
Smith, G. (2009). Democratic innovations: Designing institutions for citizen participation. Cambridge, UK; New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Spada, P., & Vreeland, J. R. (2013). Who moderates the moderators? The effect of non-neutral moderators in deliberative decision making. Journal of Public Deliberation, 9(2), Article 3. Available at: http://www.publicdeliberation.net/jpd/vol9/iss2/art3
Steiner, J. (2012). The foundations of deliberative democracy: Empirical research and normative implications. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Thompson, S., & Hoggett, P. (2001). The emotional dynamics of deliberative democracy. Policy & Politics, 29(3), 351–364. doi:10.1332/0305573012501396
Weber, C. & Federico, C. M. (2007). Interpersonal attachment and patterns of ideological belief. Political Psychology, 28(4), 389-416. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2007.00579.x
Wojcieszak, M. (2011). Deliberation and attitude polarization: What happens when people with extreme views encounter disagreement. Journal of Communication, 61, 596–617.
Wojcieszak, M. (2012). On Strong Attitudes and Group Deliberation: Relationships, Structure, Changes and. Effects. Political Psychology, 33(2), 225–242. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2012.00872.x
Wright, S. (2006). Government-run online discussion fora: Moderation, censorship and the shadow of control. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 8(4), 550–568. doi:10.1111/j.1467-856x.2006.00247.x
Žvelc, M. & Žvelc, G. (2006). Stili navezanosti v odraslosti / Adult attachment styles. Psihološka obzorja = Horizons of psychology, 15(3), 51–64.
Viewing Statistics
- Abstract - 261
- PDF - 108
Copyright (c) 2018 Metka Kuhar, Katja Jeznik
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Međunarodna licenca/ International License:
Imenovanje-Nekomercijalno/Attribution-NonCommercial
Pogledajte licencu/View license deeds
Print ISSN 1330-0288 | Online ISSN 1848-6096