Items #25-36 refer to a study conducted to determine the influence of small grou
ID: 3459739 • Letter: I
Question
Items #25-36 refer to a study conducted to determine the influence of small group interaction on the convergence of attitudes and opinions during the decision-making process.
At a nearby university, researchers divided thirty undergraduate students into six groups with five members each. Each group was given one hour to adjudicate an academic dishonesty case in which another student was suspected of cheating on the final exam.
The researcher created two methods: one to measure the amount of interaction between group members, and one to measure attitudes and opinions about the case. The first test measures the length of time each possible student dyad converses with each other during the group interaction. The second measures attitude and opinion convergence by determining the amount of agreement for each student dyad after the discussion.
From the original experiment, the researchers drew this conclusion:
GROUP MEMBERS ARE INFLUENCED BY THOSE WITH WHOM THEY INTERACTED MOST DURING THE DISCUSSION.
Mark Items #25-36 accordingly, considering each item independently of the others:
A. If true, this information supports the conclusion.
B. If true, this information contradicts the conclusion.
C. This information neither supports nor contradicts the conclusion.
Question 25
Researchers repeat the experiment, and the results are similar.
a) If true, this information supports the conclusion.
b) If true, this information contradicts the conclusion.
c) This information neither supports nor contradicts the conclusion.
Question 26
Researchers repeat the experiment with six different groups: two with freshmen members only, two with juniors and seniors only, and two with a combination of freshmen, juniors, and seniors. Out of the thirty students, all but three students’ post-discussion rankings correlated with those group members with whom they interacted most during the discussion.
a) If true, this information supports the conclusion.
b) If true, this information contradicts the conclusion.
c) This information neither supports nor contradicts the conclusion.
Question 27
In the original experiment, it was later discovered, two of the six groups were composed entirely of female students. When researchers accounted for the gender composition of each group, they found the variable had no measurable effect on post-discussion rankings.
a) If true, this information supports the conclusion.
b) If true, this information contradicts the conclusion.
c) This information neither supports nor contradicts the conclusion.
Question 28
Researchers repeat the experiment at a university in Ohio with twice as many groups. Three quarters of all students’ post-discussion rankings demonstrated strong disagreement with group members with whom they interacted most during the discussion.
a) If true, this information supports the conclusion.
b) If true, this information contradicts the conclusion.
c) This information neither supports nor contradicts the conclusion.
Question 29
Researchers repeat the experiment at a college in California. Every students’ post-discussion rankings correlated with those group members with whom they interacted most during the discussion. However, pre-discussion rankings show that twenty-eight of the thirty students shared opinions of the case prior to the discussion.
a) If true, this information supports the conclusion.
b) If true, this information contradicts the conclusion.
c) This information neither supports nor contradicts the conclusion.
Question 30
Researchers repeat the experiment with six different groups, each with an identical composition as the original experiment. During the discussion, however, some students were only allotted two minutes per turn to speak while others were permitted to speak for up to five minutes per turn. Out of the thirty students, all but two students’ post-discussion rankings correlated with those group members with whom they interacted most during the discussion.
a) If true, this information supports the conclusion.
b) If true, this information contradicts the conclusion.
c) This information neither supports nor contradicts the conclusion.
Question 31
It is later discovered that over half of all students on the committee had been suspected of cheating prior to the discussion, which might have influenced their attitudes and opinions of the case.
a) If true, this information supports the conclusion.
b) If true, this information contradicts the conclusion.
c) This information neither supports nor contradicts the conclusion.
Question 32
A previous report showed stronger post-discussion agreement within 5-7 member small groups than within groups of 10 or more members.
a) If true, this information supports the conclusion.
b) If true, this information contradicts the conclusion.
c) This information neither supports nor contradicts the conclusion.
Question 33
In the original experiment, four of the six groups were composed of students from the same racial/ethnic background. When researchers accounted for the racial/ethnic composition of each group, they found the variable had no measurable effect on post-discussion rankings.
a) If true, this information supports the conclusion.
b) If true, this information contradicts the conclusion.
c) This information neither supports nor contradicts the conclusion.
Question 34
Researchers repeat the experiment at a university in Wyoming with three times as many groups. A significant majority of all students’ post-discussion rankings demonstrated strong disagreement with group members with whom they interacted most during the discussion.
a) If true, this information supports the conclusion.
b) If true, this information contradicts the conclusion.
c) This information neither supports nor contradicts the conclusion.
Question 35
It turns out that during the original experiment, students tended to interrupt those who expressed a divergent opinion of the case, which might have hindered their ability to listen to different opinions and process reasoning that was at odds with their own.
a) If true, this information supports the conclusion.
b) If true, this information contradicts the conclusion.
c) This information neither supports nor contradicts the conclusion.
Question 36
Researchers perform a similar experiment at a small corporate office down the street. The results are similar to those of the original student committee experiment.
a) If true, this information supports the conclusion.
b) If true, this information contradicts the conclusion.
c) This information neither supports nor contradicts the conclusion.
Explanation / Answer
Note: This response is in UK English, please paste the response to MS Word and you should be able to spot discrepancies easily. You may elaborate the answer based on personal views or your classwork if necessary.
(Answer) The point of the original experiment mentioned above is to check whether or not talking more, makes people agree with each other. In other words, the point of the experiment is to know if extensive conversation eventually gets us to understand the position of another individual. The experiment concluded that people who talked more within a group, had the tendency to agree more willingly to each other simply because talking more, made it easier to see the other persons point-of-view. The questions below are variations of the experiment where the results matched, did not match or partially matched the original experiment.
(25) A – Because the result matched the conclusion.
(26) C – Because the result neither matches nor contradicts the conclusion.
(27) A – Because the result matched the conclusion.
(28) B – Because the result did not match the conclusion.
(29) C – Because the result neither matches nor contradicts the conclusion.
(30) A – Because the result matched the conclusion.
(31) B – Because the result did not match the conclusion.
(32) C – Because the result neither matches nor contradicts the conclusion.
(33) A – Because the result matched the conclusion.
(34) B – Because the result did not match the conclusion.
(35) B – Because the result did not match the conclusion.
(36) A – Because the result matched the conclusion.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.