POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS
A Thesis
Presented to
The Honors Tutorial College
Ohio University
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for Graduation from the Honors Tutorial College with the degree of
Bachelor of Science in Communication Studies
by
Lauren F. Albers
April 2015 POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 2
This thesis has been approved by
The Honors Tutorial College and the School of Communication Studies
______
Dr. Amy Chadwick Professor, Communication Studies Thesis Advisor
______
Dr. Judith Lee Honors Tutorial College, DOS Communication Studies
______
Jeremy Webster Dean, Honors Tutorial College
POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 4
CHAPTER 2: PILOT STUDY 15
CHAPTER 3: OBSERVATIONS 20
CHAPTER 4: FOCUS GROUPS 31
CHAPTER 5: SURVEY 41
CHAPTER 6: DISCUSSION 49
BIBLIOGRAPHY 64
POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 4
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Individuals in nearly all stages of life participate in groups with unique structures and processes. Members use power in these groups to enforce policies, make decisions, and reach other group goals. Leaders must have an understanding of how to use power to keep a group running effectively. They must know, either implicitly or explicitly, how to wield power successfully (Oc & Bashshur, 2013).
Immediacy and various compliance gaining strategies are common forms of power used by leaders. Immediacy refers to the creation and maintenance of interpersonal connections between leaders and group members (Wilson & Locker,
2008). Compliance gaining strategies are the various techniques used to influence individuals, or various ways to gain compliance (Golish, n.d.). In understanding how power, immediacy, and compliance gaining strategies affect compliance and group commitment, individuals can more successfully lead and organize groups.
Much existing literature on immediacy and compliance gaining focuses on workplace and classroom environments (Baker, Mathis, & Stites-Doe, 2011; Golish, n.d.; Golish & Olson, 2000; Horan & Myers, 2009; Jacob, 2012; Kearney, Plax,
Richmond, & McCroskey, 1985; Paulsel, Chory-Assad, & Dunleavy, 2005; etc.). Each of these settings has a clear hierarchy; a superior (the manager or the teacher) has earned a position of power and uses that status to gain compliance from subordinates.
However, little research addresses the use of immediacy and compliance gaining in groups without a strict hierarchy, such as peer-led groups. POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 5
In particular, peer-led student groups present unique environments for leader power. While leaders have earned their positions, there may be little difference in age and experience between the newest group members and their leaders. A type of peer- led student groups is student organizations. College students often join student organizations to explore interests and develop friendships with people at their school.
Because the majority of organization members are in the same age group, student leaders may face difficulties not investigated when researchers study compliance gaining in other types of groups (e.g., the workplace or classrooms). This difference leads to questions about the individual characteristics of these student leaders, their use of immediacy, and effective compliance gaining techniques, along with the relationships between each of these factors.
Power
Existing research presents power in various ways, from the different types of appeals to French & Raven’s five forms of power: coercive, reward, legitimate, referent, and expert (French & Raven, 1959). Coercive power is the power to influence someone to do something against his will, whereas reward power is the ability to give other people what they want. Legitimate power stems from official authority in a position of power. Referent power is the power that comes from being liked and is often affected by charisma. Expert power relies on an individual’s special knowledge or skills that a group needs.
Power, in any of its five forms, can be called upon to influence group members. Power is defined for the purpose of this research as the ability to influence POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 6
and direct the behavior of others or the outcome of a particular situation. Power and influence work together in the form of persuasion, which has three categories of outcomes: behavioral, cognitive, and social (Dillard & Shen, 2012). Leaders use appeals to create these outcomes. Appeals come in various forms, including fear appeals, appeals to authority, and appeals to hope. Each appeal can be constructed, consciously or unconsciously, to have the most powerful effect on its recipients. For example, an emotional appeal may be designed to tug on the heartstrings of group members, encouraging them to conform to a new policy or attend a group event because of the connection to the individual and their emotions. Leaders enact various forms of power to influence group members and achieve group goals, along with individual goals that exist within the context of the group.
Individual Characteristics
Leaders in any group must have particular individual characteristics to influence those they lead. People comply with others because of “what they are as a person” (Auzoult, Hardy-Massard, & Gangloff, 2013). This finding indicates a value placed on individual qualities, rather than uniform obedience of a power structure.
Current research outlines many characteristics that are important for leaders in the classroom and the workplace. Managers must respond adaptively to conflict and change in order to be considered productive (Sullivan & Taylor, 1990). Graduate
Teaching Assistants must overcome their lack of credentials and teaching experience to gain compliance (Golish, n.d.), because teachers with more experience are more effective and more respected. Respect increases student compliance and achievement POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 7
(Jacob, 2012). Punishment has been found to be effective only when it is used with discretion (Miller, n.d.). This theme indicates that leaders must be able to analyze various situations to decide when certain forms of power are appropriate in order to successfully influence group members.
Research finds many desirable characteristics for workplace and classroom leaders. Managers must show organizational loyalty and competency in order to gain trust and compliance from employees (Baker, & Stites-Doe, 2011). Early childhood teachers must create a caring, loving environment to support children and gain compliance (Gantner, 1997). With so many qualities expected of workplace and classroom leaders, just as many may be expected of peer group leaders. Because of the importance of understanding peer leader expectations, this thesis seeks to answer the following research question:
RQ1: What are the characteristics of the individuals who most easily gain compliance and commitment?
Immediacy
Related to referent power, immediacy is the closeness between leaders and those they lead. High immediacy tends to indicate higher levels of trust and compliance (Golish & Olson, 2000). Influence can also stem from immediacy, which in turn generates liking and increases influence (Golish & Olson, 2000). Research also shows that teacher immediacy greatly improves student willingness to comply (Golish
& Olson, 2000). If this trend extends to peer-led groups, the assumption can be made that increased immediacy also increases group members’ willingness to comply. POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 8
In a peer-led group, immediacy may be more easily attained than in traditionally structured groups. Personal power, or connections with other group members, gives individuals a great deal of influence over their peers (Oc & Bashshur,
2013). In collegiate groups, the maximum age difference between members is around four years, meaning members are in the same generation and may be part of the same social circles. This similarity may enhance immediacy. Immediate teachers signal to students an openness to communication (Turman, 2008), making students more willing to listen and comply, a trend that may extend to peer groups. Current research indicates that a closeness in age and experience makes students more comfortable interacting with graduate teaching assistants (Golish, n.d.). Therefore, it may be easier for peer leaders to develop and maintain immediacy in peer-led groups. Immediacy also increases prosocial communication in the classroom (Sidelinger, Bolen, &
McMullen, 2012). Leaders who employ immediacy create more welcoming workplace and classroom environments and are more effective at gaining compliance from those they lead. These trends are less understood in the context of peer groups.
Very little research exists that explains the role of immediacy in peer-led groups; therefore, this thesis seeks to answer the following research question:
RQ2: How is student leader immediacy related to compliance gaining and commitment?
Compliance Gaining & Compliance Gaining Strategies
Just as there are different types of power, different types of groups provide unique contexts for power, influence, and compliance. Compliance is group members’ POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 9
positive response to leader power, particularly if the leader’s appeal is successful
(Roach, n.d.). Compliance may be sought concretely by requesting attendance at an event or adherence to a new policy. It may also be necessary to seek compliance with culture or tradition, often utilizing a much less conscious appeal.
Compliance gaining in organizations is important because members who comply show their commitment to the group and help the group achieve its goals.
Organizational commitment is key in any organization because it promotes quality performance and decreases member turnover rates (Pierro, Rave, Amato, & Bélanger,
2012). If a leader can gain compliance, he or she also gains commitment, improving the group’s performance and member retention.
Group satisfaction and commitment also increases when leaders’ compliance- gaining techniques are perceived as effective (Roach, n.d.). A compliance gaining technique is a tool leaders employ to gain compliance from members, such as making a direct request or an emotional appeal to members. Members feel unsatisfied under a leader who has many unsuccessful compliance gaining attempts, indicating a need for leaders to understand and use effective compliance gaining techniques.
Effective compliance gaining techniques are generally “employee-centered”
(Roach, n.d.) and prosocial (Pytlak & Houser, 2014). Student-to-student connectedness also increases the effectiveness of compliance gaining attempts
(Sidelinger, Bolen, and McMullen, 2012), indicating the importance of fostering a prosocial environment as a form of compliance gaining. POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 10
Much existing literature examining compliance gaining in students pertains to student-teacher relationships (e.g., Horan & Myers, 2009; McCroskey & Richmond,
1983; Paulsel, et al., 2012); however, the same concepts may be applicable to power relations in a peer-led organization. Current research indicates that organizational factors such as type of organization may not play a big part in the compliance gaining process (Sullivan & Taylor, 1990). Because of the importance of research on the impact of the organization type, in this case peer-led groups, on compliance gaining techniques, this thesis seeks to answer the following research questions:
RQ3: What strategies are used to gain compliance and commitment?
RQ4: What strategies are most effective at gaining compliance and commitment?
Peer Led Organizations
Successful college graduates gain a great deal of leadership experience in student organizations. Understanding the roles of power, immediacy, and compliance gaining in these groups and identifying common best practices will help educators train college students for leadership and equip college student leaders to build better student organizations.
Despite the importance of understanding leadership within student-led organizations, there is little research on power, immediacy, and compliance gaining in this context. Without research specifically regarding peer-led student groups, individuals are left drawing potentially inaccurate parallels between student organization experiences and research on teacher-student influence or boss-employee POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 11
compliance gaining. With millions of students enrolled in higher education across the
United States, student organization-specific research will benefit a large portion of the population, along with college graduates and any individuals who interact with these students or graduates.
Student choirs are particularly relevant to the study of leadership in student organizations because student leaders handle nearly every aspect of the group except for music direction. Student leaders in choirs, depending on their position, may know more and be more responsible than the director in the areas of logistics, culture, and administration. This structure places a great deal of power in and responsibility on student leaders. Furthermore, student choirs often have elaborate leadership structures and rich traditions that influence how seniority and experience affect power, influence, and compliance gaining.
Student choirs are a fitting choice for student organization research because of their power structure. Like most student organizations, the age range of members is narrow, but unlike other groups, student choirs are almost entirely peer-led. From logistics, to culture, to performances, student choirs rely on the hard work of an executive board to run smoothly. Furthermore, these groups provide a large, yet manageable pool of participants.
Because of the peer status of every choir member, leadership and compliance gaining in student-led groups may take on characteristics unique from other settings.
Each member is equal or close-to-equal in terms of age and education level, so power may need to be asserted in ways not tied to seniority or knowledge, as is common in POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 12
workplace and classroom organizations. Individuals may also exaggerate skill level, seniority, or actual authority to gain the respect and compliance of their peers.
Additionally, leaders may struggle to project authority. A student leader must have some amount of buy-in from other organization members, because power cannot exist without the consent of those who fall under its jurisdiction (Foucault, 1980). Student- led peer groups provide many opportunities for observing both consent and dissent in the compliance gaining process. Because leaders and general members are peers, individuals may be more willing to challenge procedures or speak out against executive board decisions.
Choral performance is by nature an ensemble-based endeavor; a single individual’s absence may drastically change a concert’s outcome. Because commitment is of such importance, leadership is crucial to group success. Student leaders must gain member compliance with general policies and procedures along with fostering a positive group culture. A positive group culture ensures that members are fulfilled by their membership in the group and these individuals can positively affect group commitment. Organizational commitment promotes quality performance and decreases member turnover rates, making commitment essential to the functioning of any organization (Pierro, Rave, Amato, & Bélanger, 2012). The need for commitment pushes leaders to employ immediacy and effective compliance gaining techniques to retain members.
For this purpose, the researcher has chosen to conduct a case study of the leadership in the Singing Men of Ohio, Ohio University’s men’s chorus. The Singing POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 13
Men of Ohio (SMO) consists of between 70 and 80 members and one faculty director.
The group meets three times a week at a scheduled class period and once a week for an evening, student-led rehearsal. A ten-member elected executive board leads the group. Individuals, generally upperclassmen, are elected to the executive board one month before the end of each school year and spend the rest of the semester shadowing their predecessors. Auditions for new members are held the first week of each semester, guaranteeing the regular addition of individuals not familiar with the group’s policies and traditions. This creates the opportunity to observe leaders’ compliance gaining techniques at various stages of the group’s yearly life cycle, including interactions with new and veteran members. The researcher also had the opportunity to observe the socialization of new members as they enter into the group culture. The researcher will also have the opportunity to observe interactions between veteran members and first-year members, along with the dynamic between upperclassmen and younger board members. SMO provides an ideal environment for studying power, immediacy, and compliance gaining in student organizations.
Therefore, this thesis seeks to answer the following research question:
RQ5: What are the relationships between power, immediacy, and compliance gaining, on one hand, and compliance and commitment, on the other?
Conclusion
This thesis explored the five research questions described above in a yearlong research project. First, the researcher conducted a pilot study to explore patterns and themes related to commitment and compliance gaining (Chapter 2). The researcher POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 14
then began ten weeks of group observation to further understand themes that emerged during the pilot study (Chapter 3). Focus groups allowed the researcher to discuss the research questions with group members and gain further insight (Chapter 4). Finally, the researcher conducted a survey to round out her qualitative results with quantitative data (Chapter 5). Each chapter includes a brief discussion section and a complete discussion of all results can be found in Chapter 6.
POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 15
CHAPTER 2: PILOT STUDY
The researcher conducted a pilot study to gain an initial understanding of the
Singing Men of Ohio before beginning a full-length investigation of the group. The pilot study oriented her to approach in-depth research with developed research questions and an initial idea of emerging themes. Considering the criteria of reliability and validity in research, particularly rich rigor and significant contribution (Tracy, n.d.), the researcher sought to gain access to the group before launching a lengthy study.
Methods
To identify initial themes and research questions for this thesis, the researcher observed the Singing Men of Ohio as they embarked on their annual spring tour in
March 2014. She spent nine days with the group, traveling to various cities to observe performances, traditions, and group culture. Observations were also conducted during executive board elections at the end of the 2013-2014 school year.
Undergraduate group members range in age from 18 to approximately 25, with one to two older graduate students. The number of members in the group ranges between 65 and 80 at any given time. Some members miss semesters because of class conflicts but generally return the next semester or next school year. All members attending the Spring Tour were asked to complete a consent form, and only two individuals declined to be observed. The researcher did not include these members’ actions in observation notes. No members were under 17 and therefore ineligible for observation. POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 16
The researcher attended every SMO event throughout the nine-day tour, along with rehearsals and executive board elections throughout the end of spring semester
2014. A total of 30 sessions were observed, totaling approximately 38 hours.
Observation notes were taken by hand and then transcribed to a computer file, at which point the researcher examined them for recurring themes and communication phenomena. The researcher observed and took notes on power dynamics and compliance gaining strategies, including the behavior of only those individuals who agreed to participate. Individuals were described using letters (e.g., Person A) and the researcher maintained a separate sheet listing the individual’s position of authority
(executive board, non-executive board, etc.), year, charisma, and level of talent. All data were reported in aggregate so that no individual could be identified.
The researcher relied on naturalistic observation over multiple occasions to improve the validity of research.
Results
The researcher identified various themes to examine more deeply as research continued. Emerging themes included: seniority as influence and liking as influence. A pattern of success emerged from observation of executive elections. Every individual who was endorsed by a well-respected upperclassman during deliberations was elected to his desired position. If two candidates were supported by different respected upperclassmen, the results were much more difficult to predict and often boiled down to a long, in-depth discussion of the two candidates’ qualifications. When only one was endorsed, the results were based much more on interpersonal connections and POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 17
how much the group liked an individual. In these scenarios, the group essentially allowed its leaders to make election decisions. If two leaders could not agree, then the group examined their options more carefully. SMO puts a great deal of trust in upperclassman leaders, falling back on the opinions of general members only if a single decision was not presented to them.
Trust in older members (based on time in the group, not actual age) also extended to other, less important, decisions. While in various cities on tour, SMO members would often to have to choose activities to fill up free time before concerts.
Whether choosing a restaurant for lunch or a local sight to see, younger members generally followed their older counterparts in packs, sticking more closely to the well- liked upperclassmen. These same upperclassmen who were followed in droves had a great deal of influence over the group’s elections, indicating a possible connection between seniority, liking, and influence.
The researcher also identified several minor patterns that prompted more research. Particular types of appeals emerged as most common when individuals attempted to influence the group. Primarily, leaders used value appeals to gain compliance. For example, a campaign speech may have included an appeal to brotherhood or an appeal to duty, both important values in the group. The researcher investigated these value appeals further in her future study.
Leaders also had a strong sense of seniority. Members clearly knew who had influence and who did not. Conversations observed by the researcher and different observed interactions revealed tactics used by non-leaders to influence different POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 18
situations. The relationship between leadership roles and compliance gaining techniques emerged as a crucial part of the researcher’s full-length study.
Brief Discussion
The pilot study revealed a host of themes to be further explored. Particularly, the influence of senior leaders follows the Elaboration Likelihood Model. This model states that individuals will process certain information peripherally, while other messages are processed centrally, depending on certain cues, personal relevance, and previous experience (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). Election decisions were processed peripherally when senior members endorsed one candidate. However, information was processed centrally when conflicting endorsements were provided. When not given one particular path, members were prodded to consider each candidate’s qualifications, rather than trusting the guidance of older members.
Findings were similar to existing literature about compliance gaining techniques, particularly in regards to effective techniques, but differed in other critical ways. Immediacy and liking proved crucial for compliance gaining, while behavior alteration techniques used by teachers, such as appeals to authority and duty, were rarely used by student leaders in this peer group.
These results revealed opportunities for theoretical development in the area of peer leadership as an extension of existing research on classroom and small group leadership. Findings also expanded the practical knowledge base for peer leaders seeking effective compliance gaining techniques. Further research was required to overcome the limitations of the pilot study, including a short time frame and broad POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 19
scope. The researcher’s full study took place over an entire semester and included more focused observation notes and mixed methods (focus groups and a survey), leading to a more in-depth look at emerging themes.
The above themes identified in the pilot study informed the development of the next phase of research. The pilot study allowed the researcher an opportunity to become oriented within the group and gain an initial understanding of culture, norms, and traditions. Because she spent a significant amount of time traveling with the
Singing Men of Ohio, the researcher was trusted more than a complete outsider would be. This trust allowed for more honest conversations with SMO members and analysis, leading to a fuller view and deeper exploration of the research questions.
POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 20
CHAPTER 3: OBSERVATIONS
The researcher conducted observations to delve further into themes identified during the pilot study. The purpose of observations was to begin to answer the first four of the study’s research questions. First, what are the characteristics of the individuals who most easily gain compliance and commitment? Second, how is student leader immediacy related to compliance gaining and commitment? Third, what strategies are used to gain compliance and commitment? Finally, what strategies are most effective at gaining compliance and commitment? Observations allowed the researcher to see group members and leaders in the context of group rehearsals and meetings.
Methods
Recruitment and Informed Consent
Participants were recruited in person at SMO rehearsals in early Fall 2014. The researcher briefed individuals on her research goals. Once any questions were answered, the researcher asked SMO members to sign consent forms. To provide anonymity, all individuals put their consent form in a manila envelope, regardless of whether they consented. This prevented other members from knowing who agreed to participate and who wished to be excluded. If a member did not consent his behavior would not have been documented in the observations. All 74 SMO members and the faculty director signed consent forms for observation.
POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 21
Participants
Participants ranged from in age from first year students to fifth year and graduate students. The group was made up of primarily undergraduate students, with one graduate student and a faculty director who conducts rehearsals and concerts.
Because the Singing Men of Ohio is a men’s chorus, all participants were male.
Participants were predominately white, undergraduate students between the ages of 18 and 24.
Procedure
The researcher took observation notes during SMO’s weekly rehearsals and other events as they occurred. Rehearsals took place three times weekly on Mondays,
Wednesdays, and Fridays. SMO members also attended Wednesday night sectionals as deemed necessary by the executive board and director, along with concerts and other group performances.
The researcher recorded observations in her notebook and then transcribed them into a digital document. The researcher kept the notebook and laptop on her person or in her locked apartment at all times to ensure security. Upon transcription, notes were analyzed for recurring themes. The researcher observed instances in which one member attempted to gain compliance from one or more other members. The researcher took notes on the strategies used to gain compliance, response from members (consent, dissent), and the role of power and immediacy in these compliance-gaining attempts. The researcher spent 46 hours observing the group, resulting in 101 handwritten pages and 70 typed, single-spaced pages of notes. POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 22
Analysis
The researcher categorized observations by theme for further analysis to inform focus groups, interviews, and survey questions.
The researcher coded and analyzed observation transcriptions using the software program Nvivo.
Results
Four main themes emerged surrounding compliance gaining strategies, members’ responses to these strategies, and the role of power and immediacy in compliance gaining. First, leaders used values appeals to influence the group. Second, leader knowledge emerged as a predictor of consent. Third, group perceptions of leaders’ time use affected compliance gaining success. Finally, individuals struggled for power in group interactions.
Values Appeals
When trying to motivate the group, SMO leaders often employed values appeals to gain group compliance with a policy or decision. The most common appeals focused on the values of duty, respect, and brotherhood. Because the organization provides class credit and has set rehearsal times, members were often called upon to do their duty and uphold their end of the class syllabus by attending rehearsal, arriving on time, and bringing their music. In this same vein, leaders asked members to respect the director and each other by behaving according to a certain standard. This set of expectations included not talking during rehearsal, not correcting the director, and not texting. POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 23
Appeals to duty. In employing an appeal to duty, individuals attempted to influence group members to feel that a certain behavior or activity is their duty to carry out. This took the form of appeals such as a guilt-based or rule-centered message. For example, executive board members and the director often told the group to honor the “contract” they signed at the beginning of the year, referring to the group’s requirement to sign a form indicating understanding of and agreement to the course syllabus. On one specific occasion an executive board member reminded the group of their contract and an upperclassman member leaned to a classmate and said,
“We don’t have to do that – we didn’t even sign a contract this year.” The researcher was unable to confirm whether or not group members signed the contract during the
2014-2015 school year, but this example shows a relative disregard for duty appeals, especially from upperclassmen members.
Appeals to respect. Leaders also tended to call upon members to respect the director, certain leaders, or each other. As a particular concert date drew nearer, an executive board member quickly addressed the group during rehearsal. He reminded members that the director and each member of SMO put in a lot of work to get to that point of “almost ready,” and in order to respect that effort the group must work hard through the final few rehearsals so the performance reflects all that was put into it.
Appeals to respect occurred less often because of members’ willingness to comply with appeals to duty and brotherhood, a pattern that was explored in further phases of research. POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 24
Appeals to brotherhood. When asking members to do something outside of rehearsal, appeals to brotherhood were more common. For example, each fall the group sends between ten and twenty to a regional amusement park to volunteer for certain weekends. In exchange, the park makes a donation to the group based on the number of volunteers and hours worked. This fundraiser builds the group’s budget to many activities possible, particularly the spring tour. When recruiting members to spend their weekend working 12 hours a day, leaders called on brotherhood to gain compliance. First-year members were told “it’s a great way to get to know your brothers” and “it really helps the group.” It was rarely mentioned that members who attend receive a $50 credit applicable to their tour costs. If a member attended one weekend, his tour cost went down $50; if he attended two weekends his tour cost was reduced by $100. Instead of referencing the obvious monetary benefits of attending a volunteer weekend, leaders touted the interpersonal benefits and appealed to brotherhood.
Consent and Dissent
Many factors predicted a leader’s ability to gain consent, including his factual knowledge and his likeability. The researcher observed that consent was generally indicated by group adherence to a policy or compliance with a request. Members expressed dissent by actively behaving in opposition to a leader’s request or showing negative body language such as rolling their eyes or making faces of disapproval.
Members also indicated dissent verbally by complaining to or gossiping with those near them on the risers. Dissenting members would also confer with their friends in POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 25
the group to complain and gossip immediately after rehearsal. They communicated dislike in a similar way: members made it clear that they liked an individual using positive body language and verbal affirmations. Because the faculty director, who has institutional authority over the group, runs rehearsals, dissent is commonly expressed nonverbally during rehearsal.
Leader knowledge and consent. Group members were able to gain consent if they could to provide information that other members sought. Particularly in student run sectional rehearsals, members freely asked questions and offered information as uncertainties arose. However, when comments were provided without prompt, certain members were received well whereas others were received poorly. For example, at one sectional rehearsal there was a question about a particular part of a song the group was singing. When upperclassman executive board member offered up an incorrect answer, all those around him rolled their eyes and all but ignored the input. When another upperclassman executive board member gave an answer with reference to an authority figure (“The director said we should do…”), the group accepted his knowledge as fact and continued rehearsal based on that information. Although both individuals had executive board positions, only one gained consent because of his accurate knowledge.
Likeability and consent. Consent was not centered on knowledge alone, though. Consent relied on the likeability of the individual presenting information.
When an individual was less liked by the group, members dissented by not listening, rolling their eyes, or actively doing the opposite of what they had been told. For POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 26
example, a member who has a bad attitude (texting, making rude comments to other members) in rehearsal will be almost completely ignored if he makes a comment to the group, even if his information is correct.
There was little noticeable correlation between consent and formal executive board roles except that executive board members tended to address the group more often. These individuals also tended to have more relevant information (regarding rehearsal times and events, for example) to share with the group than general members. Well-liked executive board members achieved indicators of consent equal to those of well-liked general members, but disliked or disrespected executive board members saw more dissent than disliked general members, possibly because they addressed the group more often.
Leader Time Use
Leaders whose time use was perceived as more legitimate and who were present in rehearsal were more respected by the group and more successful in their compliance gaining attempts. Group members were very aware of how leaders use their time during rehearsal. Because of the group’s busy schedule, executive board members sometimes needed to leave rehearsal to do group-related work. Leaders’ compliance-gaining attempts were received differently based on the perceived legitimacy of time use during rehearsal. Executive board members who returned to rehearsal after leaving received visible reactions from group members. When a leader’s reasons for leaving rehearsal were perceived as legitimate, members made space on the risers when they returned and complied quickly and easily with requests. POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 27
If a leader used rehearsal time often for reasons perceived as illegitimate, their requests were met with eye rolls or a lack of attention and compliance.
For example, an upperclassman executive board member spent about a week of rehearsal meeting with first-year group members about their experience. Although he missed a lot of rehearsal time, members complied with this member’s requests because it was made clear to the group that he was using his time in a way that benefitted the group and was not taking advantage of his privileges as an executive board member.
When he asked a member to leave rehearsal or returned to rehearsal, group members quickly complied and responded with generally positive body language (smiling, making space for him to stand, etc.).
On the other hand, a different upperclassman executive board member used part of rehearsal time each day to fulfill a portion of his executive role. This member sometimes worked quickly and efficiently to get back to rehearsal, but often spent one-third to one-half of rehearsal time to complete his work and did not join the group for 20-30 minutes after rehearsal started. When this member addressed the group or offered comments, members around him rolled their eyes and tended to ignore him.
Members in his section sometimes dissented simply at his presence. When he joined the risers halfway through rehearsal, members around him often rolled their eyes and exchanged glances at his arrival. This reaction did not occur in response to members who used rehearsal time in a way that was perceived to be responsible and legitimate.
POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 28
Power Struggles
SMO members are peers, leading to struggles for power between leaders.
Certain individuals emerged as competing for influence within the group, with mixed results. These individuals would interrupt rehearsal to make comments such as “let’s try to listen to each other in measure 51,” and while none received full consent, some members were markedly more successful than others. This success appeared to rely on the individuals’ behavior during rehearsal, their personal treatment of other members, and the opinions of well liked group leaders. If an influence-seeking member was positively active in rehearsal, kind to other members, and liked by older group members, his attempts at influence were successful. If one or more of these factors was missing, a member’s attempts at influence were met mostly with dissent.
Comments observed during rehearsals indicate that these individuals may have been competing for influence in attempts to be elected president of the group at the end of the school year. These power struggles may explain the importance of current leader support in successful influence attempts, as observed during SMO’s elections in the
2013-2014 school year.
Endorsement
Individuals who did not have influence themselves gained influence through upperclassman endorsement. This theme emerged in the pilot study, but became clear throughout observations. If an underclassman or first year member of the group tried to address an issue, he was generally met with dissent from other members (rolled eyes, groans, etc.). However, if an underclassman raised his hand and made a POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 29
comment, and an upperclassman leader indicated his endorsement by nodding or verbally agreeing, the rest of the group would respect the underclassman’s statement.
Endorsement by respected leaders allowed members who are not typically seen as leaders to provide input to the group.
Brief Discussion
Individuals who succeeded in gaining influence tended to have certain characteristics in common. Successful leaders used effective compliance gaining techniques to yield a positive group response. They also participated fully in rehearsal as often as possible. These two qualities did not necessarily indicate a good leader, however. Leaders with the preceding qualities also required one or more of the following characteristics: position as an upperclassman leader, spoken or unspoken endorsement by an upperclassman leader, or consistently relevant and accurate information.
These findings indicated that members in peer groups were aware of the intentions and actual behavior of other members. On the other hand, they valued accurate information as much as leadership influence, indicative of shared goals and a strong sense of group identity. Immediacy was also crucial for established leaders to maintain their influence, evidenced by the importance of rehearsal attendance and participation.
Observation results showed that group members felt more connected to leaders if they were present, active, and had good relationships with members. Observation results informed the formation of a focus group discussion guide to facilitate POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 30
discussion of power, influence, and compliance gaining by group members. These results also revealed important patterns to be explored in the survey and focus group portions of research. Observations allowed the researcher to watch how group leaders exercised their influence to gain compliance. Focus groups and surveys allowed for exploration of the reasons behind these patterns and the development of explanations for observed phenomena.
POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 31
CHAPTER 4: FOCUS GROUPS
Focus groups aimed to explore more deeply the results of observations. In particular, the researcher aimed to get direct feedback from group members and foster discussion about emergent themes. The researcher was able to get a sense of group members’ perception of certain compliance gaining techniques and identify a difference in group experience between upperclassman and underclassman members.
Methods
Recruitment and Informed Consent
The researcher recruited participants during a SMO rehearsal and asked them to sign up for a focus group session. The researcher then emailed the participants reminders and more information about the focus groups. Each of the four focus groups had between one and nine participants, with a mean of five participants and a total of
20 participants. Three participants were board members. Participants represented approximately 27% of the group as a whole and approximately 30% of the executive board. There was a nearly even split between first-year members and upperclassman members.
Moderator’s Guide
The researcher moderated focus groups using a semi-structured moderator’s guide to allow for flexibility in response to each unique focus group. The moderator’s guide also included a script that explained the steps the researcher took to protect participants’ anonymity and privacy. The main goals of the guide were to ensure consistent questions between the focus groups and make sure that the researcher POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 32
discussed the same themes with each group. The guide was divided into two main sections, group culture and compliance gaining. The group culture discussion began with the guided creation of a list of five group values. The moderator then asked questions such as, “How do leaders communicate these values to members?” In the compliance gaining section the moderator prompted participants to discuss the characteristics of effective and ineffective leaders and the most common and most successful compliance gaining techniques. The focus group ended with an open-ended question allowing participants to add anything else they felt was relevant to the discussion topics before the moderator thanked them for their participation and ended the focus group session.
Procedures
Upon arriving to the focus group, participants were given a copy of the informed consent form to read and sign. The forms requested permission to conduct research and audio record focus group sessions. Participants were given the opportunity to ask questions about the consent form and focus group process. After gaining consent from all participants, the researcher used the moderator’s guide to explore individuals’ opinions of phenomena observed during the first phase of research. The researcher took short notes to record nonverbal cues, which totaled one page typed for all focus groups.
Analysis
The researcher transcribed focus group recordings into NVivo for coding. The researcher looked for themes present in observations along with any new emergent POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 33
themes related to power, immediacy, and compliance gaining. Themes were identified, analyzed, and compared to results from observations. The researcher coded quotations and specific interactions from focus groups by themes such as “brotherhood” and
“compliance gaining strategies.” Certain interactions received multiple codes, giving insight into the relationships between certain themes.
Results
The focus group discussions revealed effective leader characteristics and successful and unsuccessful compliance gaining techniques, along with the roles that seniority, respect, and dissent play in group dynamics and compliance.
Leader Characteristics
Members of the Singing Men of Ohio identified multiple characteristics as important or group leaders. Most notable was participants’ emphasis on respect and seniority as an indicator of a good leader. Members of all ages and across positions
(executive board or general members) indicated respect as an important quality in leaders. Five main themes emerged as characteristics of effective leaders. Effective leaders had seniority, along with the respect of other members. They were also committed to SMO and familiar with the group’s mission. Members also noted that discretion was an important leader characteristic, along with a positive attitude.
Respect. Leaders tended to give respect in order to receive respect from other members. A comment made by one particular participant summarized a common sentiment. He said, “A good leader won’t talk down to us. He’ll talk with the group, not at us.” Participants repeatedly mentioned this respect in interactions as incredibly POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 34
important in successful leaders. They noted that ineffective leaders often lacked this respect and would talk down to members. Members discussed not respecting individuals in leadership positions who behaved as though they were better than the rest of the group, or those who did not show respect to fellow group members.
Seniority. The majority consensus indicated that older members were more respected because of their senior status in the group. Upperclassmen were noted as having more experience in the group and “knowing how things are done,” according to a first year member in a focus group. An upperclassman member echoed this sentiment, saying that older members felt it was their duty to help integrate younger members into the group’s culture. This led to many upperclassmen becoming influential because of their role in shaping the experience of first-year members.
Commitment to SMO. The longer an individual participated in the group, the more familiar with the group’s ideals and values he was. This familiarity with the group’s mission also emerged as an important quality for leaders. Leaders who were familiar with and fully committed the group’s mission and goals made better leaders, based on the consensus of all four focus groups. These leaders tended to be older members and executive board members. However, if members in these positions were not respected they were ineffective leaders. Regardless of age or leadership position, members did not respect those members who did not give them respect.
Discretion. One focus group’s discussion of leaders centered on the importance of discretion. This group concluded that leaders must use their influence only when necessary to avoid over-saturation and losing respect from general POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 35
members. Each focus group emphasized the importance of leaders’ understanding situational cues and “being in tune with the group” to make appropriate decisions when communicating. Members discussed the importance of context, and knowing
“when to say what.”
Positive attitude. Every focus group discussed characteristics of a good leader in combination, but most conversation focused on attitude, and whether or not that attitude is well-received by the group. Positive attitudes were determined by the positivity of a member’s intentions. Individuals with a positive attitude were discussed as not contributing negatively to rehearsals (i.e., talking poorly about the executive board, providing unnecessarily negative comments). Positive individuals also had a favorable attitude toward SMO, particularly during rehearsal. Certain individuals had many of the characteristics listed above, but were not considered to be effective leaders. These individuals were executive board members with negative attitudes or members with a positive attitude who had little experience in the group. Other individuals had these characteristics, but disregarded discretion as mentioned above and used their influence too often to remain effective.
Intention. Because group members spend between 5 and 10 hours a week together, personal relationships develop even between members who don’t consider themselves friends. These relationships allowed for a degree of transparency in interactions. Members could identify the intentions of those around them and judge their actions accordingly. For example, the majority opinion of the focus groups concluded that individuals with self-serving intentions were seen to be less committed POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 36
to the group and have poorly received attitudes. These individuals, regardless of their time in the group or executive board position, were less respected and less successful when attempting to gain compliance.
Compliance Gaining Techniques
Depending on the situation, leaders had a variety of compliance gaining techniques to choose from. Every focus group discussed emotional appeals as the most an important factor when trying to gain compliance.
Emotional connection. SMO members highly valued emotional connection, or a personal relationship with another member, as a compliance gaining technique.
First year members said they felt more welcome when they had a personal connection with someone older in the group, while executive board and older members actively fostered these connections to improve the group dynamic. They then call upon this emotional connection when attempting to gain compliance. A senior executive board member shared the following with his focus group:
“I really want to reach [new members] on an emotional level because I feel
like when people are vulnerable and emotional with something they are
attached to it. So I feel like that's why a lot of things in SMO work and why a
lot of people are involved in SMO because they do have emotional sentimental
attachment to the group.”
Leaders most easily influenced members who were emotionally connected to the group, especially if an appeal was made to brotherhood. All focus groups were asked about their response to two common appeals: appeals to brotherhood and appeals to POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 37
duty. Brotherhood appeals called upon members to behave in a certain way for the good of the group and to support their brothers. Duty appeals placed importance on the class aspect of the group, noting consequences in the form of lowered grades. Both appeals were employed in similar situations with varying degrees of success.
Appeals to brotherhood. The majority of focus group participants indicated a preference for brotherhood appeals. Leaders invoking this kind of appeal had an understanding of the group’s goals, an important characteristic of good leaders in
SMO. As stated by members as a quality of effective leaders, commitment to and understanding of SMO ideals and goals was a requisite for effective leadership and thus, successful compliance gaining.
However, brotherhood appeals were often implicitly used to influence members. Because the group culture placed great importance on brotherhood, this ideal influenced members even when leaders do not say something like, “support your brothers, come to rehearsal on time.” Two senior members spoke on this in detail:
Participant A: I don’t think I’ve ever seen somebody that’s coming in late that
somebody just yelled at them or just gave them a punishment. It's just, if you
aren't doing your part the disappointment from the group is palpable. It's just
everyone is upset with you. So I feel like the drive to be better just comes from
not wanting to disappoint all of your peers.
Participant B: That's definitely where it is for me. Every time I come in late I
feel like I’m letting the group down and honestly I feel like, "oh, I f*cked up
again." POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 38
A cultural preference for brotherhood over course policies made brotherhood appeals the most effective compliance gaining technique. These appeals were most commonly used by leaders with the characteristics listed above.
On the other hand, certain situations allowed for successful compliance gaining attempts by younger group members, especially if a more senior individual had not yet addressed an issue. A second year member gave insight into this phenomenon:
If it takes to the point where no one who’s older is stepping up and saying
something — the fact that they’re saying something shows something that we
should look at and think ‘well, hey at least they’re stepping up and doing
something’.
This statement represents the majority opinion in all four focus groups, indicating greater respect for the group and brotherhood than for individual leaders, particularly if these leaders were not addressing important issues with the group. This pattern also held true on an individual level. Older members were just as effective as younger ones in terms of individually addressing misbehavior in rehearsal. If a member was texting or constantly checking his phone, a request by any member with a well-received attitude resulted in compliance. This respect for the group and for brotherhood pushed individuals to overcome their pride for the sake of achieving the group’s goals.
Brotherhood Over All
The “brotherhood over all” mentality functioned well within the cyclical leadership structure of SMO, and would seem applicable to student organizations in general. When members are more loyal to the group than they are to individuals, POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 39
leadership changes are presumably easy to maneuver, and leaders can focus on what needs to be done for the group without having to wait to gain personal trust from members. While this trust and respect is necessary in the long-term, new leaders do not have to make their primary focus gaining respect because members are loyal to the group as a whole. The combination of group loyalty and the generally consistent election of good leaders allows executive board members to focus more on the group than their personal standing with members.
The ability of non-elected, non-experienced members to influence the group can also be attributed to the group-over-individual mentality. Because brotherhood was held in such high esteem, members were able to remove themselves personally from situations and understand the value of a comment, even if it came from a younger member.
That being said, attitude was still critical in these interactions. Members with positive attitudes generally followed group policies and showed great enjoyment when in rehearsals. Members with negative attitudes generally showed their unhappiness with eye rolls, negative comments, or other signs of dissent during rehearsal. If a first- year member with a positive attitude told the group to stop talking, many individuals would comply because they saw the merit of that individual’s comment. However, if a member of the same age with an unpleasant attitude made the same remark, they would be all but ignored and the problem would continue.
Brief Discussion POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 40
Focus groups aimed to answer questions about successful leaders and effective compliance gaining techniques as perceived by SMO members. All themes identified in observations were explored in discussion with focus group participants and all themes emerged as relevant in varying degrees. Participants provided more insight into many themes identified in observations, particularly the importance of attitude and the focus on brotherhood. Other themes emerged as less important than originally identified, including the importance of knowledge when addressing the group. While it was important for members to know what they are talking about, it was more important that the group respects them. Respected individuals were assumed to have the group’s best interests in mind and therefore give the most accurate information possible.
Compliance gaining techniques and the role of respect and attitude were explored in particular in the survey phase of research. Further questions remained after focus groups, such as the relationship between immediacy and compliance gaining, along with individuals’ likelihood to dissent. The survey enabled the researcher to reach a substantial number of group members to identify trends in culture and behavior as they pertained to the research questions.
POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 41
CHAPTER 5: SURVEY
Survey responses allowed the researcher to identify explanations for themes and occurrences that emerged during observations and focus groups. In particular, the survey aimed to address the relationships between power, immediacy, and compliance gaining, and compliance and commitment. The researcher used five survey measures to assess these relationships: the small group relational satisfaction questionnaire
(Anderson, Martin, & Riddle, 2001), the organizational identification questionnaire
(Cheney, 1982), the organizational culture survey (Glaser, S.R., Zamanou, S., &
Yaker, K., 1987), the organizational dissent scale (Kassing, J.W., 2000), and the behavior alteration techniques (BATs) scale (McCroskey, 1985). All scales were adapted when necessary to reflect the context of the Singing Men of Ohio. The survey intended to answer questions about the interaction of variables and provide statistical data to support qualitatively identified patterns.
Methods
Recruitment and Informed Consent
The researcher emailed the survey link to SMO members’ in February 2015.
Participants had 10 days to complete the survey. The researcher sent follow up emails every 3 days to thank participants who had completed the survey and encourage those who had not to participate. When members first accessed the survey website, they were presented with the IRB-approved consent document. The document encouraged students to contact the researcher via e-mail or telephone with any questions they had about the research or consent process. In addition to the “I Agree” button on the POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 42
consent page, there was also an “I do not agree” button, which thanked the participant and closed the survey. If individuals consented to participate, they proceeded to complete the survey. To avoid coercion or undue influence, all responses were recorded anonymously. Individuals who elected not to participate faced no consequences. Participation was completely voluntary.
Participants
The survey had 48 participants. These individuals joined SMO between Fall
2010 and Spring 2015; two individuals did not provide demographic information. The most common semesters for joining SMO were Fall 2012 (ten participants), Fall 2013
(eleven participants), and Fall 2014 (fifteen participants). Table 6.1 outlines the school years of participants. Current executive board members made up 21% of total participants (ten individuals), and 38 participants had never held an executive board position.
Table 6.1: Demographic Responses What is your year in school? Frequency Valid Percent Valid First Year 9 19.6 Sophomore 12 26.1 Junior 15 32.6 Senior 9 19.6 Other 1 2.2 Total 46 100.0 Missing 2 Total 48
POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 43
Survey
The researcher distributed a survey with six measures. Participants accessed the survey through a link to the Qualtrics website.
Relational satisfaction. The small group relational satisfaction questionnaire
(Anderson, Martin, & Riddle, 2001) measured individuals’ satisfaction with interpersonal relationships and communication within a group. Twelve survey items were measured on a 5-point Likert scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree). Survey items included statements such as “I do not feel part of the group” and “The group atmosphere is comfortable.” Survey items were adjusted to reflect the context of the
Singing Men of Ohio. Items were averaged to create a scale (M= 4.20, SD = .42, α =
.80). With reverse coding taken into account, a higher score indicated higher levels of satisfaction with the small group.
Organizational identity. The organizational identification questionnaire
(Cheney, 1982) measured the strength of an individual’s identification with a particular organization. 24 survey items were measured on a 5-point Likert scale
(strongly disagree to strongly agree). For example, participants responded to items such as “I am very proud to be a member of SMO” and “In general, I view SMO’s problems as my own.” The scale was originally published with a 7-point Likert scale, which was adapted to a 5-point Likert scale improve and ease transitions between the multiple scales used in the survey. Survey items were also adjusted to reflect the context of the Singing Men of Ohio (SMO). A higher score indicated higher levels of POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 44
organizational identity. Items were averaged to create the scale (M = 4.96, SD = .56,
α = .93).
Organizational culture. The organizational culture survey (Glaser, S.R.,
Zamanou, S., & Yaker, K., 1987) measured the culture of an organization as perceived by members. The 33 survey items were traditionally measured on a 5-point extent scale, but the researcher changed this measure to a 5-point agreement scale to match the scale used throughout the rest of the survey. Items were also adjusted to reflect the context of SMO. For example, participants responded on a 5-point agreement scale to items such as “People in SMO function as a team.” Items were averaged to create the scale, with a higher score indicating a more positive response to organizational culture
(M = 3.78, SD = .60, α = .96).
Organizational dissent. The organizational dissent scale (Kassing, J.W.,
2000) measured the relationship between superior-subordinate relationship quality and employee dissent. The scale was adjusted for context to measure leader-member relationship quality and member dissent in SMO. Questions included: “I share my criticism of SMO openly” and “I do not express my disagreement to SMO leaders.” A higher score indicated a greater likelihood of dissent. Items were averaged to create the scale (M= 3.22, SD = .31, α = .61).
Behavior alteration techniques. The behavior alteration techniques (BATs) scale measured preferred BATs in specific scenarios (McCroskey, 1985). The researcher altered three scenarios to relate to patterns identified in previous research to adequately measure BATs used in SMO. Participants responded to scenarios such as POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 45
“Two people standing near you on the risers are constantly talking and laughing during rehearsal. You cannot focus on rehearsal and others around you are also distracted. How do you respond?” Responses reflected the five most commonly observed responses to dissent in SMO. Responses were categorized as either
“prosocial” or antisocial” responses to dissent. Prosocial BATs are positive and potentially rewarding to the party being influenced, such as addressing an issue directly with a member. Antisocial BATs are generally perceived as negative or neutral in outcome for the individual being influenced, such as not addressing the member or talking about them with other SMO members. The researcher created categorical variables of prosocial and antisocial responses to create the scale (M= 2.27,
SD = .81, α = .26).
Analysis
The researcher conducted analysis using the data program SPSS. Survey results were imported and analyzed using chi-square, regression, and descriptive analyses. The regression addressed research question 5 to analyze the relationship between compliance and commitment and power, immediacy, and compliance gaining strategies. The chi-square analysis addressed research question 3 by determining the compliance gaining techniques most commonly used.
Results
Survey results revealed causes behind and correlations between emergent themes. Predictors of dissent and preferred behavior alteration technique emerged particularly clearly. POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 46
Likelihood of Dissent
Research question five explored the relationships between variables identified in research questions one through four. A multiple regression analysis addressed this question with small group relational satisfaction, organizational identity, and organizational culture as independent variables and organizational dissent as the dependent variable (Table 5.1). Evaluations of assumptions indicated no violations of the assumptions of normality, linearity, homoscedasticity, or multicollinearity.
The R for regression (R = .80) was significantly different from zero, F(3, 6) =
3.66, p = .08, with an R2 value of .65. The regression coefficient for small group relational satisfaction (β = -.97, t = -2.91, p = .03) differed significantly from zero, along with the regression coefficients for organizational identity (β = .84, t = 3.02, p =
.02). The regression coefficients for organizational culture (β = -.07, t = -.35, p = .74) did not differ from zero (Table 5.1). The relationships indicate that dissent was greater among people who do not identify with SMO as a group and those with low relational satisfaction within SMO.
Table 5.1: Correlations Small Group Org. Relational Org. Org. Dissent Satisfaction Identity Culture Pearson Org. Dissent 1.00 Correlation Small Group Relational -.15* 1.00 Satisfaction
Org. Identity .30 .84* 1.00 Org. Culture .09 .74 .73 1.00 Note. *p < .05. POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 47
Preferred Behavior Alteration Technique
Three survey scenarios gauged SMO members’ likelihood to pursue certain behavior alteration techniques in various situations. As indicated in Figure 5.1, general
SMO members responded as overall more likely to pursue antisocial BATs such as ignoring the situation or talking about another member with friends in SMO.
Executive board members were significantly more likely to respond prosocially by directly addressing individual members or the entire group. 30% of executive board responses preferred antisocial BATs, while 48% of general members preferred this approach.
Figure 5.1: Preferred Behavior Alteration Techniques
Antisocial
General Members
Type of BAT Type Executive Board Members Prosocial
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Percentage of Responses
On the other hand, 70% of executive board members pursued prosocial BATs.
More than half of general members, 52% did the same, but there was a notable difference in response between executive board members and the SMO members they lead. POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 48
A chi-square test for independence indicated no significant difference between member type (executive board or general member) and preferred behavior alteration technique for any of the three scenarios, addressing an upperclassman’s dissent, x2 (1,
32) = 2.26, p = .13, Φ = .27, addressing members talking near you x2 (1, 32) = 1.0, p =
1.0, Φ = .18, and responding to a first-year member struggling to fit in x2 (1, 32) = .00, p = 1.0, Φ = 0.
Brief Discussion
Survey results supported and extended observation and focus group results.
The researcher gained understanding of the factors that increase or decrease an individual’s likelihood of dissenting. The survey aimed to identify the relationships between membership variables, as determined by a regression model.
Survey results provided quantitative data to support the qualitative results found in previous phases of research.
POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 49
CHAPTER 6: DISCUSSION
The goal of this thesis was to examine individual characteristics that affect power and compliance, immediacy, and compliance gaining strategies in a peer-led student organization. Specifically through observations, focus groups, and a survey, the researcher examined each of these themes and the relationship between them.
Each phase of the study affirmed the qualities and preferred compliance gaining techniques of effective student organization leaders. There were three phases of research: observation, focus groups, and a survey. Each phase built on the previous phases and helped identify further patterns and themes in response to the five research questions.
Individual Characteristics
Research question one asked what individual characteristics are present in individuals who most easily gain compliance and commitment. Across all three phases of research, multiple individual characteristics emerged as important for effective leaders. Respected and respectful leaders are more successful at gaining compliance.
Successful leaders also build and maintain relationships with group members, employing immediacy. Committed leaders are also perceived as more effective.
Finally, leaders who hold a formal leadership role within the group are more effective than those who do not have a formal position.
Respect
The study revealed that respect is an important characteristic in group leaders.
In order for leaders to gain compliance, they must first give and receive respect. POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 50
Leaders give respect by behaving kindly toward other members and having a positive attitude as perceived by the group as a whole. The importance of respect aligns with classroom leadership literature exploring teacher-student relationships (McCroskey &
Richmond, 1983). This research outlines the positive impact respect has on a classroom, improving student involvement and increasing the success of teachers’ compliance gaining attempts. Existing research extends teacher-student themes to peer leadership trends in a classroom or rehearsal setting.
As indicated in focus groups and survey results, members respond well to leaders’ positive attitudes, but respond to negative attitudes with dissent. A positive attitude is typically indicated by compliance with the director’s requests during rehearsal, positive nonverbal cues (smiling, standing up straight, etc.), and showing respect to other members. Leaders must give respect to receive respect, especially in pursuit of compliance. A member with a negative attitude does not pay attention to the director’s or other leaders’ compliance gaining attempts, talks to those around him throughout rehearsal, and gives negative nonverbal cues (sighing, rolling eyes, etc.). A positive attitude rooted in respect is an important individual characteristic for a leader, a finding that aligns with classroom and workplace based research on leadership
(Jacob, 2012).
To influence their peers and achieve compliance, leaders must show respect to other group members. Whether or not this respect is sincere or not matters significantly, because group members are generally able to discern the sincerity of leaders’ intentions due to close personal connections. Similar to literature on students’ POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 51
relationships with graduate teaching assistance (Golish, n.d.), a small age gap gives
SMO members a feeling of power and influence over group leaders. Members are thus able to question leaders’ intentions and determine if their attitude is positive or negative.
Immediacy
Research indicates that leader immediacy, or personal interaction with members, greatly improves leader effectiveness. Existing research states that high immediacy yields high trust and compliance (Golish & Olson, 2000). This claim is supported by focus group results in particular, in which SMO members noted that a personal connection with an upperclassman leader made them more likely to trust leaders’ decisions and comply with requests. Just as teacher immediacy contributes to positive academic outcomes (Golish & Olson, 2000), peer leader immediacy improves member compliance and general leader effectiveness.
This study’s findings on immediacy contribute to and extend classroom immediacy literature to include peer leaders and their compliance gaining attempts.
Current literature states that immediacy in the classroom and workplace improves the effectiveness of compliance gaining attempts and contributes to more positive outcomes (Oc & Bashshur, 2013). This research aligns with existing literature and extends results into peer-led groups by supporting the value of immediacy and its positive impacts on the success of compliance gaining attempts. Immediacy can be employed in a variety of leadership settings to contribute to more effective compliance gaining. POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 52
Commitment
Commitment to SMO also contributes to leader effectiveness. Existing literature notes that power cannot exist without the consent of those influenced, making a strong case for member commitment to group ideals (Foucault, 1980).
Leadership by example reflects in leaders’ own commitment to SMO and a generally positive attitude toward rehearsals and other group events.
Amplified by respect and immediacy, commitment to the group is common in effective leaders (Pierro, Rave, Amato, & Bélanger, 2012). Similarly, if a leader is committed to SMO and its members, members will respect him and respond positively to his compliance gaining attempts. If a committed SMO leader has personal interactions with members, other individuals will trust him and take note of his commitment. The benefits of commitment are numerous, because it decreases member turnover rates and promotes quality performance (Pierro, Rave, Amato, & Bélanger,
2012). By providing a positive example of commitment, leaders gain respect and improve the group as a whole.
Formal Leadership Role
Many SMO leaders have a formal leadership role on the executive board, but an individual’s role does not automatically make him an effective leader in the group.
A leader must display all of the traits noted above, along with having a positive attitude. Positive attitude works in conjunction with each of the characteristics described above, while a poorly perceived attitude can all but negate a formal leadership position. These results reveal certain leadership characteristics as POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 53
conditions of authority. These conditions of authority differ from literature on formal leadership roles, which argues that hierarchical positions such as teacher or manager come with a certain amount of respect and compliance, although this can be increased with immediacy and effective compliance gaining techniques (Kearney, Plax,
Richmond, & McCroskey, 1985; Paulsel, Chory-Assad, & Dunleavy, 2005; etc.). A
SMO member in a formal leadership role who displays respect, immediacy, and group commitment has the tools to effectively lead the group. Similarly, a SMO member without a formal leadership role who shows respect, is personally connected to other members, and expresses his commitment to the group in length of time (seniority) can also lead the group. However, a member in a formal leadership role who lacks any of the necessary characteristics faces more dissent and more failed compliance gaining attempts than his respected, immediate, and committed counterparts.
Leader Immediacy and Compliance Gaining
Research question two explores the relationship between immediacy and compliance gaining. Existing research focuses on teachers’ immediacy and its effect on student compliance. This work finds that immediacy generates liking and increases influence (Golish & Olson, 2000). Study results extend this claim to include respect as a form of liking and an important characteristic in successful leaders, especially when success is defined by effective compliance gaining attempts.
Compliance gaining relies heavily on leader immediacy in peer groups, more so than noted in existing teacher-student literature (Baker, Mathis, & Stites-Doe, 2011;
Golish & Olson, 2000; Horan & Myers, 2009; Jacob, 2012; etc.). Because authority is POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 54
conditional based on certain individual characteristics, including immediacy, compliance gaining cannot occur without a certain level of immediacy. Individuals with formal authority roles cannot exercise their role-based power unless they meet certain other criterion. The nature of peer groups is a similarity in age and, in SMO’s case, a general homogeneity of membership including gender. This decreases the power distance between formal leaders and general members, making leaders more likely to pursue immediacy as a way to gain authority and members more likely to criticize leaders’ intentions and dissent. Because there is no institutional structure demanding that members respect leaders, peer leaders must gain compliance in informal ways, particularly immediacy.
With this in mind, leaders should strive to build personal connections with the individuals from whom they desire compliance. Immediacy builds liking and respect and reduces the likelihood of dissent (Golish & Olson, 2000). Student leaders are in a unique position to understand the peers they are leading, an advantage that should be used to increase immediacy and therefore increase compliance.
Compliance Gaining Strategies
Research questions three and four explore compliance gaining techniques used by leaders and their effectiveness. SMO leaders use many compliance gaining strategies, particularly prosocial strategies. These include emotional appeals, appeals to duty, and appeals to brotherhood. Depending on the individual employing them, each of these strategies can be effective to varying degrees. Well-respected leaders can use any of the techniques, with preference given to emotional and brotherhood appeals POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 55
due to the conditions of authority discussed previously. The group’s faculty director, who has institutional authority over the group, mainly uses appeals to duty.
Existing literature finds that influence has three categories of outcomes: behavioral, cognitive, and social (Dillard & Shen, 2012). Current knowledge aligns with research results, because SMO student leaders tend to pursue behavioral and social goals in their use of emotional and brotherhood appeals. SMO’s faculty director pursues cognitive goals more than student leaders, because he aims to educate and prepare group members for performances. Current research supports this, noting that student-to-student connectedness, a type of behavioral and social goal, increases the effectiveness of all compliance gaining techniques (Sidelinger, Bolen, and McMullen,
2012). SMO student leaders also tend to use prosocial compliance gaining techniques, a trend that is similar to existing research stating that successful compliance gaining attempts are prosocial (Pytlak & Houser, 2014).
Considering conditions of authority and effective compliance gaining techniques, peer leaders should seek to understand the types of goals they are pursuing and analyze how best to approach gaining compliance in that area. Cognitive goals are best addressed by the director, who can use his hierarchical authority to influence the group and gain compliance (Paulsel, Chory-Assad, & Dunleavy, 2005). Student leaders with behavioral and social goals should employ prosocial techniques that rely on the effectiveness of student-to-student connectedness (Sidelinger, Bolen, and
McMullen, 2012). Without institutional authority to rely on, peer leaders must POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 56
consider the informal choices that give them power such as individual characteristics and compliance gaining choices.
Relationships Between Variables
Research question five explores the relationship between all variables investigated throughout this study. SMO members manifest power by influencing one another. Executive board members and upperclassmen tend to exert the most power based on their role and status in the group. As supported by each phase of research and existing literature, immediacy is necessary in successful compliance gaining attempts
(Oc & Bashshur, 2013). Leaders call upon emotional connections, appeals to brotherhood, and other such emotional appeals to use their immediacy with other members to gain compliance. Immediacy is important for both student leaders and future employers to understand. SMO members appreciated and responded well to personal connections with leaders in the group, particularly in terms of compliance gaining attempts.
Compliance and commitment are also significantly related. Not only were individuals who were more committed to SMO more likely to seek compliance, committed members were less likely to dissent in response to compliance gaining attempts. Peer leaders built personal relationships with members in order to increase individual members’ commitment to SMO and thus increase their likelihood of compliance.
These results are different from existing research because of the emphasis placed on relationships and relational satisfaction in peer-led groups as opposed to the POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 57
importance of institutional authority in schools or offices (Horan & Myers, 2009;
McCroskey & Richmond, 1983; Paulsel, et al., 2012; etc.). SMO leaders employed immediacy to build respect and increase the effectiveness of their compliance gaining attempts. Leaders were able to take advantage of their closeness to reveal their positive intentions and attitudes to other members. On the other hand, leaders’ close relationships with members revealed negative attitudes and decreased the effectiveness of compliance gaining attempts. As seen in observations, focus groups, and survey results, the relationships between compliance gaining and commitment and power, immediacy, and compliance gaining strategies hinge on relational satisfaction and immediacy.
Limitations
Although this study provides an in-depth look into peer leadership in student organizations, there are multiple limitations. The study took place over the course of one school year, eliminating the opportunity to explore executive board transitions and the development of leaders throughout their entire time in the group. Furthermore, the scope and timeline of the study only allowed for the inclusion of focus groups, rather than focus group and individual interviews with members.
Another study limitation is the time-based inability to explore SMO leaders’ transition into post-graduation jobs. An understanding of this adjustment could expand the implications and applications of peer group research results.
POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 58
Generalization of Results
The findings of this study are generalizable to many peer-led organizations because of the commonness of SMO’s structure. Many student organizations consist of an executive board and general membership. Furthermore, SMO has a mission that is not entirely academic, allowing the possibility of generalization to less academic organizations such as marching bands, fraternities, and other student organizations.
These less academic organizations often claim to be training grounds for future leaders, but in certain cases, leaders employ antisocial behavior alteration techniques in the form of peer pressure and, in more extreme cases, hazing. Antisocial techniques are not preferred in SMO, revealing a potential difference between SMO and these less academic groups. SMO has a blend of academic and extracurricular goals, indicating that some themes may not extend to both academic and extra- or co- curricular groups.
More specific trends, such as appeals to brotherhood, are not as generalizable because of the unique culture of SMO. SMO leaders intentionally build and perpetuate specific group values, particularly brotherhood. Other groups may not have such explicit and pervasive values that can be called upon to influence group members.
However, other peer groups may have uniting interests and goals that leaders include in values appeals. Trends identified in SMO may not be universally generalizable to these organizations, but may have some similarities.
Furthermore, SMO is an all-male, predominately white organization, so generalization may be inhibited by the lack of gender and racial diversity in POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 59
participants. The presence of only one gender in the group controlled for communication and power patterns that can arise based on gender. The control for gender in this research may affect the generalizability in peer groups with members and leaders of multiple genders.
Suggestions for Future Research
This case study reveals many opportunities for future research. A longitudinal study of a student organization may provide insight into the development of leaders in a setting with annual leadership turnover. Studying individuals’ paths to leadership will help researchers and group members understand the most important leader characteristics and how one can foster the growth of necessary characteristics and skills. Another path may be to involve the group’s director in research processes through interviews and other research methods. This approach will provide multiple perspectives on group leaders from an individual without peer status in the group.
Further research should also examine college graduates’ transition into the workplace and consider the application of student leadership skills in a professional setting. Employee and employer perspectives will be particularly useful to consider the multiple individuals invested in an employee’s development.
Implications
This study has many implications for student organization members, leaders, and scholars in the field of organizational communication.
Student organization leaders can better understand how to influence members and better achieve group goals. Organization executive board members now have an POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 60
understanding of the qualities in a good leader and effective compliance gaining techniques. Student leaders can put effective compliance gaining techniques into practice immediately, ideally improving morale and reducing dissent in peer groups.
Leaders can employ emotional and values appeals and build personal connections with group members. Further, a list of leader characteristics can serve as a useful rubric when electing or selecting future group leaders. Current and future group members will have the tools to choose and evaluate leaders, along with the tools to develop themselves as effective peer leaders.
Furthermore, scholars have a unique look at peer leadership in the context of student organizations. A large portion of the existing body of work on classroom leadership deals with teacher-student interactions, a decidedly different context than college student organizations. This research allows individuals to draw connections between the various types of compliance gaining techniques teachers and students in the classroom to influence groups of students. The context of student organizations is unique because of the yearly leadership turnover and constant struggle for power, allowing for an authentic look at dissent and compliance gaining attempts. Members express in-rehearsal dissent in largely nonverbal ways (eye-rolling, unwillingness to make space for individuals to stand), while saving verbal expressions of dissent for the time immediately following rehearsal. This finding provides valuable information to scholars because verbal dissent occurs mainly outside of the organization’s official events, revealing the fluid boundaries of peer groups where members may also be friends outside of the group. POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 61
Study results also have implications for individuals who interact with current and former student organization leaders. Organization advisors and faculty directors will have greater insight into effective leadership tactics and qualities of good group leaders. Advisors will be better equipped to identify effective student leaders and provide support necessary to influence group members by employing appeals to duty or to group values. Faculty members will also be better able to articulate student leaders’ skills and experiences when writing letters of recommendation or serving as references as students begin searching for jobs.
Employers of recent college graduates will be able to understand more fully the leadership experiences new employees bring to a company through the study’s results. While official authority may be important to an organization’s structure, an employer who understands an employee’s experience building respect through immediacy may call upon that individual to help improve organizational commitment.
An employer may also struggle to address an individual’s weaknesses without an idea of the strengths required in previous leadership positions. Furthermore, the results’ similarity with existing workplace research could lead to more successful professional development by drawing comparisons between college leadership experiences and workplace expectations. Without this understanding the individual’s potential may remain untapped simply because an employer does not have a full picture of that person’s strengths and weaknesses.
POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 62
Conclusion
Study results indicate strong connections between existing classroom leadership literature and peer leadership trends in student organizations. However, variations in context make these results unique and important to students, faculty members, and future employers. While many results are similar, important distinctions are made between existing literature’s emphasis on immediacy and the important role immediacy plays for student leaders without institutional authority.
This four-phase study provides both qualitative and quantitative data that outline characteristics of successful leaders and effective compliance gaining techniques and explores the relationship between power, immediacy, and compliance gaining in peer groups. Successful leaders must be respectful, immediate, and committed to the group. Many leaders hold formal leadership positions, but no individual in any position gains consent without a positive attitude. Furthermore, individuals most often choose prosocial compliance gaining techniques to successfully influence their peers. Members who identify with the group and feel interpersonally connected to leaders and other members dissent less, again indicating the importance of immediacy and commitment in leaders and members.
Students can use these results to become better leaders and choose better leaders for groups in which they are involved. Faculty members can be better mentors and have knowledge of the types of influence employed by student leaders who do not have institutional authority. Future and currently employers are able to understand POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 63
employees’ previous leadership experience and work with individuals to adapt student peer leadership skills in the workplace.
POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 64
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Auzoult, L., Hardy-Massard, S., & Gangloff, B. (2013). Causal attributions of
compliance or rebellion according to the Raven's bases of power. Cognition,
Brain, Behavior, 17(3), 237-248.
Baker, S., Mathis, C., & Stites-Doe, S. (2011). An exploratory study investigating
leader and follower characteristics at U.S. healthcare organizations. Journal of
Managerial Issues, 23(3), 341-363.
Dillard, J. P., & Shen, L. (Eds.). (2012). The SAGE handbook of persuasion:
Developments in theory and practice. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Foucault, M. (1980). Power/Knowledge: selected interviews and other writings (Ed.
C. Gordon). NY: Pantheon. [Selected readings].
French, J. and Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. D. Cartwright (Ed.),
Studies in social power (pp. 150-167). Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social
Research.
Frost, T. & Moussavi, F. (1992). The relationship between leader power base and
influence: the moderating role of trust, Journal of Applied Business Research,
8, 9-14.
Gantner, M. (1997). A study of parental views regarding the characteristics of an
effective school leader. Educational Administration.
Golish, T. (n.d.). Students’ use of compliance gaining strategies with graduate
teaching assistants: Examining the other end of the power spectrum.
Communication Quarterly, 12-32. POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 65
Golish, T. & Olson, L. (2000). Students’ use of power in the classroom: An
investigation of student power, teacher power, and teacher immediacy.
Communication Quarterly, 48, 293-310.
Horan, S. & Myers, S. (2009). An exploration of college instructors’ use of classroom
justice, power, and behavior alteration techniques. Communication Education,
58, 483-496.
Jacob, A. (2012). Examining the relationship between student achievement and
observable teacher characteristics: Implications for school leaders.
International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 7(3).
Kearney, P., Plax, T. G., Richmond, V. P., & McCroskey, J. C. (1985). Power in the
classroom III: Teacher communication techniques and messages.
Communication Education, 34, 19-28.
McCroskey, J. & Richmond, V. (1983). Power in the classroom I: Teacher and student
perceptions. Communication Education, 32, 175-184.
McCroskey, J. C., & Teven, J. J. (1999). Goodwill: A reexamination of the construct
and its measurement. Communication Monographs, 66, 90-103.
Miller, N., Butler, D., & McMartin, J. (n.d.). The ineffectiveness of punishment power
in group interaction. Sociometry.
Oc, B., & Bashshur, M. (2013). Followership, leadership and social influence. The
Leadership Quarterly, 919-934. POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 66
Paulsel, M., Chory-Assad, R., & Dunleavy, K. (2005). The relationship between
student perceptions of instructor power and classroom justice. Communication
Research Reports, 22, 207-215.
Pierro, A., Raven, B. H., Amato, C & Bélanger, J. J. (2012) Bases of social power,
leadership styles, and organizational commitment. International Journal of
Psychology, 47, 1-13.
Pytlak, M., & Houser, M. (2014). Because I'm the teacher and I said so: GTA use of
behavior alteration techniques to establish power and credibility in the college
classroom. Western Journal of Communication, 78(3), 287-309.
Reicherts, J. (2011). Communicative power is power over identity. Communications,
36, 147-168.
Reysen, S. (2005). Construction of a new scale: The Reysen Likability Scale. Social
Behavior and Personality, 33(2), 201-208.
Richmond, V. P., & McCroskey, J. C. (1984). Power in the classroom II: Power and
learning. Communication Education, 33, 125-136.
Roach, K. (n.d.). University department chairs' use of compliance-gaining strategies.
Communication Quarterly, 75-90.
Robson, C. (2011). Real World Research (3rd Ed). West Sussex, United Kingdom:
Wiley.
Sidelinger, R., Bolen, D., Frisby, B., & McMullen, A. (2012). Instructor compliance to
student requests: An examination of student-to-student connectedness as
power in the classroom. Communication Education, 61(3), 290-308. POWER, IMMEDIACY, AND COMPLIANCE GAINING IN PEER GROUPS 67
Sullivan, J., Albrecht, T., & Taylor, S. (1990). Process, organizational, relational, and
personal determinants of managerial compliance-gaining communication
strategies. The Journal of Business Communication, 27(4), 331-355.
Truman, P. (2008). Coaches' immediacy behaviors as predictors of athletes'
perceptions of satisfaction and team cohesion. Western Journal of
Communication, 7(2), 162-179.
Wibeck, V., Dahlgren, M.A., & Oberg, G. (2007). Learning in focus groups: an
analytical dimension for enhancing focus group research. Qualitative
Research, 7, 249-267.
Wilson, J., & Locker, L. (2008). Immediacy scale represents four factors: Nonverbal
and verbal components predict student outcomes. Journal of Classroom
Interaction, 42, 4-10.