Collaboration has become increasingly common in modern life, study and work and group discussion is vital for exchanging ideas and promoting collaboration. This study aims to explore how groups with consistent and inconsistent initial attitudes negotiate meaning and build knowledge together by analyzing verbal interaction in face-to-face discussion settings.
This study conducted a qualitative inquiry of 19 group discussions in which students were asked to discuss a certain topic to produce arguments supporting a thesis statement they agreed with. Ten groups are composed of attitude-consistent members, and the other ten of attitude-inconsistent members. This study recorded, transcribed and coded the discussion process, using a codebook built upon prior research on collaborative knowledge building.
This study found that 1) attitude-consistent groups reached consensus quickly and focused on refining shared arguments with minimal conflict; 2) attitude-inconsistent groups engaged in more questioning, explanation and defense, reflecting deeper negotiation and reasoning; 3) initial attitude composition influenced how groups interacted, negotiated conflicts and moved toward consensus and 4) the ability to influence group outcomes was linked less to majority opinion and more to members’ communication and persuasion skills.
This study offers process-level insights into how group-level attitudinal composition shapes collaborative knowledge building in in-person educational settings. The findings inform the design of collaborative learning environments that balance efficiency with cognitive depth and foster productive engagement with diverse perspectives.
