Chapter 13

Article 1: Warnick, B. (2004). Online Ethos: Source Credibility in an “Authorless” Environment. American Behavioral Scientist, 48(2), 256–265. doi:10.1177/0002764204267273

Questions that apply to this article:

1. The author suggests that credibility has traditionally been viewed as an attribute of the source’s trustworthiness and competence. How do you tie this claim to what you've read in your textbook about a speaker’s credibility?
2. The author notes that, in the time of Aristotle, the decision of a jury of peers was based on what they had heard, and it was very tied up with their perception of the speakers’ credibility (ethos) and with social values related to the situation and its larger context. Is this still the case today with modern juries?
3. In the article's conclusion, the author discusses the issue of credibility on the Web and with authors. Do you find any parallels between authors who write for the Web and authors who prepare a speech?

Article 2:  Paulus, P. B., Kohn, N. W., Arditti, L. E., & Korde, R. M. (2013). Understanding the Group Size Effect in Electronic Brainstorming. Small Group Research, 44(3), 332–352. doi:10.1177/1046496413479674

Questions that apply to this article:

1. Identify where in the article the authors note that “although there are many ways to generate good ideas, one of the more popular techniques involves brainstorming (Osborn, 1957). The classic brainstorming process involves generating ideas by focusing on generating a large quantity of ideas while deferring evaluation until a later session. The assumption is that by generating a large quantity of ideas, there is an increased probability of producing good solutions. This is in fact true (cf., Paulus, Kohn, & Arditti, 2011), and we have discovered much about the brainstorming process and how to enhance brainstorming (Nijstad & Stroebe, 2006; Paulus & Coskun, 2012).” The authors continue to discuss how research on group brainstorming has not necessarily shown strong results of synergy. Why do you think the aspect of synergy in group brainstorming needs to be researched?
2. The authors suggest that “although it is generally presumed that brainstorming with others will enhance the number and quality of the ideas generated, controlled studies that compare interactive brainstorming with nominal groups have shown that verbal brainstorming in groups actually hinders the number of ideas generated (Diehl & Stroebe, 1987; Mullen, Johnson, & Salas, 1991).” When preparing for a public presentation, we seem to most often brainstorm as individuals. Do you think that using an electronic platform to brainstorm with others (friends, classmates) might also lead to a reduction in ideas? Why?
3. Find the author’s discussion of how individuals have a tendency to prematurely conform their ideas to their peers when brainstorming. Do you think this is generally true in the groups in which you have worked? Do you believe you tend generate more ideas alone or with a small group? Do you find that you generate more ideas in face-to-face interactions or online?