本研究透過同步網路合作學習活動，探討實施概念性鷹架的提示對學習者在非結構化問題解決任務之學習成效、互動模式以及問題解決歷程的影響。研究採前後測準實驗設計，選取中部地區四所大學財務金融相關學系170位學生為實驗對象。研究工具為研究者自編之前測評量、非結構化問題解決任務、問題解決評分準則、學習成就測驗、延宕測驗、自我效能量表以及群體效能量表。資料分析分為兩部分，一是語意資料的處理，本研究以內容分析法進行互動行為分類，並使用序列分析推導出群體互動行為的轉換模式；二是測驗分數的處理，本研究以多變量變異數分析方法、獨立樣本t檢定、單因子共變數分析，比較實驗組與控制組在處理非結構化問題解決任務上，群體討論品質、解題績效、學習成就測驗以及延宕測驗的差異情形，以及使用階層線性模式探討網路合作學習模式之對學習成效之跨層次的影響效果。研究結果發現：概念性鷹架能改善群體互動行為以及提升群體討論的品質；認知因素會影響學生個人的學習成效；在控制認知因素影響下，網路合作學習模式對學習成效具有正向影響作用；網路合作學習模式對認知因素與學習成效的關係，具有脈絡調節效應。

The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of conceptual scaffolding on learner’s interactive behavior and their ill-structured problem-solving performance during learning with a synchronous web-based cooperative learning environment. A total of 170 undergraduates’ major finance from 4 classes in central Taiwan universities randomly assigned to either the No Scaffolding (NS) or Conceptual Scaffolding condition (CS) used a web-based learning environment for 2 hours to learn about Capital Budgeting. The instruments used in this study were: Prior Knowledge Test, Ill-Structured Problem Solving Test, and The Rubric for Coding Quality of Group Solution, Achievement Test, Delay Test, Self-Efficacy Scale, and Group efficacy Scale. Data analysis was divided into two parts: First, content analysis was used to determine what learners discussed and sequential analysis was used to determine communication patterns; second, the Test scores were analyzed through MANOVA, t-test, ANCOVA and Hierarchical Linear Modeling. Results indicated that the CS condition facilitated the group interaction and discussion quality significantly more than did the NS condition. In addition, the HLM results indicated that prior knowledge, self-efficacy, individual participation ratio, treatment type, group efficacy, and problem-centered interactional activity directly affected learning performance. On the other hand, problem-centered interactional activity had a positive moderating effect on the relationships among psychological learning process, and learning performance.

第壹章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的 5
第三節 名詞解釋 6
第四節 研究之重要性 8
第貳章 文獻探討 11
第一節 網路合作學習 11
第二節 問題導向學習 19
第三節 跨層次分析的推論 25
第参章 研究設計與實施 37
第一節 研究樣本 37
第二節 研究設計與研究架構 40
第三節 研究流程 43
第四節 研究工具 48
第五節 資料分析 75
第肆章 研究結果 87
第一節 互動內涵分析 87
第二節 討論品質與群體績效 91
第三節 網路合作學習模式的序列分析 98
第四節 非結構化問題解決任務之學習成效 113
第五節 網路合作學習模式的脈絡調節分析 119
第伍章 結論與建議 135
第一節 結論 135
第二節 建議 142
參考文獻 147
中文部份 147
英文部份 148
附錄 171
附錄一 前測試卷 171
附錄二 非結構化問題解決任務 173
附錄三 學習成就測驗 175
附錄四 延宕測驗試卷 178
附錄五 自我效能量表 179
附錄六 群體效能量表 182

中文部份
林鉦棽（2005）。組織公民行為之跨層次分析：層級線性模式的應用。管理學報，22，503-524。
林鉦棽、彭台光（2006）。多層次管理研究：分析層次的概念、理論和方法。管理學報，23，649-675。
姜堯民（2007）。財務管理原理。台北：新陸書局
孫春在、林珊如（2007）。網路合作學習。台北：五南圖書。
陳年興、王逸宏（2004）。網路學習重要觀念與小組同步合作學習模式探討。教育研究月刊，125，74-92
陳年興、汪承蓉（2009）。網路教學線上即時授課之問題探討與解決方法。臺北市立圖書館館訊，22（4），46-61。
黃政傑、吳俊憲（2006）。合作學習發展與實踐。台北：五南圖書。
黃寶園、林世華（2002）。合作學習對學習效果影響之研究：統合分析。教育心理學報，34（1），21-42。
鄭義（2004）。財務管理：觀念、理論、個案。台北：新陸書局。
謝劍平（2006）。財務管理：新觀念與本土化。台北：智勝文化。
 
英文部份
Agarwal, R., Sambamurthy, V., & Stair, R. M. (2000). Research report: The evolving relationship between general and specific computer self efficacy-An empirical assessment. Information Systems Research, 11(4), 418-430.
Alavi, M. & Gallupe, R. B. (2003). Using information technology in learning: Case studies in business and management education programs. Academic of Management Learning and Education, 2(2), 139-153.
Alavi, M. (1994). Computer-mediated collaborative learning: An empirical evaluation. MIS Quarterly, 18(2), 150-174.
Alavi, M., Wheeler, B. C., & Valacich, J. S. (1995). Using IT to reengineer business education: An exploratory investigation of collaborative tele-learning. MIS Quarterly, 19(3), 293-313.
Anderson, W. & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Blooms’ educational objectives. New York: Longman.
Azevedo, R., Cromley, J. G., & Seibert, D. (2004). Does adaptive scaffolding facilitate students’ ability to regulate their learning with hypermedia? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 344-370.
Azevedo, R., Cromley, J., Winters, F., Moos, D., & Greene, J. (2005). Adaptive human scaffolding facilitates adolescents’ self-regulated learning with hypermedia. Instructional Science, 33, 381-412.
Bakeman, R. & Gottman, J. M. (1997). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Baker, D. F. (2001). The development of collective efficacy in small task group. Small Group Research, 32(4), 451-474.
Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In Pajares, F. & Urdan, T. (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 307-337). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
Bannan-Ritland, B. (2002). Computer-mediated communication, eLearning, and interactivity: A review of the research. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3(2), 161-179.
Bliese, P. D. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In K. J. Klein and Kozlowski, S. W. J. (Eds.), Multilevel Theory, Research, and Methods in Organizations, 349-381. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Buchs, C., Butera, F., & Mugny, G. (2004). Resource interdependence, student interactions and performance in cooperative learning. Educational Psychology, 24, 291-314.
Chen, G. & Bliese, P. D. (2002). The role of different levels of leadership in predicting self- and collective efficacy: Evidence for discontinuity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 549-556.
Chen, Y., Chen, N. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2009). The use of online synchronous discussion for web-based professional development. Computer & Education, 53, 1155-1166.
Chiu, M. M. & Khoo, L. (2003). Rudeness and status effects during group problem solving: Do they bias evaluations and reduce the likelihood of correct solutions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 506-523.
Chiu, M. M. & Khoo, L. (2005). A new method for analyzing sequential process: Dynamic multilevel modeling. Small Group Research, 36, 600-631.
Cho, K. L., & Jonassen, D. H. (2002). The effects of argumentation scaffolds on argumentation and problem solving. Educational Technology, Research & Development, 50, 5-22.
Choi, I. & Lee, K. (2009). Designing and implementing a case-based learning environment for enhancing ill-structured problem solving: classroom management problems for prospective teacher. Educational Technology Research & Development, 57, 99-129.
Cohen, E. G. (1994). Designing group work: Strategies for the heterogeneous classroom (2nd Ed.). New York: Teachers College.
Cohen, E. G., Lotan, R. A., Abram, P. L., Scarloss, B. A., & Schultz, S. E. (2002). Can groups learn? Teachers College Record, 104(6), 1045-1068.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd Ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Compeau, D. R. & Higgins, C. A. (1995a). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 189-211.
Compeau, D. R. & Higgins, C. A. (1995b). Applications of social cognitive theory to training for computer skills. Information Systems Research, 6(2), 118-143.
Cress, U. (2008). The need for considering multilevel analysis in CSCL research-An appeal for the use of more advanced statistical methods. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3, 69-84.
De Wever, B., Van Keer, H., Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2007). Applying multilevel modeling to content analysis data: Methodological issues in the study of role assignment in asynchronous discussion groups. Learning and Instruction, 17, 436-447.
Deng, X., Doll, W. J., & Truong, D. (2004). Computer self-efficacy in an ongoing use context. Behaviour & Information Technology, 23(6), 395-412.
DeSantics, G. & Gallupe, R. B. (1987). A foundation for the study of group decision support systems. Management Science, 33(5), 586-609.
Dochy, F. J. R. C., De Ridjt, C., & Dyck, W. (2002). Cognitive prerequisites and learning: How far have we progressed since Bloom? Implications for educational practice and teaching. Active Learning in Higher Education, 3, 265-284.
Dochy, F. J. R. C., Segers, M., & Buehl, M. M. (1999). The relation between assessment practices and outcomes of studies: The case of research on prior knowledge. Review of Educational Research, 69, 145-186.
Downey, J. P. & McMurtrey, M. (2007). Introducing task-based general computer self-efficacy: An empirical comparison of three general self-efficacy instruments. Interacting with Computers, 19, 382-396.
Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41, 1040-1048.
Eccles, J. S. & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109-132.
Erkens, G., Andriessen, J., & Peters, N. (2003). Interaction and performance in computer-supported collaborative tasks. In H. van Oostendorp (Eds.), Cognition in a Digital World (pp. 225-252). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Erkens, G., Jaspers, J., Prangsma, M., & Kanselaar, G. (2005). Coordination processes in computer supported collaborative writing. Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 463-486.
Fidas, Ch., Komis, V., Tzanavaris, S., & Avouris, N., (2005). Heterogeneity of learning material in synchronous computer-supported collaborative modeling. Computers & Education, 44(2), 135-154.
Gavin, M. B., & Hofmann, D. A. (2002). Using hierarchical linear modeling to investigate the moderating influence of leadership climate. Leadership Quarterly, 13, 15-33.
Gibson, C. B., Randel, A. E., & Earley, P. C. (2000). Understanding group efficacy: An empirical test of multiple assessment methods. Group & Organization Management, 25, 67-97.
Gist, M. E. (1987). Self-efficacy: Implications for organizational behavior and human resource management. Academy of Management Review, 12, 472-485.
Gist, M. E., Schwoerer, C., & Rosen, B. (1989). Effects of alternative training methods on self-efficacy and performance in computer software training. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(6), 884-891.
Gully, S. M., Incalcaterra, K. A., Joshi, A., & Beaubien, J. M. (2002). A meta-analysis of team-efficacy, potency, and performance: Interdependence and level of analysis as moderators of observed relationships. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 819-832.
Guzzo, R. A., Yost, P. R., Compbell, R. J., & Shea, G. P. (1993). Potency in groups: Articulating a construct. British Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 87-106.
Hackman, J. R. & Morris, C. G. (1983). Group task, group interaction, and group performance effectiveness. Small Group and Social Interaction, 1, 331-345.
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R., and Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate Data Analysis. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Häkkinen, P. & Järvelä, S. (2006). Sharing and constructing perspectives in web-based conferencing. Computers & Education, 47, 433-447.
Hannafin, M., Land, S., & Oliver, K. (1999). Open learning environments: Foundation, methods, and models. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.). Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. II, pp. 115-140). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Harackiewicz, J. M, Barron, K. E, Tauer, J. M., & Elliot, A. J. (2002). Predicting success in college: A longitudinal study of achievement goals and ability measures as predictors of interest and performance from freshman year through graduation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 562–575.
Hardin, A, M., Fuller, M. A., & Valacich, J. S. (2006). Measuring group efficacy in virtual teams: New questions in an old debate. Small Group Research, 37(1), 65-85.
Hasan, B. (2003). The influence of specific computer experiences on computer self-efficacy beliefs. Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 443-450.
Hill, T., Smith, N. D., & Mann, M. F. (1987). Role of efficacy expectations in predicting the decision to use advanced technologies: The case of computers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(2), 307-313.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235–266.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Chernobilsky, E., & Jordan, R. (2008). Understanding collaborative learning processes in new learning environments. Instructional Science, 36, 409–430.
Hou, H. T., Chang, K. E., & Sung, Y. T. (2007). An analysis of peer assessment online discussions within a course that uses project-based learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 15(3), 237-251.
Hou, H. T., Chang, K. E., & Sung, Y. T. (2008). Analysis of problem-solving based online asynchronous discussion pattern. Educational Technology & Society, 11(1), 17-28.
Hou, H. T., Sung, Y. T., & Chang, K. N. (2009). Exploring the behavioral patterns of an online knowledge sharing discussion activity among teachers with problem-solving strategy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(1), 101-108.
James, L. R., Demaree, R. G. & Wolf, G. (1984). Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 85-98.
Jang, S. J. (2008). The effects of integrating technology, observation and writing into a teacher education method course. Computers & Education, 50, 853-865.
Janssen, J., Erkens, G., & Kanselaar, G. (2007a). Visualization of agreement and discussion processes during computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 1105-1125.
Janssen, J., Erkens, G., Kanselaar, G., & Jaspers, J. (2007b). Visualization of participation: Does it contribute to successful computer-supported collaborative learning? Computers & Education, 49, 1037-1065.
Jocob, E. (1999). Cooperative learning in context: An educational innovation in everyday classrooms. New York: State University of New York.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. J. (1998). Cooperation in the classroom. Minnesota: Interaction Book Company.
Johnson, D., Johnson, R., & Smith, K. (1991). Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
Jonassen, D. H. & Kwon, H. (2001). Communication patterns in computer mediated versus face-to-face group problem solving. Educational Technology, Research & Development, 49(1), 35-51.
Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Towards a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology, Research & Development, 48(4), 63-85.
Jung, D. I. & Sosik, J. J. (2003). Group potency and collective efficacy: Examining their predictive validity, level of analysis, and effects of performance feedback on future group performance. Group & Organization Management, 28, 366-391.
Kapur, M. & Kinzer, C. K. (2007). Examining the effect of problem type in a synchronous computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) environment. Educational Technology Research & Development, 55, 439-459
Kapur, M. & Kinzer, C. K. (2009). Productive failure in CSCL groups. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4, 21-46.
Kapur, M. (2008). Productive Failure. Cognition and Instruction, 26, 379-424.
Kapur, M., Voiklis, J., & Kinzer, C. (2008). Sensitivities to early exchange in synchronous computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL) groups. Computers & Education, 51, 54–66.
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86.
Klein, K. J., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (2000). From micro to meso: Critical steps in conceptualizing and conducting multilevel research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(3), 211-236.
Kopcha, T. J. & Sullivan, H. (2008). Learner Preferences and Prior Knowledge in Learner-Controlled Computer-Based Instruction. Educational Technology Research & Development, 56(3), 265-286.
Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology. University of Pennsylvania, PA: Sage Publications.
Lee, E. Y. C., Chan, C. K. K., & Van Aalst, J. (2006). Students assessing their own collaborative knowledge building. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1, 57-87.
Lindsley, D. H., Brass, D. J., & Thomas, J. B. (1995). Efficacy-performance spirals: A multilevel perspective. Academy of Management Review, 20, 645-678.
Litwin, G. & Stringer, N. (1968). Motivation and organizational climate. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.
Liu, C. C. & Tsai, C. C. (2008). An analysis of peer interaction patterns as discoursed by on-line small group problem-solving activity. Computers & Education, 50, 627-639.
Lou, Y., Abrami, P. C., & d’Apollonia, S. (2001). Small group and individual learning with technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71, 449-521.
Mone, M. A. (1994). Comparative validity of two measures of self-efficacy in predicting academic goals and performance. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 516-529.
Moos, D. C. & Azevedo, R. (2008). Monitoring, planning, and self-efficacy during learning with hypermedia: The impact of conceptual scaffolds. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 1686-1706.
Mulvey, P. W. & Ribbens, B. A. (1999). The effects of intergroup competition and assigned group goals on group efficacy and group effectiveness. Small Group Research, 30(6), 651-677.
Nelson, B. C. & Ketelhut, D. J. (2008). Exploring embedded guidance and self-efficacy in educational multi-user virtual environments. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3, 413-427.
Norman, W. T. (1963). Toward an adequate taxonomy of personality attributes: Replicated factor structure in peer nomination personality ratings. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 574–583.
Osman, G. & Herring, S. C. (2007). Interaction, facilitation, and deep learning in cross-cultural chat: A case study. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(2), 125-141.
Poole, M. S. & Holmes, M. E. (1995). Decision development in computer-assisted group decision making. Human Communication Research, 22(1), 90-127.
Prussia, G. E. & Kinicki, A. J. (1996) A motivational investigation of group effectiveness using social cognitive theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 187-198.
Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Resta, P. & Laferrière, T. (2007). Technology in support of collaborative learning. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 65-83.
Saleh, M., Lazonder, A. R., & de Jong, T. (2007). Structuring collaboration in mixed-ability groups to promote verbal interaction, learning, and motivation of average-ability students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(3), 314-331.
Schellens, T., Van Keer, H., & Valcke, M. (2005). This impact of role assignment on knowledge construction in asynchronous discussion groups: A multilevel analysis. Small Group Research, 36, 704-745.
Schellens, T., Van Keer, H., & Valcke, M. (2007). The impact of role assignment on knowledge construction in asynchronous discussion groups: A multilevel analysis. Small Group Research, 36(6), 1-42.
Schellens, T., Van Keer, H., Valcke, M., & De Wever, B. (2007). Learning in asynchronous discussion groups: A multilevel approach to study the influence of student, group and task characteristics. Behaviour & Information Technology, 26, 55-71.
Schraw, G., Dunkle, M. E., & Bendixen, L. D. (1995). Cognitive processes in well-defined and ill-defined problem solving. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 1–16.
Schwartz, D. L. (1999). The productive agency that drives collaborative learning. In P. Dillenbourg (Eds.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 197–218). NY: Elsevier Science.
Seijts, G. H., Latham, G. P., & Whyte, G. (2000). Effect of self- and group efficacy mixed-motive situation. Human Performance, 13(3), 279-298.
Shapiro, A. (1999). The relationship between prior knowledge and interactive overviews during hypermedia-aided learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 20(2), 143–167.
Shapiro, A. (2000). The effect of interactive overviews on the development of conceptual structure in novices learning from hypermedia. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 9(1), 57–78.
Shaw, M. E. (1981). Group dynamics: The psychology of small group behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Shih, Y. Y. (2006). The effect of computer self-efficacy on enterprise resource planning usage. Behaviour and Information Technology, 25(5), 407-411.
Shin, N., Jonassen, D. H., & McGee, S. (2003). Predictors of well-structured and ill-structured problem solving in an astronomy simulation. Journal of research in science teaching, 40(1), 6-33.
Shivers-Blackwell, S. L. & Charles, A. C. (2006). Ready, set, go: Examining student readiness to use ERP technology. Journal of Management Development, 25(8), 795-805.
Silver, W. S. & Bufanio, K. M. (1996). The impact of group efficacy and group goals on group task performance. Small Group Research, 27(3), 347-359.
Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice (2nd Ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice (2nd Ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Slavin, R. E. (1999). Comprehensive approaches to cooperative learning. Theory into practice, 38(2), 74-79.
Sorensen, E. & Takle, E. (2002). Collaborative knowledge building in web-based learning: Assessing the quality of dialogue. International Journal of E-learning, 1(1), 28-32.
Stahl, G. (2005). Group cognition in computer assisted collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 79–90.
Strijbos, J. W. & Fischer, F. (2007). Methodological challenges for collaborative learning research. Learning and Instruction, 17, 389-393.
Strijbos, W., Martens, R. L., Jochems, W. M. G., & Broers, N. J. (2004). The effect of functional roles on group efficiency: Using multilevel modeling and content analysis to investigate computer-supported collaboration in small groups. Small Group Research, 25, 195-229.
Strijbos, W., Martens, R. L., Jochems, W. M. G., & Broers, N. J. (2007). The effect of functional roles on perceived group efficiency during computer-supported collaborative learning: A matter of triangulation. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 353-380.
Suthers, D. D. (2006). Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning making: A research agenda for CSCL. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(3), 315–337.
Thompson, R. A. & Zamboanga, B. L. (2004). Academic aptitude and prior knowledge as predictors of student achievement in introduction to psychology. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 778–784.
Valentine, J.C., DuBois, D.L., & Cooper, H. (2004). The relation between self-beliefs and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review. Educational Psychologist, 39, 111–133.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
Whiteoak, J. W., Chalip, L., & Hort, L. K. (2004). Assessing group efficacy: Comparing three methods of measurement. Small Group Research, 35(2), 158-173.