How Pre-deliberation Processes Predict Group Discussion: An Application of the Goals-Plans-Action Model


  • Mary Lynn Miller Henningsen Northern Illinois University
  • David Dryden Henningsen Northern Illinois University



The goal of the study was to investigate the role of pre-deliberation planning on the enactment of normative and informational influence attempts during group decision-making. The goals-plans-action model (Dillard, 1990) was used to frame the study. The participants (N=112) performed a judgmental group decision-making task. The results of the study support the GPA in several ways. Pre-deliberation plans were enacted in discussion. In support of the extant group literature, perceptions of the task type influenced the proportion of pre-deliberation informational plans. Post-discussion attitudes toward the group’s decision were related to goals and to the proportion of normative plans.

Author Biographies

Mary Lynn Miller Henningsen, Northern Illinois University

Dr. Mary Lynn Miller Henningsen is a scholar studying group dynamics, social influence, and human communication. She has publiched in a variety of regional, national, and international journals.

David Dryden Henningsen, Northern Illinois University

David Henningsen is a scholar studying group dynamics. He has published research on group decision making, creativity in groups, and group relations. He has published in a variety of regional, national, and international journals.



Berger, C. R. (1997). Planning strategic interaction: Attaining goals through communicative action. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Berger, C. R., & diBattista, P. (1993). Communication failure and plan adaptation: If at first you don’t succeed, say it louder and slower. Communication Monographs, 60, 220-238. doi: 10.1080/03637759309376310

Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon social judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 629-636. doi: 10.1037/h0046408

Dillard, J. P. (1990). A goal-driven model of interpersonal influence. In J. P. Dillard (Ed.), Seeking compliance: The production of interpersonal influence messages (pp. 41-56). Scottsdale, AZ: Gorsuch Scarisbrick.

Dillard, J. P. (2004). The goals-plans-action model of interpersonal influence. In J. S. Seiter & R. H. Gass (Eds.), Perspectives of persuasion, social influence, and compliance gaining (pp. 185-206). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

Dillard, J. P. (2015). Goals-plans-action theory of message production: Making influence messages. In D. O. Braithwaite & P. Schrodt (Eds.), Engaging theories of interpersonal communication: Multiple perspectives (2nd ed., pp. 63-74). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

Dillard, J. P., Anderson, J. W., & Knobloch, L. K. (2002). Interpersonal influence. In M. L. Knapp and J. A. Daly (Eds.) Handbook of interpersonal communication (3rd ed., pp. 425- 474). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Dillard, J. P., Segrin, C., & Harden, J. M. (1989). Primary and secondary goals in the production of interpersonal influence messages. Communication Monographs, 56, 19-38. doi: 10.1080/03637758909390247

Henningsen, D.D., Cruz, M.G., & Miller, M.L. (2000). The role of social loafing in pre-deliberation decision making. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research and Practice, 4, 168-175.

Hullett, C. B. (2004). A test of the initial processes of the goal-planning-action model of interpersonal influence. Communication Studies, 55, 286-299.

Kaplan, M. F. (1989). Task, situational, and personal determinants of influence processes in group decision making. In E. J. Lawler (Ed.) Advances in group processes (Vol. 6, pp. 87-105). Greenwich, CT: JAI.

Kaplan, M. F., & Miller, C. E. (1987). Group decision making and normative versus informational influence: Effects of type of issue and assigned decision rule. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 306-313. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.53.2.306

Kelly, J. R., Jackson, J. W., Hutson-Comeux, S. L. (1997). The effects of time pressure and task differences on influence modes and accuracy in decision-making groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 10-22. doi: 10.2277/0146167297231002

Kerr, N. L., & Watts, B. L. (1982). After division, before decision: Group faction size and pre-deliberation thinking. Social Psychology Quarterly, 45, 198-205.

Laughlin, P. R. (1980). Social combination processes of cooperative, problem-solving groups on verbal intellective tasks. In M. Fishbein (Ed.), Progress in social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 127-155). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Levine, J. M. & Russo, E. (1995). Impact of anticipated interaction on information acquisition. Social Cognition, 13, 293-317.

Meyer, J. R. (2005). Effect of secondary goal importance on the anticipation of message outcomes. Southern Communication Journal, 70, 109-122.

Meyer, J. R. (2009). Effect of primary goal and secondary goal importance and message plan acceptability. Communication Studies, 60, 509-525.doi: 10.1080/10510970903260343

Rugs, D., & Kaplan, M. F. (1993). Effectiveness of informational and normative influences in group decision making depends on the group interactive goal. British Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 147-158.

Simpson, R. H. (1939). The effect of discussion on intra-group divergencies of judgment. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 4, 546-552.

Wilson, S. R. (2002). Seeking and resisting compliance: Why people say what they do when trying to influence others. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Wittenbaum, G. W., Stasser, G., & Merry, C. J. (1996). Tacit coordination in anticipation of small group task completion. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 32, 129-152.



How to Cite

Henningsen, M. L. M., & Henningsen, D. D. (2019). How Pre-deliberation Processes Predict Group Discussion: An Application of the Goals-Plans-Action Model. Groupwork, 27(3), 87-106.