1、外文翻译原文AMULTIVARIATEANALYSISOFTHEEFFECTSOFEXPERIENCEANDTRAININGUPONPERFORMANCEINALEADERLESSGROUPDISCUSSIONMATERIALSOURCEABHIGYANAUTHORNANDAN,SHEFALIALTHOUGHSOMEEVIDENCEHASBEENMUSTEREDTOSUPPORTTHERELIABILITYBASS,1954GREENWOODANDMCNAMARA,1967BRAY,1964BRAYANDGRANT,1966ANDVALIDITYBASS,1954WOLLOWICKANDMCN
2、AMARA,1969BRAYANDGRANT,1966OFTHELEADERLESSGROUPDISCUSSIONLGD,THEREISONEWEAKNESSOFTHETECHNIQUETHATMUSTBECONSIDEREDTHATIS,THEREISSOMEQUESTIONTHATASSLGDPERFORMANCEMAYBEAFUNCTIONOFSEVERALVARIABLESWHICHAREINDEPENDENTOFTHESSLEADERSHIPABILITYONESUCHVARIABLEISTHESIZEOFTHELGDGROUPBASSANDNORTON1951EXAMINEDLGD
3、GROUPSVARYINGINSIZEFROM2TO12ANDFOUND83PERCENTOFTHEVARIANCEAMONGTHESSCOULDBEACCOUNTEDFORBYTHESIZEOFTHEGROUPINWHICHTHESSPARTICIPATEDINTHISSAMESTUDY,INTERRATERRELIABILITYREACHEDAMAXIMUMWITHLGDGROUPSOFSIXSSANDTENDEDTOBECOMELOWERASGROUPSIZEWASALTEREDINEITHERDIRECTIONBASS,KLUBECK,ANDWURSTER1953HAVEALSOFOU
4、NDARELATIONSHIPBETWEENGROUPSIZEANDMEANDISCUSSIONRATINGSTHATIS,THEYREPORTANEGATIVECORRELATIONOF37EVENWHEREGROUPSIZEDIFFERENCESWERESMALLTHEPOSSIBLEEFFECTSOFSEATINGPOSITIONUPONLGDPERFORMANCEHAVEALSOBEENINVESTIGATEDSTEINZOR1950,FOREXAMPLE,FOUNDTHATTHEFARTHERAWAYAGIVENSWASFROMANOTHERSWHOWASSPEAKING,THEMO
5、RELIKELYWASTHEFIRSTSTOREACTVERBALLYWHENTHESPEAKERFINISHEDTHISWASANINTERESTINGFINDINGINLIGHTOFTHEFACTTHATAMOUNTOFPARTICIPATIONANDLGDPERFORMANCEHAVEBEENFOUNDTOBEHIGHLYCORRELATED,65TO86BASS,1949LUCASANDJAFFEE,1969SUBSEQUENTLY,BASSANDKLUBECK1952HYPOTHESIZEDTHATANYPARTICIPANTINALGDWHOHADAGREATERMEANSITTI
6、NGDISTANCEFROMALLOTHERPARTICIPANTSWOULDRECEIVEAHIGHERPERFORMANCERATINGTOTESTTHEIRHYPOTHESIS,BASSANDKLUBECKSTUDIEDTHEEFFECTOFSEATINGARRANGEMENTINTWOGROUPSWHERESSSATINPARALLELROWSFACINGEACHOTHERANDINFIVEGROUPSWHERESSSATINVSHAPEDARRANGEMENTSTHERESULTSOBTAINEDFROMALLSEVENGROUPSINDICATEDTHATSSSEATEDATTHE
7、ENDSOFTHESEATINGARRANGEMENTSOBTAINEDHIGHERMEANSCORESHOWEVER,THEEFFECTWASSTATISTICALLYSIGNIFICANTINONLYTWOOFTHESEGROUPSANDTHEINVESTIGATORSNOTEDTHATTHEEFFECTTENDEDTODISAPPEARWHENVARIATIONSINTHOREALLIFEESTEEMOFSSWEREHELDCONSTANTAMORERECENTSTUDYHOWELLSANDBECKER,1962FOUNDSUPPORTFORTHEEFFECTOFSEATINGARRAN
8、GEMENTINTHISSTUDY20GROUPSOFFIVESSEACHPERFORMEDAPROBLEMSOLVINGTASKAFTERWHICHTHEPARTICIPANTSRATEDOTHERGROUPMEMBERSONEXHIBITEDLEADERSHIPINEACHGROUPTWOSSSATONONESIDEOFTHETABLEWHILETHEOTHERTHREESSSATONTHEOPPOSITESIDETHERESULTSINDICATEDTHATAGREATERNUMBEROFLEADERSTHANWOULDBEEXPECTEDBYCHANCEEMERGEDFROMTHETW
9、OSEATSIDEOFTHETABLETHISFINDINGLEDTHEINVESTIGATORSTOCONCLUDETHATSEATINGARRANGEMENTWASAFACTORINLEADERSHIPEMERGENCETHUS,THEREISSTILLSOMEQUESTIONCONCERNINGTHEEFFECTOFSEATINGARRANGEMENTTHEHOWELLSANDBECKERSTUDYEMPLOYEDADIFFERENTCRITERIONPEERRATINGS,ADIFFERENTSEATINGARRANGEMENT,ANDDIDNOTCONTROLFOREXTRANEOU
10、SVARIABLESASWELLASTHEBASSANDKLUBECKSTUDYBASSSSTATEMENT1954,P469SEEMSTOREPRESENTFAIRLYWELLTHERESULTOFTHERESEARCHEVIDENCETODATEONPOSITION“ATANYRATETHEDIFFERENCES,STATISTICALLYSIGNIFICANTORNOT,ASSOCIATEDWITHPARTICIPANTSLOCATIONINTHEGROUPWERETOOSMALLTOBEOFMUCHPRACTICALCONCERN“ANOTHERVARIABLETHATHASBEENS
11、TUDIEDINRELATIONTOLGDPERFORMANCEISTHEEFFECTOFTRAININGORCOACHINGIFBRIEFTRAININGIMPROVEDTHEPERFORMANCEOFSSINALGDWITHOUTACORRESPONDINGCHANGEINREALABILITY,THETECHNIQUEWOULDNOTBEVERYUSEFULIFLGDSCORESWEREBEINGASSIGNEDTOTWOSSWHOWEREINTHESAMELGDGROUPANDWHOBOTHHADTHESAMELEADERSHIPABILITY,THEISWHOHADRECEIVEDT
12、HETRAININGORCOACHINGMIGHTPOSSIBLYRECEIVEAHIGHERSCORETHANTHESWHOHADNOTRECEIVEDTHETRAININGORCOACHINGKLUBECKANDBASS1952STUDIEDTHEEFFECTOFTRAININGBYBRIEFITYCOACHINGTHETHIRDHIGHESTANDSIXTHHIGHESTSSAFTERAPRETESTIN20LGDSOFSEVENPEOPLEEACHTHEGROUPSWERETHENRETESTEDANDTHEDATAWEREANALYZEDTHROUGHANANALYSISOFCOVA
13、RIANCETHERESULTSLEDTHEAUTHORSTOINFERTHATSSWHOWEREFAIRLYHIGHINLGDSCOREINITIALLYPROFITEDSIGNIFICANTLYFROMCOACHING,WHILESSWHOWEREINITIALLYLOWDIDNOTPROFITATALLFROMTHEBRIEFCOACHINGWHILETHEINCREASEINLGDSCORESOFTHEHIGHRANKINGSSWASSTATISTICALLYSIGNIFICANT,ITWASNOTVERYLARGEINANABSOLUTESENSE,AND,THEAUTHORSCON
14、CLUDEDTHATLGDBEHAVIORISAFUNCTIONOFPERSONALITYTRAITSANDNEEDSWHICHCANNOTBEALTEREDRAPIDLYBYBRIEFCOACHINGBASS,1954THISCONCLUSIONISINLINEWITHTHEOPINIONOFHARRIS1950WHOBELIEVESTHATONECANNOTCRAMFORTHELGDHESUGGESTSTHATPRIMINGACANDIDATEWOULDMOSTLIKELYHANDICAPHIMBYINHIBITINGHISSPONTANEITYFURTHERSUPPORTFORTHEHA
15、RRISHYPOTHESISHASBEENPROVIDEDBYANUNPUBLISHEDSTUDYPRUITTANDBASS,ASREPORTEDINBASS,1954INWHICHTHEESGAVETHESAMEPARTDIRECTIVE,PARTPERMISSIVECOACHINGASKLUBECKANDBASS1952HADGIVENEARLIER,BUTTHEGROUPSRECEIVINGTRAININGWERECOACHEDASGROUPSPRIORTOUNDERGOINGTHELGDTHERESULTSINDICATEDTHATTHETRAINEDGROUPSSHOWEDSIGNI
16、FICANTLYLESSINITIATIONBEHAVIORANDONLYHALFASMUCHCONSIDERATIONBEHAVIORASTHEUNTRAINEDGROUPS“RATERSCOMMENTEDONTHEFREEZINGUPANDINCREASEDNERVOUSNESSANDTENSIONSWHICHCHARACTERIZEDTHETRAINEDGROUPS“BASS,1954,P470ANOBSERVATIONWHICHWOULDAPPEARTOSUPPORTTHEHARRISHYPOTHESISUNFORTUNATELY,VERYLITTLEDATAWEREPROVIDEDT
17、OSUPPORTTHECONCLUSIONSTHEGROUPSMAYHAVEDIFFEREDINLEADERSHIPPOTENTIALSTATUS,PRESTIGE,VERBALABILITY,ETCBEFORETHETREATMENTSALSO,THEEFFECTOFTRAININGANDTESTINGTHESSINTHESAMEGROUPMAYHAVEHADANINHIBITINGEFFECTSINCEEACHSWOULDBEAWAREOFANYOTHERSWHOATTEMPTEDTOIMPROVEHISPERFORMANCEBY“FAKING,“IE,BYMODIFYINGHISBEHA
18、VIORASAFUNCTIONOFANYKNOWLEDGEGAINEDINTHETRAININGSESSIONWITHOUTACORRESPONDINGCHANGEINABILITYEVIDENCETHATTRAININGCANMAKEIMMEDIATEMODIFICATIONSTOLEADERBEHAVIORHASBEENPROVIDEDBYWEXLEYANDJAFFEE1970INTHISSTUDYTHEBSUSEDTHEMETHODOFTELECOACHINGTOIMPROVETHEHUMANRELATIONSBEHAVIOROFSUPERVISORSTELECOACHINGEMPLOY
19、SAWIRELESSDEVICETOPROVIDEINSTANTFEEDBACKANDSUBSEQUENTLYINSTANTREINFORCEMENTTOTHESTHEEXCELLENTAPPLICATIONSOFBASICLEARNINGPRINCIPLESFEEDBACK,ACTIVEPARTICIPATION,ETCMAYBEONEREASONWHYTHISMETHODOFTRAININGHASBEENSUCCESSFULHOWEVER,WEXLEYANDJAFFEEWARNTHATFURTHERRESEARCHISNEEDEDTODETERMINEWHETHERTHEBEHAVIORC
20、HANGESOBTAINEDINTHISSTUDYREMAINSTABLEOREXTINGUISHOVERTIMEADDITIONALSUPPORTFORTHEEFFECTOFTRAININGUPONLEADERSHIPBEHAVIORHASBEENPROVIDEDBYFURR1969THERESULTSOFTHISSTUDYINDICATEDTHATLEADERSWHOOBSERVEDANOTHERLEADERPLAYINGAGAMEANDLISTENEDTOTHETELECOACHINGHERECEIVEDASHEPLAYED,MODIFIEDTHEIRBEHAVIORABOUTASMUC
21、HASTHOSEWHOACTUALLYPLAYEDTHEGAMETHEMSELVESANDRECEIVEDTHECOACHINGDIRECTLYITAPPEARSTHATTHEFINDINGSCONCERNINGTHEEFFECTSOFTRAININGUPONLEADERSHIPBEHAVIORINSMALLGROUPSAREINCONCLUSIVEONLYTWOSTUDIESKLUBECKANDBASS,1954PRUITTANDBASS,UNPUBLISHEDHAVESPECIFICALLYINVESTIGATEDTHEEFFECTSOFTRAININGINALGDANDTHERESULT
22、S,ACCORDINGTOBASS1954,WERENEGATIVEINBOTHCASESHOWEVER,THEREAPPEARSTOBESOMEDISCREPANCYBETWEENTHECONCLUSIONSREPORTEDBYKLUBECKANDBASS1954ANDBASS1954THATIS,KLUBECKANDBASS1954,P70,INTHEORIGINALARTICLE,REPORTED“THISSTUDYHASDEMONSTRATEDTHATCOACHINGACTUALLYBENEFITSTOSOMEEXTENTPARTICIPANTSOFFAIRLYHIGHSTATUS,“
23、BASS1954LATERIMPLIEDTHATTHESTATISTICALLYSIGNIFICANTEFFECTINTHEKLUBECKANDBASSSTUDYLACKEDPRACTICALSIGNIFICANCENEVERTHELESS,THERESULTSOFONLYONEPUBLISHEDSTUDYDONOTPROVIDESUFFICIENTEVIDENCEREGARDINGTHERELATIONSHIPBETWEENTRAININGANDLGDPERFORMANCETHUS,THEPRIMARYPURPOSEOFTHISPRESENTINVESTIGATIONWASTOSTUDYTH
24、EEFFECTSOFTRAININGUPONLGDPERFORMANCETHEEFFECTOFPREVIOUSLGDEXPERIENCEUPONSUBSEQUENTLGDPERFORMANCEWASALSOINVESTIGATEDINTHISSTUDYSINCESTUDIESOFTHEEFFECTSOFTHISVARIABLEWERENONEXISTENTINTHELITERATURETHEEFFECTSOFEXPERIENCEANDTRAININGAREREFIECTEDINTHEDATATHATAREPRESENTEDINTABLE2ANEXAMINATIONOFTHISTABLEINDI
25、CATESTHATTHETRAININGEFFECTWASSTATISTICALLYSIGNIFICANTACROSSALLCRITERIONMEASURESUNIVARIATETESTSWHILETHEEXPERIENCEEFFECTFAILEDTOREACHSIGNIFICANCEINANYOFTHECRITERIONMEASURESTHETRAININGEFFECTWASALSOSIGNIFICANTINTHEMULTIVARIATEANALYSISOFCOVARIANCETHEONLYSIGNIFICANTINTERACTIONETOCCURSWITHORACOMPARISONOFTH
26、EADJUSTEDMEANSACROSSTREATMENTSINTABLE4INDICATESTHATTHISINTERACTIONISDUETOTHEFACTTHATTHENETGROUPRECEIVEDAHIGHERORAVERAGETHANTHEETGROUPONEPOSSIBLEEXPLANATIONFORTHISINTERACTIONCOULDBETHATTHENETGROUPWASMOREATTENTIVEDURINGTHETRAININGSESSIONSINCETHEYWERENOTASFAMILIARWITHTHELGDTHATIS,THEYHADNOTPARTICIPATED
27、INTHEFIRSTLGDHOWEVER,THISEXPLANATIONISWEAKENEDWHENONECONSIDERSTHENONSIGNIFICANTINTERACTIONSINTHEISANDCDATAANESTIMATEOFTHEVARIANCETHATCANBEACCOUNTEDFORBYTHEEXPERIMENTALTREATMENTSISFOUNDUNDERTHEOMEGAHAYS,1963COLUMNINTABLE2ALTHOUGHTHESEVALUESARENOTOVERLYIMPRESSIVE,THEVALUEFORISANDORWOULDCOMPAREWITHVALI
28、DITYCOEFFICIENTSTHATAREOFTENREPORTEDINTHELITERATURETHATIS,CORRELATIONSINTHELOW30SWHICHWOULDACCOUNTFORABOUT9TO10OFTHEVARIANCEINTHECRITERIONMEASUREWHENTHECORRELATIONSARESQUAREDTHUSTHERESULTSOFTHISSTUDYINDICATESOMEEVIDENCEFORTHESUPPOSITIONTHATTRAININGCANACCOUNTFORSOMEOFTHEVARIANCEINTHESSRATEDPERFORMANC
29、ETHISFINDINGISINCONGRUENTWITHTHECONCLUSIONSOFBASS1954,BUTTHISMAYBEDUETOTHEFACTTHATTHETRAININGCONTENTINTHEPRESENTSTUDYWASMORESPECIFICTOTHELGDTHETRAININGCONTENTINTHISSTUDYREVOLVEDAROUNDTHEHISTORY,DEVELOPMENT,RATINGINSTRUMENTS,ANDRESEARCHRELATIVETOTHELGDFOREXAMPLE,THETRAINEDSSOBSERVEDTHERATINGINSTRUMEN
30、TWHICHWOULDBEUSEDTOEVALUATETHEIRLGDPERFORMANCESTHEYWERETOLDIFYOUWILLEXAMINETHISCHECKLIST,YOUWILLSEETHATTHELGDAPPEARSTOMEASURETHEEXTENTTOWHICHANINDIVIDUALINITIATESSTRUCTUREORISSOCIALLYBOLDINAMBIGUOUSSITUATIONS,ANDALSOTHEAMOUNTOFCONSIDERATIONANINDIVIDUALDISPLAYSTOWARDHISPEERSTHUS,IFYOUARETOMAXIMIZEYOU
31、RSCORE,YOUSHOULDDISPLAYTHEBEHAVIORSTHATAREINCLUDEDONTHISCHECKLISTCONSEQUENTLY,THESSWHORECEIVEDTRAININGINTHISSTUDYWEREAWAREOFTHEDEMANDCHARACTERISTICSORNE,1962ANDWILSON,1971OFTHESITUATIONANDCONSEQUENTLYKNEWHOWTO“FAKE“THELGDIFTHEYSODESIREDTHEPRIMARYIMPLICATIONOFTHETRAININGEFFECTISFORTHEUSEOFTHELGDINTHE
32、ASSESSMENTCENTERIFTHELGDPERFORMANCEOFANSCANBEIMPROVEDWITHA15MINUTEBRIEFING,WHATWILLBETHEEFFECTOFTHE“GRAPEVINE“INFORMATIONTHEASSCESSEERECEIVESBEFOREHEENTERSTHEASSESSMENTCENTERTHEKEYASSUMPTIONINVOLVEDINTHEDEVELOPMENTOFTHISQUESTIONISTHATTHEASSESSEESAREUNDERPRESSUREINTHEASSESSMENTCENTERTOPERFORMWELLSINC
33、ETHEYPERCEIVETHATTHEIRFUTUREWITHTHEORGANIZATIONWILLBEINFIUENCEDBYTHEIRPERFORMANCESITISLIKELY,THEREFORE,THATTHEYWILLRESPONDINANAPPROPRIATEMANNERIFTHEYAREAWAREOFTHEDEMANDCHARACTERISTICSOFTHEASSESSMENTCENTERTHUS,SI,WHOSELEADERSHIPPOTENTIALISEQUALTOTHATOFS2,MAYRECEIVEALOWEREVALUATIONCOMPAREDTOS2IFSHASRE
34、CEIVEDCOACHINGORTRAININGIFBRIEFTRAININGIMPROVESS2SRATINGWITHOUTACORRESPONDINGINCREASEINACTUALLEADERSHIPPOTENTIAL,S2HASANUNFAIRADVANTAGEOVERSITHERESULTSOFTHISSTUDYMAYBEGENERALIZEDONLYTOOTHERASSESSMENTCENTERSETTINGSINMILITARYORGANIZATIONSHOWEVER,THISSTUDYHASRAISEDSOMEQUESTIONSABOUTTHEINDISCRIMINATEUSE
35、OFTHELGDADDITIONALRESEARCHISNEEDEDBEFORETHELGDBECOMESAVICTIMOFTHE“BANDWAGONEFFECT“IE,THEINDISCRIMINATEAPPLICATIONOFATECHNIQUEBECAUSEITISINVOGUE译文多变量分析经验和培训的影响在无领导小组讨论中的作用。资料来源ABHIGYAN作者MMPETTY虽然有些证据被用来支持的信度贝斯，1954；格林伍德和麦克纳马拉，1967；布雷和格兰特，1966和效度（贝斯，1954；沃尔威客和麦克纳马拉，1967；布雷和格兰特，1966）进行区领导小组讨论（LGD）,必须考虑
36、这是一项虚弱的技术。也就是说,有一些问题,LGDS的表现可能是一个函数的几个变量独立的S的领导能力。这样的一个变量的LGD组。贝斯和诺顿（1951）检测在SS所代表的变量从2至12不同尺寸LGD组发现存在有83的方差。在这个相同的研究，6个变量的无领导小组讨论的可靠性达到最大，由此向两边的趋势逐渐减小。贝斯，克鲁贝克和伍斯特（1953）研究也发现小组大小与讨论效率是存在一定关系的。也就是，即使小组的人数再小他们的报告成是负37相关。座椅位置可能产生的影响在LGD也被调查。举例来说，圣塔士（1950）发现被给定的越远的相对于两外一个近的也就是谁在说话,就越有可能是第一个完成口头演讲人。在参与的变
37、量当中这是一项有趣的发现并且相关性非常高，达到065086（贝斯1949；卢卡斯和詹妮弗，1969）。随后，贝斯和克鲁贝克（1952），假设,任何参赛者在LGD中，意味着谁坐在距离越适合与所有其他参与者将获得更高性能的评价。为了验证她们的假设，贝斯和克鲁贝克安排了两个小组进行研究，一组的两排面对面的小组，另一组的5个人做成V字形。所有的七组计算结果表明,安排坐在座位的两头的具有较高的分数。然而，据统计影响这些的因素只有2个，研究人员指出,在现实生活，在S变量不变化的情况下，这种影响将会逐渐消失。最近的研究（威尔士和贝克，1962）发现支持公布座位安排的影响。在这项研究中，每组由5个人员组成的2
38、0个小组中在解决同一个问题时所表现出来的领导能力是不同的。每一组一边坐2个人对面坐三个人，这个研究发现座位的安排对无领导小组讨论是一个重要的因素。也就是，对座位的安排影响还是存在一些问题的。威尔士和贝克研究了雇员的不同标准，不同的座位安排，是一个不可控的变量就像贝斯和克鲁贝克研究的那样。LGD另一个变量之间的关系研究是培训效果或辅导。在没有相应变化的现实能力下，简单的培训是可以提高在无领导小组中的表现的，这项技术并不是非常有用。如果无领导小组的评价分数是根据两个参与者在相同的小组中和具有想通的领导能力，那么参加过培训或辅导的人相对与没有参加过培训或辅导就有可能获得更高的分数。贝斯和克鲁贝克（1
39、952）在每组由7个人组成的20个小组中，研究发现通过简单培训有第三高和第六高。小组被再次测验和数据通过协方差分析进行分析。数据结果使作者推断，培训使人在相对较公平的无领导小组中取得较高的分数。然而在无领导小组讨论分数递增排名统计是显著的，这不是非常大的在绝对意义上说，作者们总结说,LGD行为是一个函数包括人的格特征和无法改变迅速短暂培训。这一结论是符合哈里斯的意见1950年,相信一个人不能完成无领导小组讨论。他建议候选人很可能会通过抑制他的冲动妨碍他的行为表现。一项未公布的研究（普鲁特和贝斯，由贝斯代为发表，1954）证明哈里斯的假设。结果表明，被培训过的群组明显的显示具有较小的启蒙行为而未
40、被培训的群组只有他们的一半。评委的评论会给培训过的小组人员增加紧张感和冰冻感。不幸的是，只有少数的数据能证明这个结论。小组人员的领导潜质在被培训过后可能存在不同。有证据显示培训可以迅速的改变一个人的领导行为已经被维克斯和詹妮弗（1970）证明。在这项研究中，运用提前培训被监察人来提高人际关系。电视辅导是采用一种无线设备对参与者即时反馈和立即巩固的方法。对基本学习原则的有效运用也许是这种培训成功的原因之一。然而，维克斯和詹妮弗提醒更进一步的调查是必须的来确定稳定的行为改变在这项研究或是扑灭。另外一项研究对于培训在领导行为中的作用已经被份福尔（1969）证明。这个研究结果表明那些引导别的领导游戏和
41、倾听电视教程的领导者们按照他们的方式游戏，调整他们的行为就像实际玩过这个游戏一样。如果你检测这项清单，你会发现在一定程度上出现个人素质构架是在含糊的情况下被社会化，个人性格特征被认为是这些数据中趋向于他的同类别的。看来这些发现关于训练的效果在领导行为方面的影响是不确定的。只有两项研究明确的表明培训在无领导小组中的影响，根据贝斯的研究结果，在这两个研究中的结果都是消极的。研究证明对公平高地位程度的参与者培训是有实际效益的。贝斯随后又在克鲁贝克和贝斯的研究中暗示有统计的显著影响缺乏实际的证明。不过，在一项已经公布的研究结果中没有提供足够的证据证明关于人际关系和培训在无领导小组讨论中的关系。因此，最初的这项最近的研究的目的是研究培训在路领导小组中的效度。在早先的无领导小组讨论经验和后来的无领导小组经验上都证明了无领导小组讨论是由多个变量因素相互作用而成的。经验和培训对无领导小组讨论的影响在表2中的数据可以被看出。在这个证明表格中可以发现统计显著的作用于在所有的标准都是由多个变量引起的。培训的影响主要有效的应用于无领导小组评价中心。如果一个参与者在15分钟在无领导小组表现能提高。
