Collaborators' Attitudes about Differences of Opinion.

The attitudes of long-term collaborators on research publications about the negotiation of substantive differences of opinion were studied. Long-term collaborators were those who had co-authored publications with another academic for 10 years or more. Multiple sources of data collected from both members of 12 collaborative pairs included interviews and analysis of selected publications and the curriculum vitae of each member of the pair. Participants' responses to how they negotiated substantive differences of opinion with the collaborative partner could be grouped on a continuum defined as "Like Minded," five pairs who thought significant differences of opinion were unlikely, Triangulators, three pairs who thought differences were not likely to be about important issues, and Multiplists, four pairs who thought differences of opinion would be frequent and expected. Sixteen of the 24 downplayed the suggestion that they and the collaborative partner experienced significant differences of opinions. Differences in disciplinary training seemed to offer little by way of insight into how members of long-term collaborative pairs viewed differences of opinion. It is hypothesized that members of the first group deny experiencing significant differences of opinion because they began the relationship thinking alike or grew to do so over time. Members of the second group are so familiar with the others' thinking that they are aware that they see the same question from a slightly different angle, and members of the third group see differences as routine because they know each other well enough to recognize their differences. (SLD)