What added benefit do we obtain from dyadic research designs that we do not get

What added benefit do we obtain from dyadic research designs that we do not get from individual participant designs? Is research of group processes distinct from research on dyadic processes? Why? What potentially relevant information do we lose when we include only one part of a larger group (e.g., one member of a dyad) in our sample? Should all group-related processes be studied with dyadic or group designs, assuming that any information collected from multiple members of the same group is likely to be non-independent?

You may also like