To investigate the influence of group settings on the receiver's perception of an inducement to rhetorical transactions, 45 undergraduates in a basic speech communication course were asked to rank from most important to least important a group of items that might help survivors of an arctic plane crash. After completing individual rankings, subjects participated in small group discussions and created group scores for the items. They then identified the three items showing the greatest incremental differences between their personal and group scores. Subjects' responses were grouped into four general clusters: those listing justifications for changed opinions, those comparing competing arguments, those citing sources as support, and those indicating the group process as an explicit factor in changed ranking. Tentative generalizations from these responses included the following: (1) group rhetoric is inherently related to the consensual development of the group; (2) rhetorical ideas develop from comparisons, which are themselves facilitated by the small group setting; (3) rhetorical transactions are a function of leadership; (4) the construction of an argument in a small group setting is an interactive, social phenomenon; and (5) consensus is frequently a matter of compromise and cooperation rather than agreement. (MM)