Misattribution and attributional redirection in distributed virtual groups

Virtual distributed groups must adapt to a number of sociotechnical characteristics in order to relate positively and work effectively over distance. Short-term groups, in particular; experience considerable difficulty in making the adaptations to systems and partners in virtual teams. When adaptation failures occur; such group members are prone to make attributional judgments about distant partners rather than to consider their own adjustment difficulties. However, by redirecting participants' attributional attention to situational issues, though experience with local rather than distributed virtual interaction, participants become more effective when they encounter subsequent distributed virtual environments. This report describes the theoretical dynamics and the results of three pilot studies, the data from which, in comparison to one another, begin to substantiate this attributional framework for virtual work groups.

[1]  J. Walther Anticipated Ongoing Interaction Versus Channel Effects on Relational Communication in Computer-Mediated Interaction , 1994 .

[2]  T. Postmes,et al.  Breaching or Building Social Boundaries? Side-Effects of Computer-Mediated Communication. , 2002 .

[3]  David W. Park,et al.  Interpersonal Effects in Computer-Mediated Interaction , 1994 .

[4]  J. Walther Group and Interpersonal Effects in International Computer-Mediated Collaboration , 1997 .

[5]  Joseph B. Walther,et al.  Construction and validation of a quantitative measure of impression development , 1993 .

[6]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  A foundation for the study of group decision support systems , 1987 .

[7]  Charles R. Berger,et al.  Studies in interpersonal epistemology: III. Anticipated interaction, self‐monitoring, and observational context selection , 1981 .

[8]  J. Walther,et al.  Relational communication in computer-mediated interaction , 1990 .

[9]  Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa,et al.  Is Anybody Out There? Antecedents of Trust in Global Virtual Teams , 1998, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[10]  Gerald M. Phillips,et al.  Teaching group discussion via computer‐mediated communication , 1989 .

[11]  Fraser J. M. Reid,et al.  The messaging threshold in computer-mediated communication , 1996 .

[12]  C. Cramton The Mutual Knowledge Problem and Its Consequences for Dispersed Collaboration , 2001 .

[13]  Joseph B. Walther,et al.  Is a Picture Worth a Thousand Words? , 2001, Commun. Res..

[14]  Jerold L. Hale,et al.  Validation and measurement of the fundamental themes of relational communication , 1987 .

[15]  Laku Chidambaram,et al.  Relational Development in Computer-Supported Groups , 1996, MIS Q..

[16]  Henk Sol,et al.  Proceedings of the 54th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences , 1997, HICSS 2015.

[17]  J. Walther Relational Aspects of Computer-Mediated Communication: Experimental Observations over Time , 1995 .

[18]  Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa,et al.  Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams , 1999, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[19]  J. Mccroskey,et al.  The measurement of interpersonal attraction , 1974 .

[20]  L. Tidwell,et al.  Computer-Mediated Communication Effects on Disclosure, Impressions, and Interpersonal Evaluations: Getting to Know One Another a Bit at a Time , 2002 .

[21]  Glen W. Clatterbuck Attributional Confidence and Uncertainty in Initial Interaction , 1979 .

[22]  Jonathan Evans,et al.  Styles of group discussion in computer-mediated decision making , 1997 .

[23]  Jonathan A. Rhoades,et al.  Interaction process in computer-mediated and face-to-face groups , 1995, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[24]  K. Burke,et al.  A Study of Partially Distributed Work Groups , 1999 .

[25]  L. Ross The Intuitive Psychologist And His Shortcomings: Distortions in the Attribution Process1 , 1977 .