Enhancing Mutual Understanding in Synchronous Computer-Mediated Communication by Training

Ineffective use of text-based synchronous computer-mediated communication (CMC), that is, chats, may affect the quality of communicative exchange compared to effective use and to face-to-face (FtF) communication. Especially in groups making decisions in equivocal judgmental tasks, inappropriate use of the CMC medium often impairs performance. Users need high communication and media competencies to overcome the negative effects brought about by the technology. Without intervention, mutual understanding and satisfaction with the group process are reduced in computer-mediated decision groups. Training that helps participants adapt to the medium should provide them with the needed competencies. The authors found a complex pattern of process and outcome effects with the best performance scores in the FtF condition, performance scores in CMC with training approximating those of the FtF condition, and lowest performance scores in CMC without training.

[1]  Susan G. Straus,et al.  Getting a Clue , 1996 .

[2]  Joseph E. McGrath,et al.  Time matters in groups , 1990 .

[3]  Roger Bakeman,et al.  Observing Interaction: An Introduction to Sequential Analysis , 1986 .

[4]  R. Spears,et al.  Social influence and the influence of the 'social' in computer-mediated communication. , 1992 .

[5]  S. Kiesler,et al.  Group decision making and communication technology , 1992 .

[6]  S. Herring.  Computer-mediated communication : linguistic, social and cross-cultural perspectives , 1996 .

[7]  Christina Hellman.  The Notion of Coherence in Discourse , 1995 .

[8]  Carl Graf Hoyos,et al.  Leistungsverbesserungen in aufgabenorientierten Kleingruppen , 2003 .

[9]  Vincent Yzerbyt,et al.  The Primacy of the Ingroup: The Interplay of Entitativity and Identification , 2000 .

[10]  J. Fleiss.  Statistical methods for rates and proportions , 1974 .

[11]  James J. Bradac,et al.  On Coherence Judgments and Their Multiple Causes: A View from the Message-Variable Paradigm , 1989 .

[12]  Herbert H. Clark,et al.  Grounding in communication , 1991, Perspectives on socially shared cognition.

[13]  Tom Postmes,et al.  Cognitive and strategic processes in small groups: effects of anonymity of the self and anonymity of the group on social influence. , 2002, The British journal of social psychology.

[14]  Joseph B. Walther,et al.  Misattribution and attributional redirection in distributed virtual groups , 2002, Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[15]  J. Walther.  Computer-Mediated Communication , 1996 .

[16]  Garold Stasser,et al.  Speaking turns in face-to-face discussions. , 1991 .

[17]  Stephanie D. Teasley,et al.  Perspectives on socially shared cognition , 1991 .

[18]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  Rethinking media richness: towards a theory of media synchronicity , 1999, Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences. 1999. HICSS-32. Abstracts and CD-ROM of Full Papers.

[19]  S. Planalp,et al.  Not to Change the Topic But …: A Cognitive Approach to the Management of Conversation , 1980 .

[20]  Jacob Cohen.  A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales , 1960 .

[21]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Intellectual Teamwork: Social and Technological Foundations of Cooperative Work , 1990 .

[22]  Ursula Piontkowski,et al.  Topic Progression and Social Categorization , 1997 .

[23]  S. Ng,et al.  Conversation as a resource for influence: evidence for prototypical arguments and social identification processes , 2000 .

[24]  H. Rutenberg.  Group processes. , 1974, Hospital progress.

[25]  J. McGrath.  Groups interacting with technology: the complex and dynamic fit of group, task, technology, and time , 1992, CSCW '92.

[26]  N. Schwarz.  Agenda 2000 — Social judgment and attitudes: warmer, more social, and less conscious , 2000 .

[27]  B. Szuchewycz,et al.  Power in Language: Verbal Communication and Social Influence , 1995 .

[28]  David A. Shapiro,et al.  Resources Required in the Construction and Reconstruction of Conversation. , 1978 .

[29]  S. Condon,et al.  Functional comparisons of face-to-face and computer-mediated decision making interactions , 1996 .

[30]  H. H. Clark,et al.  Hearers and speech acts , 1982 .

[31]  W. Grove.  Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions, 2nd ed , 1981 .

[32]  A. Lott,et al.  Group cohesiveness as interpersonal attraction: a review of relationships with antecedent and consequent variables. , 1965, Psychological bulletin.

[33]  Michael A. Hogg,et al.  The Social Psychology of Group Cohesiveness: From Attraction to Social Identity , 1992 .

[34]  G. Miller,et al.  Handbook of Interpersonal Communication , 1985 .

[35]  Rachel Reichman,et al.  Conversational Coherency , 1978, Cogn. Sci..

[36]  Susan G. Straus,et al.  Testing a Typology of Tasks , 1999 .

[37]  J. Walther.  Interpersonal Effects in Computer-Mediated Interaction , 1992 .

[38]  R. Zajonc.  The process of cognitive tuning in communication. , 1960, Journal of abnormal and social psychology.

[39]  Franziska Tschan,et al.  Communication Enhances Small Group Performance if it Conforms to Task Requirements: The Concept of Ideal Communication Cycles , 1995 .

[40]  M. Wallach,et al.  Risk Taking: A Study in Cognition and Personality , 1965 .

[41]  Philip R. Cohen,et al.  Referring as a Collaborative Process , 2003 .

[42]  Dan Nimmo.  Communication Yearbook 4. , 1980 .

[43]  Joseph N. Cappella,et al.  Sequence and pattern in communicative behaviour , 1985 .

[44]  Martin Lea,et al.  Contexts of computer-mediated communication , 1992 .

[45]  Christopher Habel,et al.  Focus and coherence in discourse processing , 1995 .

[46]  K. Parker,et al.  Speaking turns in small group interaction: A context-sensitive event sequence model. , 1988 .

[47]  Susan G. Straus,et al.  Does the medium matter? The interaction of task type and technology on group performance and member reactions. , 1994, The Journal of applied psychology.

[48]  Thomas R. Hensley,et al.  Victims of Groupthink , 1986 .

[49]  E.,et al.  GROUPS : INTERACTION AND PERFORMANCE , 2001 .

[50]  Victor Savicki,et al.  Effects of training on computer-mediated communication in single or mixed gender small task groups , 2002, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[51]  Susan C. Herring.  Interactional Coherence in CMC , 1999, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[52]  Carol M. Werner,et al.  Responsiveness and communication medium in dyadic interactions , 1976 .

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

[54]  B. Dorval,et al.  Conversational Organization and Its Development , 1990 .

[55]  R. Freedle.  Discourse production and comprehension , 1978 .

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