The effects of time scarcity on conflict and compromise in computer conferencing

This paper examines the effects of time scarcity on the way disagreement is managed in synchronous computer conferencing. We report an experiment in which pairs of undergraduate students used keyboard-based conferencing software to resolve disputes on two controversial discussion topics under conditions either of time scarcity or time abundance. Drawing on previous work on discussion styles in computer-mediated communication (CMC), we predicted that time-limited computer discussions would be more consensus-driven than time-abundant discussions, with fewer statements of fact or inference but relatively more value and position statements. In fact, no differences in factual or inferential argumentation between these conditions were observed. Instead, we found position statements alone to be more frequent in time-limited discussions on one topic, and value statements more frequent in discussions of the other topic. A follow-up analysis of discussion content revealed differences between topics in the availability of a compromise position. Where compromise was possible, arguments in time-scarce conditions focused on the positional concessions necessary to reach agreement within the time available. Where compromise was less attainable, time scarcity led to an increase in value-based argument. We conclude that temporal constraints profoundly affect the way in which disputes are interpreted and collaboratively managed in computer conferencing.