The Effects of Gender Interaction Patterns on Student Participation in Computer-Supported Collaborative Argumentation

In this study we examined response patterns in exchanges between males and females and their effects on gender participation in five online debates. Students classified messages into arguments, evidence, critiques, and elaborations while posting messages to the debates to facilitate argumentation and the sequential analysis of message-response sequences. The findings revealed no differences in number of critiques posted in response to arguments because females were just as likely as males to critique messages from both males and females, and because females responded to males with critiques at a higher than expected frequency. Posthoc analysis revealed strong indications that females posted fewer rebuttals to the critiques of females than males, and males posted more rebuttals to the critiques of females than females. The methods used in this study illustrate a process-oriented approach to explain and predict gender differences in participation and serve as a framework for future research on gender participation, group interaction, and strategies for facilitating collaborative argumentation and problem solving.

[1]  Allan Jeong,et al.  The Combined Effects of Response Time and Message Content on Growth Patterns of Discussion Threads in Computer-Supported Collaborative Argumentation. , 2004 .

[2]  Patrick J. Fahy,et al.  Patterns of Interaction in a Computer Conference Transcript , 2001 .

[3]  Gayle V. Davidson-Shivers,et al.  Synchronous and Asynchronous Discussion: What Are the Differences in Student Participation? , 2000 .

[4]  D. Newman.  An Experiment in Group Learning Technology: Evaluating Critical Thinking in Face-to-Face and Computer-Supported Seminars. , 1996 .

[5]  Daniel N. Stern,et al.  Mother and infant at play: The dyadic interaction involving facial, vocal, and gaze behaviors. , 1974 .

[6]  V. Savicki,et al.  Gender Language Style and Group Composition in Internet Discussion Groups , 2006 .

[7]  John A. Ross.  The Influence of Computer Communication Skills on Participation in a Computer Conferencing Course , 1996 .

[8]  Roger Bakeman,et al.  Social Rules Governing Object Conflicts in Toddlers and Preschoolers , 1982 .

[9]  José Bidarra,et al.  Current Developments and Best Practice in Open and Distance Learning , 2000 .

[10]  P. Coirier,et al.  Foundations of argumentative text processing , 2000 .

[11]  Christine B. Smith,et al.  Conduct Control on Usenet , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[12]  김용진.  Discourse in the Novel , 2006 .

[13]  M. Lipman.  Thinking in Education , 1992 .

[14]  Gayle V. Davidson-Shivers,et al.  Gender Differences: Are They Diminished in Online Discussions? , 2003 .

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

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

[17]  S. Herring.  Two variants of an electronic message schema , 1996 .

[18]  David H. Jonassen,et al.  The effects of argumentation scaffolds on argumentation and problem solving , 2002 .

[19]  Thomas M. Duffy,et al.  Using asynchronous conferencing to promote critical thinking: two implementations in higher education , 1999, Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences. 1999. HICSS-32. Abstracts and CD-ROM of Full Papers.

[20]  Jerry Andriessen,et al.  Collaborative learning through computer-mediated argumentation , 1999, CSCL.

[21]  Susan C. Herring,et al.  Gender and Democracy in Computer-Mediated Communication , 1995, Computerization and Controversy, 2nd Ed..

[22]  P. Dillenbourg,et al.  The evolution of research on collaborative learning , 1996 .

[23]  David McConnell,et al.  Interaction Patterns of Mixed Sex Groups in Educational Computer Conferences. Part I--Empirical Findings , 1997 .

[24]  Jennifer Wiley,et al.  Constructing arguments from multiple sources: Tasks that promote understanding and not just memory for text. , 1999 .

[25]  Steven S. Vrooman.  Flamethrowers, Slashers and Witches: Gendered Communication in a Virtual Community , 2001 .

[26]  S. Toulmin.  The uses of argument , 1960 .

[27]  Florence Geis,et al.  Nonverbal affect responses to male and female leaders: Implications for leadership evaluations. , 1990 .

[28]  D. Garrison,et al.  Methodological Issues in the Content Analysis of Computer Conference Transcripts , 2007 .

[29]  D. Tannen.  You just don't understand: women and men in conversation. morrow , 1990 .

[30]  Timothy Koschmann,et al.  Toward a dialogic theory of learning: Bakhtin's contribution to understanding learning in settings of collaboration , 1999, CSCL.

[31]  R. Garrison.  Theoretical Challenges for Distance Education in the 21st Century: A Shift from Structural to Transactional Issues , 2000 .

[32]  Allan Jeong,et al.  The Effects of Conversational Language on Group Interaction and Group Performance in Computer-Supported Collaborative Argumentation , 2006 .

[33]  Kenneth H. Rubin,et al.  Peer relationships and social skills in childhood , 1982 .

[34]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Creative Controversy: Intellectual Challenge in the Classroom , 1992 .

[35]  Charlotte N. Gunawardena,et al.  Analysis of a Global Online Debate and the Development of an Interaction Analysis Model for Examining Social Construction of Knowledge in Computer Conferencing , 1997 .

[36]  B. Allen.  Gender and computer-mediated communication , 1995 .

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

[38]  James D. Herbsleb,et al.  Characterizing the sequential structure of interactive behaviors through statistical and grammatical techniques , 1994 .

[39]  J. Gottman.  Marital Interaction: Experimental Investigations , 1980 .

[40]  Andrew J. Flanagin,et al.  Computer-Mediated Group Work: The Interaction of Sex and Anonymity , 2002, Commun. Res..

[41]  N. Baym.  Agreements and Disagreements in a Computer-Mediated Discussion , 1996 .

[42]  Patrick J. Fahy.  Epistolary and Expository Interaction Patterns in a Computer Conference Transcript , 2002 .

[43]  A. C. Kruger.  Peer collaboration: conflict, cooperation, or both? , 1993 .

[44]  Patricia G. Wojahn,et al.  Computer-Mediated Communication: The Great Equalizer between Men and Women?. , 1994 .

[45]  Allan Jeong.  The Sequential Analysis of Group Interaction and Critical Thinking in Online , 2003 .

[46]  Patrick J. Fahy,et al.  Use of Linguistic Qualifiers and Intensifiers in a Computer Conference , 2002 .

[47]  Alexander Renkl,et al.  A plea for “more local” theories of cooperative learning , 1992 .

[48]  P. Fahy.  Indicators of Support in Online Interaction , 2003 .

[49]  Lin Muilenburg,et al.  How Do Students Participate in Synchronous and Asynchronous Online Discussions? , 2001 .