Why distance matters: effects on cooperation, persuasion and deception

In this study, we examine how geographic distance affects collaboration using computer-mediated communication technology. We investigated experimentally the effects of cooperating partners being in the same or distant city on three behaviors: cooperation, persuasion, and deception using video conferencing and instant messaging (IM). Our results indicate that subjects are more likely to deceive, be less persuaded by, and initially cooperate less, with someone they believe is in a distant city, as opposed to in the same city as them. Although people initially cooperate less with someone they believe is far away, their willingness to cooperate increases quickly with interaction. Since the same media were used in both the far and near city conditions, these effects cannot be attributed to the media, but rather to social differences. This study confirms how CSCW needs to be concerned with developing technologies for bridging social distance, as well as geographic distance.

[1]  Steven G. Jones Cybersociety 2.0: revisiting computer-mediated communication and community , 1998 .

[2]  E. Hall,et al.  The Hidden Dimension , 1970 .

[3]  Steven M. Drucker,et al.  The effect of communication modality on cooperation in online environments , 2000, CHI.

[4]  G. Olson,et al.  From Laboratories to Collaboratories: A New Organizational Form for Scientific Collaboration , 1997 .

[5]  Youngme Moon,et al.  The effects of distance in local versus remote human-computer interaction , 1998, CHI.

[6]  Judith S. Olson,et al.  Distance Matters , 2000, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[7]  J. Sensenig,et al.  Cooperation in the prisoner’s dilemma as a function of interpersonal distance , 1972 .

[8]  James D. Herbsleb,et al.  Object-Oriented Analysis and Design in Software Project Teams , 1995, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[9]  Jonathan Grudin,et al.  Meeting at the desktop: An empirical study of virtually collocated teams , 1999, ECSCW.

[10]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Patterns of contact and communication in scientific research collaboration , 1990, CSCW '88.

[11]  Judith S. Olson,et al.  What mix of video and audio is useful for small groups doing remote real-time design work? , 1995, CHI '95.

[12]  Abigail Sellen,et al.  Remote Conversations: The Effects of Mediating Talk With Technology , 1995, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[13]  Youngme Moon,et al.  Impression management in computer-based interviews: The effects of input modality, output modality, and distance. , 1998 .

[14]  Russell Spears,et al.  COMPUTER-MEDIATED COMMUNICATION, DEINDIVIDUATION AND GROUP DECISION-MAKING , 1991 .

[15]  Bonnie A. Nardi,et al.  Interaction and outeraction: instant messaging in action , 2000, CSCW '00.

[16]  D. Paulhus Two-component models of socially desirable responding. , 1984 .

[17]  Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa,et al.  Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams , 1999 .

[18]  James H. Liu,et al.  Distance Matters: Physical Space and Social Impact , 1995 .

[19]  B. Latané The psychology of social impact. , 1981 .

[20]  L. Nahemow,et al.  Similarity and propinquity in friendship formation. , 1975 .

[21]  M. Poster The Second Media Age , 1994 .

[22]  Gloria Mark,et al.  Social presence with video and application sharing , 2001, GROUP.

[23]  T. Allen Managing the flow of technology , 1977 .

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

[25]  Maureen S. Battistella,et al.  Connections: New Ways of Working in the Networked Organization , 1991 .

[26]  Paul Rosenfeld,et al.  Impression management, social desirability, and computer administration of attitude questionnaires: Does the computer make a difference? , 1992 .

[27]  H. Tajfel Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations. , 1978 .

[28]  Youngme Moon,et al.  The effects of physical distance and response latency on persuasion in computer-mediated communication and human–computer communication. , 1999 .

[29]  Lee Sproull,et al.  My partner is a real dog: cooperation with social agents , 1996, CSCW '96.

[30]  T. Newcomb,et al.  The Acquaintance Process , 1962 .

[31]  Russell Spears,et al.  Computer-Mediated Communication, De-Individuation and Group Decision-Making , 1991, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[32]  M. Castells The rise of the network society , 1996 .