The Impact of Anonymity on Perceptions of Source Credibility and Influence in Computer-Mediated Group Communication: A Test of Two Competing Hypotheses

As scholars and practitioners have endeavored to develop computer-based tools that foster effective communication and collaboration in groups, anonymity has played a key role. Anonymity purportedly minimizes status differences, liberates team members from a fear of retribution, and makes members feel more comfortable contributing to discussions. Yet these benefits may be outweighed by the impact of anonymity on receiver perceptions and behavior. Two competing hypotheses, drawn from adaptive structuration theory, were tested in this study to determine the impact of anonymity on receiver perceptions of sources and messages in computer-mediated group communication. The results of the multilevel models offer evidence in support of the discounting hypothesis and suggest that anonymity provided by electronic meeting systems may undermine source credibility and influence.

[1]  D. Kashy,et al.  Conceptual and Methodological Issues in the Analysis of Data from Dyads and Groups , 2012 .

[2]  Victoria K. Clawson,et al.  Research-driven facilitation training for computer-supported environments , 1996 .

[3]  C. Erik Timmerman,et al.  Ironic uses of group communication technology: Evidence from meeting transcripts and interviews with group decision support system users , 1998 .

[4]  Bruce A. Reinig,et al.  Toward an Understanding of Satisfaction with the Process and Outcomes of Teamwork , 2003, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[5]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  Understanding Fit and Appropriation Effects in Group Support Systems via Meta-Analysis , 2001, MIS Q..

[6]  T. Postmes,et al.  Social processes and group decision making: anonymity in group decision support systems , 2000, Ergonomics.

[7]  S. Fiske,et al.  The Handbook of Social Psychology , 1935 .

[8]  H. Kelley,et al.  Communication and Persuasion: Psychological Studies of Opinion Change , 1982 .

[9]  Bruce A. Reinig,et al.  An investigation of the influence of national culture and group support systems on group processes and outcomes , 2003, 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2003. Proceedings of the.

[10]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  Data analysis in social psychology. , 1998 .

[11]  P. Bentler,et al.  Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis : Conventional criteria versus new alternatives , 1999 .

[12]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  Understanding the use of Group Decision Support Systems: The Theory of Adaptive Structuration , 1990 .

[13]  Poppy Lauretta McLeod,et al.  A comprehensive model of anonymity in computer-supported group decision making , 1997, ICIS '97.

[14]  Larry E. Toothaker,et al.  Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions , 1991 .

[15]  N. Kerr.  When is a minority a minority? Active versus passive minority advocacy and social influence , 2002 .

[16]  Kwok Kee Wei,et al.  An Empirical Investigation of the Effects of Group Support Systems (GSS) and Task Type on Group Interactions from an Influence Perspective , 2000, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[17]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  Capturing the Complexity in Advanced Technology Use: Adaptive Structuration Theory , 1994 .

[18]  Peter M. Bentler,et al.  EQS : structural equations program manual , 1989 .

[19]  Blair T. Johnson.  Insights about Attitudes: Meta-Analytic Perspectives , 1991 .

[20]  F. Boster,et al.  The impact of varying argument quality and minority size on influencing the majority and perceptions of the minority , 2001 .

[21]  Dennis S. Gouran,et al.  Behavioral correlates of perceptions of quality in decision‐making discussions , 1978 .

[22]  J. Mccroskey.  Scales for the measurement of ethos , 1966 .

[23]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  Information exchange and use in GSS and verbal group decision making: effects of minority influence , 1997, Proceedings of the Thirtieth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[24]  M. Hardy.  Regression with dummy variables , 1993 .

[25]  C. D. De Dreu,et al.  Minority Influence on Focal and Related Attitudes: Change in Size, Attributions, and Information Processing , 2002 .

[26]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  Information Exchange and Use in Group Decision Making: You Can Lead a Group to Information, but You Can't Make It Think , 1996, MIS Q..

[27]  Paul A. Mongeau,et al.  Majority/minority size and the evaluations of persuasive arguments , 1992 .

[28]  Charles R. Schwenk,et al.  Devil's Advocacy and Dialectical Inquiry Effects on Face-to-Face and Computer-Mediated Group Decision Making , 1995 .

[29]  Alain Pinsonneault,et al.  Anonymity in Group Support Systems Research: A New Conceptualization, Measure, and Contingency Framework , 1997, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[30]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Lessons from a Dozen Years of Group Support Systems Research: A Discussion of Lab and Field Findings , 1996, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[31]  Lorne Campbell,et al.  Estimating Actor, Partner, and Interaction Effects for Dyadic Data Using PROC MIXED and HLM: A User–Friendly Guide , 2002 .

[32]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  A conceptual framework of anonymity in Group Support Systems , 1992 .

[33]  S. Kiesler,et al.  Group processes in computer-mediated communication☆ , 1986 .

[34]  J. Valacich,et al.  Group Size and Anonymity Effects on Computer-Mediated Idea Generation , 1992 .

[35]  J. Bonito.  The Analysis of Participation in Small Groups , 2002 .

[36]  Ronald E. Rice,et al.  Identification of Comment Authorship in Anonymous Group Support Systems , 2003, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[37]  Richard E. Yellen,et al.  Extraversion and introversion in electronically-supported meetings , 1995, Inf. Manag..

[38]  J. Mccroskey,et al.  Goodwill: A reexamination of the construct and its measurement , 1999 .

[39]  K. Wei,et al.  An Empirical Study of the Task Dimension of Group Support System , 1994, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst..

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

[41]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The statistical analysis of data from small groups. , 2002, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[42]  Paul A. Mongeau,et al.  Argument quality and group member status as determinants of attitudinal minority influence , 1993 .

[43]  C. Scott.  The impact of physical and discursive anonymity on group members’ multiple identifications during computer‐supported decision making , 1999 .

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

[45]  B. Tabachnick,et al.  Using multivariate statistics, 5th ed. , 2007 .

[46]  F. Heider.  The psychology of interpersonal relations , 1958 .

[47]  J. Valacich,et al.  Effects of anonymity and evaluative tone on idea generation in computer-mediated groups , 1990 .

[48]  Sara B. Kiesler,et al.  The Equalization Phenomenon: Status Effects in Computer-Mediated and Face-to-Face Decision-Making Groups , 1991, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[49]  J. Glenn.  Ethics in Decision Making , 1986 .

[50]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  A Study of Collaborative Group Work With and Without Computer-Based Support , 1990, Inf. Syst. Res..

[51]  Dennis S. Gouran,et al.  The handbook of group communication theory & research , 1999 .

[52]  Douglas R. Vogel,et al.  A cross-cultural comparison of GSS and non-GSS consensus and satisfaction levels within and between the U.S. and Mexico , 1996, Proceedings of HICSS-29: 29th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[53]  Ronald E. Rice,et al.  Attribution accuracy when using anonymity in group support systems , 1997, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[54]  Ajay S. Vinze,et al.  Technology, culture and persuasiveness: a study of choice-shifts in group settings , 1997, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

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

[56]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Meeting analysis: findings from research and practice , 2001, Proceedings of the 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[57]  Anne P. Massey,et al.  Element Finding: The Impact of a Group Support System on a Crucial Phase of Sense Making , 1995, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[58]  Stephen A. Rains,et al.  Leveling the Organizational Playing Field—Virtually , 2005, Commun. Res..

[59]  Kwok Kee Wei,et al.  Interacting effects of GDSS and leadership , 1994, Decis. Support Syst..

[60]  Janet Fulk,et al.  Organizations and Communication Technology , 1990 .