Asynchronous team support: Perceptions of the group problem solving process when using a CyberCollaboratory

The research presented studied thirty-three groups of student volunteers over a period of three weeks while the groups performed a series of teamwork tasks. To investigate the viability of Web-based group support tools for asynchronous learning networks, student volunteers from four widely distributed universities were assigned to one of four experimental conditions. The conditions are; 2 modes of communication (asynchronous vs. synchronous)/spl times/2 support conditions (with CyberCollaboratory support or without). The groups assigned to the different conditions reported significant differences in perceptions of the group problem solving process. The face-to-face groups felt the process was more efficient, coordinated, fair, and satisfying. Those with CyberCollaboratory support thought the process was more confusing and less satisfying. Comments from the students suggest the reason for these results may be a combination of insufficient training time (one week) and a short period (two weeks) for using the tools to accomplish a fairly simple group task. Interaction effects showed that both the asynchronous groups with CyberCollaboratory support and the baseline (face-to face) groups found the problem solving process to be more efficient, coordinated, and fair than did either the asynchronous groups without CyberCollaboratory support or the face-to face groups with CyberCollaboratory support.

[1]  James D. Thompson Organizations in Action , 1967 .

[2]  L. Richard Hoffman,et al.  Applying Experimental Research on Group Problem Solving to Organizations , 1979 .

[3]  Starr Roxanne Hiltz,et al.  Network Nation: Human Communication Via Computer , 1979 .

[4]  Paul Gray,et al.  Group decision support systems , 1987, Decis. Support Syst..

[5]  Ilze Zigurs,et al.  The effect of computer-based support on influence attempts and patterns in small group decision-making , 1987 .

[6]  R. Watson A study of group decision support system use in three and four-person groups for a preference alloca , 1987 .

[7]  Michael E. Holmes,et al.  Distributed group support systems: Social dynamics and design dilemmas , 1991 .

[8]  Vinton Gray Cerf National Collaboratories: Applying Information Technologies for Scientific Research , 1993 .

[9]  Starr Roxanne Hiltz,et al.  Distributed group support: a preliminary analysis of the effects of the use of voting tools and sequential procedures , 1994, 1994 Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[10]  Starr Roxanne Hiltz,et al.  The Virtual Classroom: Learning Without Limits Via Computer Networks , 1994 .

[11]  Starr Roxanne Hiltz,et al.  Teaching in a Virtual Classroom , 1995 .

[12]  Andrew B. Whinston,et al.  Creating a collaboratory in cyberspace: Theoretical foundation and an implementation , 1995, J. Organ. Comput..

[13]  Starr Roxanne Hiltz,et al.  Learning Networks: A Field Guide to Teaching and Learning Online , 1995 .

[14]  M. Lynn Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences , 1996 .

[15]  James D. Myers,et al.  Collaboratories: Doing Science on the Internet , 1996, Computer.

[16]  William Rogers,et al.  Enriching asynchronous learning networks through the provision of virtual collaborative learning spaces: a research pilot , 2001, Proceedings of the 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.