The messaging threshold in computer-mediated communication

This study examines the effects of text-based computer-mediated communication on group interaction. Fourteen four-person teams were trained to use a networked computer system to produce a sequence of written reports either face-to-face (FTF), or from separate locations using a computer-mediated communication (CMC) system. Results showed that CMC teams took longer to complete their work, but produced reports of equivalent quality to FTF teams. Comparisons of interaction processes revealed a shortfall of social-emotional reactions and task-oriented requests in CMC interactions, but an increase in ingroup-oriented exchanges. Results are interpreted as evidence of a messaging threshold in CMC, in which the decision to send a message depends on the urgency and relevance of the message in relation to the costs associated with its communication. Implications of this threshold for understanding social interaction in CMC groups are discussed.

[1]  J. Walther,et al.  Relational communication in computer-mediated interaction , 1990 .

[2]  Herbert H. Clark,et al.  Grounding in communication , 1991, Perspectives on socially shared cognition.

[3]  D. Norman,et al.  Psychological Issues in Support of Multiple Activities , 1986 .

[4]  R. Spears,et al.  De‐individuation and group polarization in computer‐mediated communication , 1990 .

[5]  Herbert H. Clark,et al.  Contributing to Discourse , 1989, Cogn. Sci..

[6]  S. Kiesler,et al.  Group and computer-mediated discussion effects in risk decision making. , 1987 .

[7]  S. R. Hiltz,et al.  Experiments in group decision making: Communication process and outcome in face-to-face versus computerized conferences. , 1986 .

[8]  Merrill Carlsmith.  Methods of research in social psychology , 1976 .

[9]  Jacqueline G. Ord.  Who's Joking? The Information System at Play , 1989, Interact. Comput..

[10]  R. Spears,et al.  Panacea or Panopticon? , 1994 .

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

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

[13]  S. Siegel,et al.  Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences , 2022, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[14]  Sara Kiesler,et al.  Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication , 1984 .

[15]  E. Mishler,et al.  Scoring and Reliability Problems in Interaction Process Analysis: A Methodological Note , 1966 .

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

[17]  S. Weisband.  Group discussion and first advocacy effects in computer-mediated and face-to-face decision making groups , 1992 .

[18]  J. Stevens.  Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences , 1986 .

[19]  Lee Sproull,et al.  Computers, Networks and Work. , 1991 .

[20]  Alphonse Chapanis,et al.  Interactive human communication , 1975 .

[21]  Philip R. Cohen.  The Pragmatics of Referring and the Modality of Communication , 1984, Comput. Linguistics.

[22]  E. Schegloff,et al.  Opening up Closings , 1973 .

[23]  D. Sperber,et al.  Relevance: Communication and Cognition , 1989 .

[24]  Susan G. Straus,et al.  Does the medium matter? The interaction of task type and technology on group performance and member reactions. , 1994, The Journal of applied psychology.

[25]  H. H. Clark,et al.  Referring as a collaborative process , 1986, Cognition.

[26]  Judith Weedman,et al.  Task and Non-Task Functions of a Computer Conference Used in Professional Education: A Measure of Flexibility , 1991, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[27]  John Bowers,et al.  Local and global structuring of computer mediated communication: developing linguistic perspectives on CSCW in cosmos , 1988, CSCW '88.

[28]  M. Lea,et al.  Rationalist assumptions in cross-media comparisons of computer-mediated communication. , 1991 .

[29]  David Myers.  “Anonymity is part of the magic”: Individual manipulation of computer-mediated communication contexts , 1987 .

[30]  E. Krausz,et al.  Group Conflict and Cooperation: Their Social Psychology , 1968 .

[31]  J. Walther.  Interpersonal Effects in Computer-Mediated Interaction , 1992 .

[32]  B. J. Winer.  Statistical Principles in Experimental Design , 1992 .

[33]  R. Spears,et al.  Social influence and the influence of the 'social' in computer-mediated communication. , 1992 .

[34]  Thomas A. Finholt,et al.  Communication and performance in ad hoc task groups , 1990 .

[35]  James A. Levin,et al.  Real and non‐real time interaction: Unraveling multiple threads of discourse∗ , 1983 .

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

[37]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Task Requirements and Media Choice in Collaborative Writing , 1992, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[38]  John Short,et al.  The social psychology of telecommunications , 1976 .

[39]  David W. Park,et al.  Interpersonal Effects in Computer-Mediated Interaction , 1994 .

[40]  Sara B. Kiesler,et al.  Affect in Computer-Meditated Communication: An Experiment in Synchronous Terminal-to-Terminal Discussion , 1985, Hum. Comput. Interact..

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