Student characteristics and computer-mediated communication

Abstract Use of computer-mediated communication systems (CMCS) to support coursework is increasing, both as a means for students to prepare for using CMCS in their careers and as a mechanism for delivering distance education. But it is not clear whether the same student characteristics lead to academic success using CMCS as with traditional face-to-face (FTF) communication. This paper reports the results of a correlational study of the relationship between individual characteristics and use of CMCS in a team project situation. On most measures the results suggest CMCS will be adopted and used successfully by the same types of students who do well in courses conducted via FTF communication, e.g., students with high-achievement or high-aptitude characteristics. However, personality type was linked to substantial deviations in CMCS usage, suggesting that personality may influence academic success in unanticipated ways.

[1]  Jolene Galegher,et al.  Computer-Mediated Communication for Intellectual Teamwork: An Experiment in Group Writing , 1994, Inf. Syst. Res..

[2]  Ibrahim M. Al-Jabri,et al.  Effects of User Characteristics on Computer Attitudes Among Undergraduate Business Students , 1997 .

[3]  TINA WILSON,et al.  What are the perceived benefits of participating in a computer-mediated communication (CMC) environment for distance learning computer science students? , 1998, Comput. Educ..

[4]  Gayle J. Yaverbaum,et al.  Effects of information system education and training on user satisfaction: An empirical evaluation , 1992, Inf. Manag..

[5]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Using Two Different Electronic Meeting System Tools for the Same Task: An Experimental Comparison , 1990, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[6]  S. R. Hiltz.  The Network Nation , 1978 .

[7]  Starr Roxanne Hiltz,et al.  Asynchronous learning networks as a virtual classroom , 1997, CACM.

[8]  R. Heinssen,et al.  Assessing computer anxiety: Development and validation of the Computer Anxiety Rating Scale , 1987 .

[9]  T. Roberts,et al.  The impact of decision support training on computer use: the effect of prior training, age, and gender , 1996 .

[10]  Jane M. Carey,et al.  The Impact of Communication Mode and Task Complexity on Small Group Performance and Member Satisfaction. , 1997 .

[11]  C. H. Mawhinney,et al.  An Investigation of the Relationship Between Managerial Personality Type and Computer Use , 1996 .

[12]  Jane M. Carey,et al.  Human factors in information systems : an organizational perspective , 1991 .

[13]  J. Valacich,et al.  Group Support Systems: New Perspectives , 1992 .

[14]  L. Festinger,et al.  A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance , 2017 .

[15]  D. Bem.  Self-perception: An alternative interpretation of cognitive dissonance phenomena. , 1967, Psychological review.

[16]  Paul Bacsich,et al.  Embedding computer conferencing into university teaching , 1998, Comput. Educ..

[17]  D. Keirsey,et al.  Please Understand Me: Character and Temperament Types , 1978 .

[18]  Marilyn E. Gist,et al.  THE INFLUENCE OF TRAINING METHOD AND TRAINEE AGE ON THE ACQUISITION OF COMPUTER SKILLS , 1988 .

[19]  Jacob Cohen.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.