Influence of group member familiarity on online collaborative learning

This study investigated the effects of group member familiarity during computer-supported collaborative learning. Familiarity may have an impact on online collaboration, because it may help group members to progress more quickly through the stages of group development, and may lead to higher group cohesion. It was therefore hypothesized that increased familiarity would lead to (a) more critical and exploratory group norms, (b) more positive perceptions of online communication and collaboration, (c) more efficient and positive collaboration, and (d) better group performance. To investigate these hypotheses, 105 secondary education students collaborated in groups of three. The results of this study indicate that familiarity led to more critical and exploratory group norm perceptions, and more positive perceptions of online communication and collaboration. Furthermore, in familiar groups students needed to devote less time regulating their task-related activities. On the other hand, no effect of familiarity on group performance was found.

[1]  J. McGrath.  Time, Interaction, and Performance (TIP) , 1991 .

[2]  F. Fischer,et al.  A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning , 2006, Comput. Educ..

[3]  Angela M. O'Donnell,et al.  Learning from peers: Beyond the rhetoric of positive results , 1994 .

[4]  Annemarie S. Palincsar,et al.  Group processes in the classroom. , 1996 .

[5]  D. Cicchetti,et al.  A Computer Program for Assessing Specific Category Rater Agreement for Qualitative Data , 1978 .

[6]  Ulrike Cress,et al.  The need for considering multilevel analysis in CSCL research—An appeal for the use of more advanced statistical methods , 2008, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[7]  Tammy Schellens,et al.  Applying multilevel modelling to content analysis data: Methodological issues in the study of role assignment in asynchronous discussion groups , 2007 .

[8]  Jerry Andriessen,et al.  Supporting interactive argumentation: Influence of representational tools on discussing a wicked problem , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[9]  R. Saavedra,et al.  Complex interdependence in task-performing groups , 1993 .

[10]  Joseph S. Valacich,et al.  An experimental examination of group history and group support system use on information sharing performance and user perceptions , 1995, Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[11]  Hans van Buuren,et al.  Determining Sociability, Social Space, and Social Presence in (A)synchronous Collaborative Groups , 2004, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[12]  Susan G. Straus,et al.  All in due time: The development of trust in computer-mediated and face-to-face teams , 2006 .

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

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

[15]  Deborah H. Gruenfeld,et al.  Group Composition and Decision Making: How Member Familiarity and Information Distribution Affect Process and Performance , 1996 .

[16]  P. Kirschner,et al.  Social and Cognitive Factors Driving Teamwork in Collaborative Learning Environments , 2006 .

[17]  Jan-Willem Strijbos,et al.  Content analysis: What are they talking about? , 2006, Comput. Educ..

[18]  Charles G. Halcomb,et al.  The influence of task type, group structure and extraversion on uninhibited speech in computer-mediated communication , 1990 .

[19]  Richard L. Daft,et al.  Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design , 1986 .

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

[21]  Pierre Dillenbourg,et al.  What we know about CSCL and implementing it in higher education , 2004 .

[22]  Nancy J. Stone,et al.  Understanding coordination in computer-mediated versus face-to-face groups , 2008, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[23]  T. Postmes,et al.  Quality of decision making and group norms. , 2001, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[24]  Gail Corbitt,et al.  The influence of familiarity among group members and extraversion on verbal interaction in proximate GSS sessions , 2004, 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2004. Proceedings of the.

[25]  Jerry Fjermestad,et al.  An analysis of communication mode in group support systems research , 2004, Decis. Support Syst..

[26]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  Dyadic Data Analysis , 2006 .

[27]  A. King.  Guiding Knowledge Construction in the Classroom: Effects of Teaching Children How to Question and How to Explain , 1994 .

[28]  E. Hobman,et al.  The Expression of Conflict in Computer-Mediated and Face-To-Face Groups , 2002 .

[29]  N. Mercer,et al.  From social interaction to individual reasoning: an empirical investigation of a possible socio-cultural model of cognitive development , 1999 .

[30]  Karen A. Jehn,et al.  Interpersonal relationships and task performance: An examination of mediation processes in friendship and acquaintance groups. , 1997 .

[31]  John R. Carlson,et al.  Channel Expansion Theory and the Experiential Nature of Media Richness Perceptions , 1999 .

[32]  J. Silla,et al.  The influence of familiarity among group members, group atmosphere and assertiveness on uninhibited behavior through three different communication media , 2000 .

[33]  Ad de Jong,et al.  Psychological safety and social support in groupware adoption: A multi-level assessment in education , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[34]  Douglas B. Clark,et al.  Analytic Frameworks for Assessing Dialogic Argumentation in Online Learning Environments , 2007 .

[35]  Jan-Willem Strijbos,et al.  Designing for interaction: Six steps to designing computer-supported group-based learning , 2004, Comput. Educ..

[36]  Johanna D. Moore,et al.  The agreement process: an empirical investigation of human-human computer-mediated collaborative dialogs , 2000, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[37]  Gijsbert Erkens,et al.  Coordination processes in computer supported collaborative writing , 2005, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[38]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Impact of Group Processing on Achievement in Cooperative Groups. , 1990, The Journal of social psychology.

[39]  Paul A. Kirschner,et al.  Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: a review of the research , 2003, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[40]  Paul A. Kirschner.  Design, development, and implementation of electronic learning environments for collaborative learning , 2004 .

[41]  Henny van der Meijden,et al.  Face-to-face versus computer-mediated communication in a primary school setting , 2005, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[42]  Jeroen Janssen,et al.  Visualization of participation: Does it contribute to successful computer-supported collaborative learning? , 2007, Comput. Educ..

[43]  Carlos José Pereira de Lucena,et al.  R-U-Typing-2-Me? Evolving a chat tool to increase understanding in learning activities , 2006, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[44]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  Rethinking media richness: towards a theory of media synchronicity , 1999, Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences. 1999. HICSS-32. Abstracts and CD-ROM of Full Papers.

[45]  Jeroen Janssen,et al.  Visualization of agreement and discussion processes during computer-supported collaborative learning , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[46]  B. Tuckman.  DEVELOPMENTAL SEQUENCE IN SMALL GROUPS. , 1965, Psychological bulletin.

[47]  Gellof Kanselaar,et al.  Effects of representational guidance on domain specific reasoning in CSCL , 2005, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[48]  P. Kirschner,et al.  CSCL in higher education?: a framework for designing multiple collaborative environments , 2004 .

[49]  C. Leaper,et al.  A meta-analytic review of gender variations in children's language use: talkativeness, affiliative speech, and assertive speech. , 2004, Developmental psychology.

[50]  Jeroen Janssen,et al.  Regulative processes in individual, 3D and computer supported cooperative learning contexts , 2005, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[51]  Roya Ayman,et al.  Communication Medium and Member Familiarity , 2005 .

[52]  Ton de Jong,et al.  Regulative support for collaborative scientific inquiry learning , 2006, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[53]  D. Garrison,et al.  Assessing Social Presence In Asynchronous Text-based Computer Conferencing , 1999 .