Improving teamwork using real-time language feedback

We develop and evaluate a real-time language feedback system that monitors the communication patterns among students in a discussion group and provides real-time instructions to shape the way the group works together. As an initial step, we determine which group processes are related to better outcomes. We then experimentally test the efficacy of providing real-time instructions which target two of these group processes. The feedback system was successfully able to shape the way groups worked together. However, only appropriate feedback given to groups that were not working well together from the start was able to improve group performance.

[1]  J. Sexton,et al.  Analyzing cockpit communications: the links between language, performance, error, and workload. , 2000, Human performance in extreme environments : the journal of the Society for Human Performance in Extreme Environments.

[2]  David A. Huffaker,et al.  The Language of Coalition Formation in Online Multiparty Negotiations , 2011 .

[3]  P. Taylor,et al.  Linguistic Style Matching and Negotiation Outcome , 2005 .

[4]  A. Hare,et al.  Handbook of small group research , 1962 .

[5]  Jeffrey T. Hancock,et al.  Language Style Matching as a Predictor of Social Dynamics in Small Groups , 2010, Commun. Res..

[6]  J. Hackman,et al.  Interventions into group process: An approach to improving the effectiveness of groups , 1974 .

[7]  Jonathan A. Rhoades,et al.  Interaction process in computer-mediated and face-to-face groups , 1995, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[8]  Jack A. Goncalo,et al.  The liberating role of conflict in group creativity: A study in two countries , 2004 .

[9]  G. Stasser,et al.  Information sampling in structured and unstructured discussions of three- and six-person groups. , 1989 .

[10]  D. Jonassen,et al.  Communication patterns in computer mediated versus face-to-face group problem solving , 2001 .

[11]  J. Pennebaker,et al.  Linguistic Style Matching in Social Interaction , 2002 .

[12]  Dan Cosley,et al.  Feedback for guiding reflection on teamwork practices , 2007, GROUP.

[13]  J. Pennebaker,et al.  The Psychological Meaning of Words: LIWC and Computerized Text Analysis Methods , 2010 .

[14]  Walter Bender,et al.  The Impact of Increased Awareness While Face-to-Face , 2007, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[15]  Michael Nowak,et al.  Social visualization and negotiation: effects of feedback configuration and status , 2012, CSCW.

[16]  Aniket Kittur,et al.  Harnessing the wisdom of crowds in wikipedia: quality through coordination , 2008, CSCW.

[17]  J. Levine,et al.  Progress in Small Group Research , 1990 .

[18]  R. Bales.  Interaction process analysis; a method for the study of small groups. , 2013 .

[19]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Cognitive Tutors: Lessons Learned , 1995 .

[20]  M. Diehl,et al.  Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. , 1987 .

[21]  Ute Fischer,et al.  Linguistic correlates of team performance: toward a tool for monitoring team functioning during space missions. , 2007, Aviation, space, and environmental medicine.

[22]  Jeremy P. Birnholtz,et al.  Visualizing real-time language-based feedback on teamwork behavior in computer-mediated groups , 2009, CHI.

[23]  R. Bales,et al.  Phases in group problem-solving. , 1951, Journal of abnormal and social psychology.

[24]  Verlin B. Hinsz,et al.  The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processors. , 1997, Psychological bulletin.

[25]  J. Pennebaker,et al.  Language style matching in writing: synchrony in essays, correspondence, and poetry. , 2010, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[26]  J. McGrath.  Small group research, that once and future field: An interpretation of the past with an eye to the future. , 1997 .

[27]  Tom Routen,et al.  Intelligent Tutoring Systems , 1996, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[28]  H. Leavitt.  Some effects of certain communication patterns on group performance. , 1951, Journal of abnormal psychology.