Group mirrors to support interaction regulation in collaborative problem solving

Two experimental studies test the effect of group mirrors upon quantitative and qualitative aspects of participation in collaborative problem solving. Mirroring tools consist of a graphical representation of the group's actions which is dynamically updated and displayed to the collaborators. In addition, metacognitive tools display a standard for desirable behavior. Results show that a mirroring tool did not substantively affect the behavior of subjects while a metacognitive tool led to increased participation in dialogue, including more frequent and precise planning.

[1]  J. Levine,et al.  Shared Cognition in-Organizations: The Management of Knowledge , 1999 .

[2]  G. Salomon.  Distributed cognitions : psychological and educational considerations , 1997 .

[3]  Edwin Hutchins,et al.  The social organization of distributed cognition , 1991, Perspectives on socially shared cognition.

[4]  Stephanie D. Teasley,et al.  Perspectives on socially shared cognition , 1991 .

[5]  P. Dillenbourg,et al.  Three worlds of CSCL: Can we support CSCL? , 2002 .

[6]  M. Goos,et al.  Socially mediated metacognition: creating collaborative zones of proximal development in small group problem solving , 2002 .

[7]  A. Bandura.  Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. , 1977, Psychological review.

[8]  Norbert Wiener,et al.  Cybernetics: Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine. , 1949 .

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

[10]  Nikol Rummel,et al.  A rating scheme for assessing the quality of computer-supported collaboration processes , 2007, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[11]  P. Dillenbourg,et al.  The evolution of research on collaborative learning , 1996 .

[12]  K. Corby.  Soven, Margot Iris. (1999). Teaching Writing in Middle and Secondary Schools: Theory, Research, and Practice. Needham Heights, MA : Allyn & Bacon. , 1999 .

[13]  B. Nardi.  Context and consciousness: activity theory and human-computer interaction , 1995 .

[14]  Joerg Zumbach,et al.  Supporting Distributed Problem-Based Learning: The Use of Feedback Mechanisms in Outline Learning , 2004 .

[15]  R. Moreland.  Transactive memory: Learning who knows what in work groups and organizations. , 1999 .

[16]  Marlene Scardamalia,et al.  Computer-Supported Intentional Learning Environments , 1989 .

[17]  H. Carl Haywood,et al.  Two ways to elaborate Vygotsky's concept of mediation. , 1998 .

[18]  P. Karoly.  Mechanisms of Self-Regulation: A Systems View , 1993 .

[19]  J. Shepperd.  Productivity loss in performance groups: A motivation analysis. , 1993 .

[20]  A. Bandura,et al.  Self-regulatory mechanisms governing the impact of social comparison on complex decision making. , 1991 .

[21]  E. Cohen.  Restructuring the Classroom: Conditions for Productive Small Groups , 1994 .

[22]  N. Kerr,et al.  Group performance and decision making. , 2004, Annual review of psychology.

[23]  Franziska Tschan,et al.  Ideal Cycles of Communication (or Cognitions) in Triads, Dyads, and Individuals , 2002 .

[24]  Alejandra Martínez-Monés,et al.  From Mirroring to Guiding: A Review of State of the Art Technology for Supporting Collaborative Learning , 2005, Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ..

[25]  Pierre Dillenbourg,et al.  Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design , 2002 .

[26]  B. Nardi.  Activity theory and human-computer interaction , 1995 .

[27]  R. Slavin.  Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research and Practice , 1990 .

[28]  S. Mohammed,et al.  Team mental models in a team knowledge framework: expanding theory and measurement across disciplinary boundaries , 2001 .

[29]  N. Kerr,et al.  Dispensability of member effort and group motivation losses: Free-rider effects , 1983 .

[30]  A. King.  Transactive Peer Tutoring: Distributing Cognition and Metacognition , 1998 .

[31]  Ernst von Glasersfeld,et al.  Reflections on cybernetics , 2000, Cybern. Hum. Knowing.

[32]  Barry G. Silverman.  Computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL) , 1995 .

[33]  Albert V. Carron,et al.  Team Cohesion and Individual Productivity , 2001 .

[34]  Pierre Tchounikine,et al.  Flexibility in macro-scripts for computer-supported collaborative learning , 2007, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[35]  C. Carver,et al.  On the Self-Regulation of Behavior , 1998 .

[36]  T. Rocklin,et al.  The Distribution of Distributed Cognition: Multiple Interpretations and Uses , 1998 .

[37]  Rachel Hertz-Lazarovits,et al.  Interaction in cooperative groups : the theoretical anatomy of group learning , 1992 .

[38]  E. Aronson.  The Jigsaw Classroom , 1978 .

[39]  Franziska Tschan,et al.  Communication Enhances Small Group Performance if it Conforms to Task Requirements: The Concept of Ideal Communication Cycles , 1995 .

[40]  N. Kerr.  Motivation losses in small groups: a social dilemma analysis , 1983 .

[41]  Tim S. Roberts.  Online Collaborative Learning: Theory and Practice , 2003 .

[42]  B. Brehmer.  Dynamic decision making: human control of complex systems. , 1992, Acta psychologica.

[43]  N. Webb.  Peer interaction and learning in small groups , 1989 .

[44]  Hans Spada,et al.  Learning in Humans and Machines: Towards an Interdisciplinary Learning Science , 1995 .

[45]  G. Salomon,et al.  When teams do not function the way they ought to , 1989 .

[46]  J. R. Aiello,et al.  Social facilitation from Triplett to electronic performance monitoring. , 2001 .

[47]  Walter Bender,et al.  Group Reactions to Visual Feedback Tools , 2007, PERSUASIVE.