Computer-Mediated Group Work: The Interaction of Sex and Anonymity

This research invokes two theoretical perspectives—the equalization hypothesis and the SIDE model—to examine the impact of individuals' sex on group members' use of anonymous, computer-mediated collaborative technologies. Data from 127 individuals in 22 enduring task groups indicate that the strategies employed differentially by men and women correspond with inferred motivations: men are more likely to seek ways to make computer-mediated interactions more like a face-to-face interaction with women, whereas women are more likely to employ strategies that maintain the reduced social cues of computer-mediated communication and afford them greater potential influence in mixed-sex interactions. The integration of theories previously regarded as oppositional, and the empirical support of hypotheses derived from these perspectives, suggest a richer, more complex view of technological support of group work at a time when collaborative technologies are increasingly important, given shifts toward more dispersed, global, and virtual organizational work groups.

[1]  R. Haase,et al.  Multivariate analysis of variance. , 1987 .

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

[3]  K. Hawkins,et al.  Effects of Gender and Communication Content on Leadership Emergence in Small Task-Oriented Groups , 1995 .

[4]  Stewart L. Tubbs,et al.  Handbook of Organizational Communication. , 1988 .

[5]  T. Postmes,et al.  The Formation of Group Norms in Computer-Mediated Communication , 2000 .

[6]  J. H. Davis,et al.  An Integrative Model Of Organizational Trust , 1995 .

[7]  S. Green,et al.  The effects of three social decision schemes on decision group process , 1980 .

[8]  Linda L. Putnam,et al.  The New Handbook of Organizational Communication , 2001 .

[9]  E. Weldon,et al.  Felt dispensability in groups of coactors: The effects of shared responsibility and explicit anonymity on cognitive effort , 1988 .

[10]  Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa,et al.  Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams , 1999, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[11]  Mary Anne Devanna Men and Women of the Corporation , 1978 .

[12]  Blair T. Johnson,et al.  Gender and Leadership Style: A Meta-Analysis , 1990 .

[13]  T. Connolly,et al.  Toward Atheory of Automated Group Work , 1990 .

[14]  N. Ellemers The Influence of Socio-structural Variables on Identity Management Strategies , 1993 .

[15]  J. Piliavin,et al.  The effects of the sex composition of groups on style of social interaction , 1978 .

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

[17]  Pamela J. Hinds,et al.  Communication across Boundaries: Work, Structure, and Use of Communication Technologies in a Large Organization , 1995 .

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

[19]  E. Shils The Constitution Of Society , 1982 .

[20]  Tim O'Shea,et al.  'Flaming' in computer-mediated communication: Observations, explanations, implications. , 1992 .

[21]  Janet Fulk,et al.  Organizations and Communication Technology , 1990 .

[22]  J. Walther Group and Interpersonal Effects in International Computer-Mediated Collaboration , 1997 .

[23]  Jennifer J. Dose The role of diversity in group processes and outcomes : values and sex composition / , 1995 .

[24]  C. Ess Philosophical Perspectives on Computer-Mediated Communication , 1996 .

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

[26]  Li-Ning Huang,et al.  Gender Identification, Interdependence, and Pseudonyms in CMC: Language Patterns in an Electronic Conference , 1999, Inf. Soc..

[27]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  Understanding the use of Group Decision Support Systems: The Theory of Adaptive Structuration , 1990 .

[28]  S. Seashore Group cohesiveness in the industrial work group , 1955 .

[29]  T. Postmes,et al.  Behavior Online: Does Anonymous Computer Communication Reduce Gender Inequality? , 2002 .

[30]  Richard T. Herschel,et al.  The Impact of Varying Gender Composition on Group Brainstorming Performance in a GSS Environment , 1994 .

[31]  A. Giddens The Constitution of Society , 1985 .

[32]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  A foundation for the study of group decision support systems , 1987 .

[33]  Kanti V. Mardia,et al.  The effect of nonnormality on some multivariate tests and robustness to nonnormality in the linear model , 1971 .

[34]  Esther E. Klein,et al.  The role of computer support tools and gender composition in innovative information system idea generation by small groups. , 2000 .

[35]  A. Pinsonneault,et al.  The effects of electronic meetings on group processes and outcomes: An assessment of the empirical research , 1990 .

[36]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Information Technology and the Structuring of Organizations , 2011 .

[37]  M. Aldenderfer,et al.  Cluster Analysis. Sage University Paper Series On Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences 07-044 , 1984 .

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

[39]  Jan Weglarz,et al.  Interpreting Information Systems in Organizations , 1993 .

[40]  J. Valacich,et al.  Effects of anonymity and evaluative tone on idea generation in computer-mediated groups , 1990 .

[41]  J. Walther Computer-Mediated Communication , 1996 .

[42]  John J. Sosik,et al.  Effects of leadership style and anonymity on group potency and effectiveness in a group decision support system environment. , 1997 .

[43]  Richard T. Herschel,et al.  Exploring numerical proportions in a unique context: The group support systems meeting environment , 1994 .

[44]  Tora K. Bikson,et al.  Work group structures and computer support: a field experiment , 1988, TOIS.

[45]  Vivien Hodgson,et al.  Computer conferencing: A new medium for investigating issues in gender and learning , 1994 .

[46]  Paul A. Games,et al.  Anova Tests for Homogeneity of Variance: Nonnormality and Unequal Samples , 1977 .

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

[48]  Marlaine E. Lockheed,et al.  Conceptualizing Sex as a Status Characteristic: Applications to Leadership Training Strategies , 1976 .

[49]  Merrill Warkentin,et al.  Virtual Teams versus Face-to-Face Teams: An Exploratory Study of a Web-based Conference System* , 1997 .

[50]  S. Wheelan,et al.  Differences in male and female patterns of communication in groups: A methodological artifact? , 1992 .

[51]  Janet Fulk,et al.  Wired Meetings: Technological Mediation of Organizational Gatherings , 2001 .

[52]  Daniel J. Canary,et al.  Is there any reason to research sex differences in communication , 1993 .

[53]  Martin Lea,et al.  Contexts of computer-mediated communication , 1992 .

[54]  Leonard Michael Jessup,et al.  Decision Making in an Automated Environment: The Effects of Anonymity and Proximity with a Group Decision Support System* , 1991 .

[55]  Geoff Walsham,et al.  Competing Interpretations of Computer-Supported Cooperative Work in Organizational Contexts , 2000 .

[56]  Edward A. Mabry,et al.  The Effects of Gender Composition and Task Structure on Small Group Interaction , 1985 .

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

[58]  J. Valacich,et al.  Group Size and Anonymity Effects on Computer-Mediated Idea Generation , 1992 .

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

[60]  Maureen S. Battistella,et al.  Connections: New Ways of Working in the Networked Organization , 1991 .

[61]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The effect of nonindependence on significance testing in dyadic research. , 1995 .

[62]  S. Herring Computer-mediated communication : linguistic, social and cross-cultural perspectives , 1996 .

[63]  John E. Baird,et al.  Styles of management and communication: A comparative study of men and women , 1979 .

[64]  Alain Van Hiel,et al.  Information Exchange in Context: Effects of Gender Composition of Group, Accountability, and Intergroup Perception on Group Decision Making1 , 1998 .

[65]  T. Postmes,et al.  Breaching or Building Social Boundaries? , 1998 .

[66]  J. Walther Anticipated Ongoing Interaction Versus Channel Effects on Relational Communication in Computer-Mediated Interaction , 1994 .