Anonymity in NSS: more than meets the eye

The author explores the concept of anonymity in negotiation support systems (NSS). Current frameworks focus on the effects of technology and task on individual performance in groups but are not useful for exploring questions about people and their personal agendas. Being a person in a negotiation involves tactics to express and shield the self from others. Three facets of anonymity in NSS are explored. First, anonymity seems to be a multidimensional concept. Second, there are at least two states of anonymity. Finally, anonymity interacts with cues in the environment to produce a number of different personal states that require different tactics in order to cope. These states provide four alternative explanations for the effects of computer-mediated meetings.<<ETX>>

[1]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  A conceptual framework of anonymity in Group Support Systems , 1992 .

[2]  R. W. Rogers,et al.  Effects of anonymity and arousal on aggression. , 1979 .

[3]  E. Goffman.  The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life , 1959 .

[4]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  A communication-based framework for group interfaces in computer-supported collaboration , 1991, Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[5]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  From negotiation to negotiation support systems: a theoretical perspective , 1992, Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[6]  E W Mathes,et al.  Anonymity and group antisocial behavior. , 1976, The Journal of social psychology.

[7]  Lee Sproull,et al.  Reducing social context cues: electronic mail in organizational communication , 1986 .

[8]  S. Duval,et al.  A theory of objective self awareness , 1972 .

[9]  W. Becker,et al.  Biasing Effect of Respondents' Identification on Responses to a Social Desirability Scale: A Warning to Researchers , 1976 .

[10]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  A Comparison of Laboratory and Field Research in the Study of Electronic Meeting Systems , 1990, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[11]  Leonard Michael Jessup,et al.  Group Problem Solving in an Automated Environment: The Effects of Anonymity and Proximity on Group Process and Outcome with a Group Decision Support System. , 1988 .

[12]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  A Study of Collaborative Group Work With and Without Computer-Based Support , 1990, Inf. Syst. Res..

[13]  James K. Sebenius,et al.  The Manager as Negotiator: Bargaining for Cooperation and Competitive Gain , 1986 .

[14]  James M. Dabbs,et al.  Sex, Group Size and Helping in Three Cities* , 1975 .

[15]  E. Bihm,et al.  Altruistic Responses under Conditions of Anonymity , 1979 .

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

[17]  L. Downing,et al.  Deindividuation and valence of cues: effects on prosocial and antisocial behavior. , 1979, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[18]  E. Diener.  Deindividuation, self-awareness, and disinhibition. , 1979 .

[19]  P. Zimbardo.  The human choice: Individuation, reason, and order versus deindividuation, impulse, and chaos. , 1969 .

[20]  Ilze Zigurs,et al.  A Study of Influence in Computer-Mediated Group Decision Making , 1988, MIS Q..

[21]  Bibb Latané,et al.  A lady in distress: Inhibiting effects of friends and strangers on bystander intervention ☆ , 1969 .

[22]  Leon Mann,et al.  A test between deindividuation and emergent norm theories of crowd aggression. , 1982 .

[23]  D. M. Pedersen.  Personality Correlates of Privacy , 1982 .

[24]  Robert B. Williams,et al.  Reflections on Anonymity , 1988 .

[25]  L. Propst,et al.  Effects of personality and loss of anonymity on aggression: a reevaluation of deindividuation. , 1979, Journal of personality.

[26]  James R. Evans.  Creative Thinking in the Decision and Management Sciences , 1991 .

[27]  N. Kerr,et al.  Ringelmann Revisited , 1981 .

[28]  E. Diener.  Deindividuation: Causes and Consequences. , 1977 .

[29]  D. M. Pedersen.  Dimensions of Privacy , 1979 .

[30]  Kwok-Kee Wei,et al.  Effects of support and task type on group decision outcome: A study using SAMM , 1991, Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[31]  Arie Nadler,et al.  Effect of self-differentiation and anonymity in group on deindividuation. , 1982 .

[32]  J.S. Valacich,et al.  A conceptual framework of anonymity in Group Support Systems , 1992, Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[33]  T. Beall.  Critical Expression and Subsequent Physiological Response as a Function of Selected Situational Variables , 1977 .

[34]  Stephen Brookfield,et al.  Developing critical thinkers: Challenging adults to explore alternative ways of thinking and acting. , 1989 .

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

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

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

[38]  Leonard M. Jessup,et al.  The Effects of Anonymity on GDSS Group Process with an Idea-Generating Task , 1990, MIS Q..

[39]  Starr Roxanne Hiltz,et al.  Experiments in group decision making, 3: disinhibition, deindividuation, and group process in pen name and real name computer conferences , 1989, Decis. Support Syst..