Developing complex group products: Idea combination in computer-mediated and face-to-face groups

This study examines how group experience, communication medium, and strategies for combining individual ideas influence the integrative complexity of group products. Each week for six weeks, members of 31 work groups wrote individual essays about their group tasks and experiences, and then collaborated on a group essay on the same topic. Results indicate that in the later weeks of the study, computer-mediated groups produce essays with higher integrative complexity than those of face-to-face groups. The integrative complexity of essays in later weeks is a joint function of the complexity of member ideas and the number of members who participate directly in writing the essay (scribes). The greater complexity of computer-mediated groups' essays in the later weeks of the study is partly accounted for by their use of more scribes and their inclusion of more unique member ideas.     

The roles of group potency and information and communication technologies in the relationship between task conflict and team effectiveness: A longitudinal study

The effects of task conflict on group effectiveness are far from conclusive. In order to further clarify this relationship, a contingency approach has been suggested. In this context, the present study examines the roles of group potency and information and communication technologies (ICTs) in the relationship between task conflict and team effectiveness. The study involved 44 groups of 4 members each, working in two communication media. Twenty-two groups worked in a face-to-face condition, and the other 22 groups worked in a computer-mediated communication condition. The groups developed a project during four weekly sessions over a one-month period. The results showed that group potency moderated the relationship between task conflict and group effectiveness. However, the communication medium did not play a moderator role in these relationships.     

The development of group identity in computer and face-to-face groups with membership change

A three-part conception of group identity is proposed that draws on common fate, cohesiveness, and cognitive views of group identity. The changing contribution of these three components to group identity was examined for 31 original and 29 reconfigured groups which met for 7 consecutive weeks using either face-to-face (FIF) or computer-mediated communication (CMC). Group identity was consistently lower for computer-mediated groups, and this effect was stronger in the reconfigured groups. In the original groups, group identity started high and declined for both FTF and CMC groups. In the reconfigured groups, developmental patterns differed from those of the original groups, and also differed by communication medium. Individual differences accounted for a substantial amount of variance in group identity across original and reconfigured groups.     

Understanding coordination in computer-mediated versus face-to-face groups

Groups performed intellective and judgmental tasks in face-to-face (FTF) or computer-mediated communication (CMC) settings after coordination training or no training to determine the impact of CMC, training, and task type on group performance and coordination. Help seeking behaviors were stronger predictors of perceived and actual performance in CMC than FTF groups, but varied based on task type. In turn, training generally increased seeking behaviors, except non-task seeking behaviors in CMC groups; and seeking behaviors were stronger predictors for perceived performance in CMC than FTF groups. In addition, perceived performance was lower in CMC than FTF groups when untrained, but not when trained. Yet, performance agreement was similar on both tasks in FTF groups, but lower on the intellective than the judgmental task in CMC groups.     

How do different types of intragroup conflict affect group potency in virtual compared with face-to-face teams? A longitudinal study

The number of organizations using teamwork is increasing. In this context, group potency has emerged as a key construct in group research. Moreover, in the last decades, information and communication technologies (ICT) have allowed organizations to form virtual teams. Consequently, a considerable amount of research has analysed the functioning of virtual teams. We focus on intragroup conflict as a relevant antecedent of potency in computer-mediated communication groups. Specifically, the aim of this research is to examine the role of ICT in the relationship between intragroup conflict and group potency in a longitudinal study. A laboratory experiment was carried out comparing 44 groups working in two communication media (face-to-face and computer-mediated communication). The groups developed a project over a one-month period. The results show that communication media play a moderator role between intragroup conflict (relationship and task conflict) and group potency. Implications of these results are discussed.     

Overcoming social awareness in computer-supported groups

We examined status effects in face-to-face and computer-mediated three-person groups. Our expectation that low status members in computer-mediated group discussions would participate more equally, and have more influence over decisions, than their counterparts in face-to-face groups was not confirmed. The results suggest that knowledge of status differences and labels were used to form cognitive impressions of other group members. It seems that when group members are aware of the status characteristics of the group, social cues were magnified rather than redüced. Implications of these findings for mixed status cooperative work groups and for the design of computer communication systems are discussed.     

Computer-mediated communication to support distributed requirements elicitations and negotiations tasks

Requirements engineering is one of the most communication-intensive activities in software development, greatly affected by project stakeholder geographical distribution. Despite advances in collaboration technologies, global software teams continue to experience significant challenges in the elicitation and negotiation of requirements. Deciding which communication technologies to deploy to achieve effective communication in distributed requirements engineering activities is not a trivial task. Is face-to-face or text-based communication more appropriate for requirements elicitations and negotiations? In teams that do not have access to face-to-face communication, is text-based communication more useful in requirements elicitations than in requirements negotiations? Here, we report an empirical study that analyzes the effectiveness of synchronous computer-mediated communication in requirements elicitations and negotiations. Our investigation is guided by a theoretical framework that we developed from theories of computer-mediated communication, common ground, and media selection for group tasks; a framework that considers the effectiveness of a communication medium in relation to the information richness needs of requirements elicitation and negotiation tasks. Our findings bring forward empirical evidence about the perceived as well as objective fit between synchronous communication technology and requirements tasks. First, face-to-face is not always the most preferred medium for requirements tasks, and we reveal a number of conditions in which, in contrast to common belief, text-based communication is preferred for requirements communication. Second, we find that in evaluating outcomes of requirements elicitations and negotiations objectively, group performance is not affected by the communication medium. Third, when groups interact only via text-based communication, common ground in requirements negotiations takes longer to achieve than in requirements elicitations, indicating that distributed requirements elicitation is the task where computer-mediated communication tools have most opportunity for successful application.     

The use of computer-mediated communication to enhance subsequent face-to-face discussions

A study assessing the effects of synchronous and asynchronous computer-mediated communication on subsequent face-to-face discussions was conducted. Participants were asked to read a short article about internet censorship. Then they were randomly assigned to one of three groups: a synchronous (internet chat) group, an asynchronous (internet discussion board) group and a control group. Both the internet chat group and the internet discussion board group engaged in an on-line dialog about the article they read. They then followed the on-line dialog with a face-to face discussion. The control group had no on-line discussion but instead immediately began a face-to-face discussion. Finally, all completed a questionnaire about their experience. The results showed that face-to-face discussions preceded by either synchronous or asynchronous computer-mediated communication were perceived to be more enjoyable and include a greater diversity of perspectives than face-to-face discussions not preceded by computer-mediated communication.     

Sampling and pooling of decision-relevant information: Comparing the efficiency of face-to-face and GSS supported groups

Past research has suggested that decision-making groups, when communicating face-to-face (FtF), suffered from information sharing biases that affected the quality of the final decision: they tended to discuss previously-shared information before they started to discuss information not known to all, and discussed more of previously-shared than unshared information. In our study we examined these effects in groups that interacted FtF or using a group support system (GSS). Four-member groups discussed a requirements elicitation task in which some requirements were known to all members before starting their discussion, while other requirements were known only to two members of the group. Both GSS and FtF groups exchanged a large percentage of the shared requirements. However, the GSS groups were more effective in communicating unshared requirements. On average, FtF groups discussed shared requirements sooner and unshared requirements later than did GSS groups. Our study also compared empirical results with predictions from an information-sampling model of group discussion in order to assess the effectiveness of the model in computer-mediated group communication.     

Group processes in solving two problems: face-to-face and computer-mediated communication

In this study, an experiment on communication and problem solving in face-to-face communication and computermediated communication was conducted. The latter was performed in two variants; subjects writing under their own name or subjects writing anonymously. The problems were a Social Dilemma problem and a Criminal Puzzle problem. The theoretical starting point was if, and how, the communication form influences social relations, communication equality and communication processes. A qualitative analysis showed that different problems were related to different patterns of the variables studied. The computer-mediated communication solving the Criminal Puzzle problem induced relatively greater idea generation that was not responded to, while the face-toface communication was associated with relatively more answers. In the Social Dilemma, feedback was relatively more common in face-to-face communication than in computermediated communication. To 'give information about the game' was relatively more common in the anonymous computer-mediated communication than face-to-face situation, indicating that computer-mediated communication is associated with speaker generation of information, but less with responses to the interlocutor. There were no outcome differences or communication equality effects related to communication condition. These results point to the importance of the task related activities in the discussions rather than the importance of medium.     

Group processes in solving two problems: Face-to-face and computer-mediated communication

In this study, an experiment on communication and problem solving in face-to-face communication and computermediated communication was conducted. The latter was performed in two variants; subjects writing under their own name or subjects writing anonymously. The problems were a Social Dilemma problem and a Criminal Puzzle problem. The theoretical starting point was if, and how, the communication form influences social relations, communication equality and communication processes. A qualitative analysis showed that different problems were related to different patterns of the variables studied. The computer-mediated communication solving the Criminal Puzzle problem induced relatively greater idea generation that was not responded to, while the face-toface communication was associated with relatively more answers. In the Social Dilemma, feedback was relatively more common in face-to-face communication than in computermediated communication. To 'give information about the game' was relatively more common in the anonymous computer-mediated communication than face-to-face situation, indicating that computer-mediated communication is associated with speaker generation of information, but less with responses to the interlocutor. There were no outcome differences or communication equality effects related to communication condition. These results point to the importance of the task related activities in the discussions rather than the importance of medium.     

A comparative content analysis of face-to-face vs. asynchronous group decision making

A field experiment was conducted to analyze the process and contents of group discussions. Groups solved a case study either orally or through an asynchronous computer-mediated communication system. Findings show that asynchronous groups had broader discussions and submitted more complete reports than their face-to-face counterparts. However, there was no difference in the ability to transfer information from the discussion to the report; under both conditions, about 15% of the issues mentioned in the discussion were omitted from the final report. In terms of coordination, face-to-face teams covered the case study questions sequentially, while asynchronous groups were more focused on solving their general disagreements.     

Group development in virtual teams: An experimental reexamination

Virtual teams are thought to be experienced differently and to have poor outcomes because there is little or no face-to-face interaction and a tendency for virtual team members to use different communication techniques for forming relationships. However, the expanding use of virtual teams in organizations suggests that virtual teams in real world contexts are able to overcome these barriers and be experienced in much the same way as face-to-face teams. This paper reports the result of an experiment in which virtual teams participated in an exercise where they completed an information-sharing task ten times as a team. The results suggest that, contrary to one-shot, ad hoc virtual teams, longer-lived virtual teams follow a sequential group development process. Virtual team development appears to differ from face-to-face teams because the use of computer-mediated communication heightens pressure to conform when a virtual team is first formed, meaning trust is most strongly linked with feeling that the team was accomplishing the task appropriately. As the virtual teams developed, trust in peers was more strongly linked with goal commitment. Once the teams were working together effectively, accomplishing the task appropriately was the strongest link with trust in peers. I suggest that virtual team managers should cultivate virtual workspaces that are similar to those proven to work in face-to-face contexts: (1) teams should have clear, specific goals, (2) members should be encouraged or even required to communicate with each other, and (3) team members should feel that they might work with the other team members again.     

The influence of familiarity among group members,group atmosphere and assertiveness on uninhibited behavior through three different communication media

The study of the influence of new information technologies (NIT) on verbal communication has attracted attention from researchers. Results obtained in previous studies suggest that NIT communication media produce a deindividualization in group processes that enhances uninhibited behavior and flaming. However, identity theory emphasizes the role of social context, challenging the interpretation that features of the media are the main antecedent of this behavior. The aim of the present paper is threefold: (1) to empirically test whether there are significant differences in the frequency of uninhibited behavior in groups working under face-to-face, videoconference and computer-mediated communication; (2) to test whether familiarity among group members, group climate, assertiveness and their interactions significantly predict uninhibited behavior in groups, regardless of the communication media; and (3) to analyze whether communication media moderate the prediction of these variables on uninhibited behavior. Uninhibited behavior has been operationalized, distinguishing between informal speech and flaming. The experiment was carried out with 28 groups of five subjects each. Results show that informal speech and flaming present higher rates in computer mediated communication than in videoconference and face-to-face. Social familiarity among group members significantly predicts mild uninhibited behavior regardless of the medium, but does not account for flaming. Communication media moderate the prediction power of familiarity and its interaction with assertiveness and group climate on mild uninhibited behavior (informal speech). Results are discussed in relation to the alternative theories and models formulated.     

The Effects of Communication Modality on Outcomes of Collaborative Tasks

Collaborative learning involves students working in small groups to complete tasks related to class instruction. Collaborative learning techniques are widely used in business schools. There is research evidence to suggest that collaborative learning leads to positive outcomes. Specifically, the interaction that occurs among students in completing the group task provides both educational and social benefits. The easy availability of communication technology has changed the modality of interaction among students. This change has been furthered by an increase in the number of students who work full-time and also enroll in business schools. Such students tend to interact more using communication technologies, such as electronic mail and not necessarily face-to-face. The objective of this study is to investigate the impact of these changes in communication modalities on the outcomes of group work. The results indicate that while students have a preference for using traditional face-to-face interaction, there seems to be no significant correlation between communication modality and measures of group outcomes.     

Computer-mediated communication in collaborative writing

The purpose of this study was to determine if using computers to communicate during group writing tasks is an effective mode of communication. Three-person teams wrote term papers in one of three conditions: face-to-face (FTF), synchronous computer-mediated communication (Netmeeting), or email. The participants were given 6 weeks to complete the task. Product differences showed only that email groups produced shorter rough drafts than FTF groups, indicating the rough draft was not as well thought out in the email groups. Process measures demonstrated that, overall, communication styles that afforded interactivity were utilized effectively in a collaborative writing setting. Furthermore, lack of expressiveness did not appear to deter groupwork. The results suggest that email alone may not be an appropriate setting for writing collaboratively; whereas teams in a synchronous computer-mediated communication setting, such as Netmeeting, should be able to produce quality work satisfactorily.     

Face-to-face versus computer-mediated communication in a primary school setting

Computer-mediated communication is increasingly being used to support cooperative problem solving and decision making in schools. Despite the large body of literature on cooperative or collaborative learning, few studies have explicitly compared peer learning in face-to-face (FTF) versus computer-mediated communication (CMC) situations. In the present study, the effects of the use of cooperative FTF groups versus and CMC groups on the interactive behavior and task performance of 42 dyads of sixth grade Dutch primary school students working collaboratively on a mathematics task were examined. The results show the FTF dyads to provide significantly more high-level elaborations than the CMC dyads when solving the mathematics problems. In contrast, the CMC dyads provided about three times as many regulative utterances and about twice as many affective utterances as the FTF dyads. The FTF dyads attained higher performance scores than the CMC dyads, and they were also relatively more satisfied with their cooperation.     

The effectiveness of synchronous computer-mediated communication for solving hidden-profile problems: Further empirical evidence

We experimentally compared the effectiveness of face-to-face (FTF) and synchronous computer-mediated communication when using a chat tool in solving hidden-profile business problems. In such problems, information critical to its solution is dispersed among team members and they must share it to solve the problem. Unlike prior research using hidden-profile tasks, our study used a real-world business-oriented task, established real rather than ad hoc teams, and imposed a time constraint on them. Hypotheses derived from media richness theory were found to be supported, with the results revealing that computer-mediated teams using the chat tool were less successful in exchanging and processing information than FTF teams and were thus less successful at solving the hidden-profile problem. The results also showed that, when operating under a time constraint, FTF was preferred over computer-mediated communication due to the relative immediacy of feedback and multiplicity of cues available in the FTF setting, as media richness theory predicted.     

Understanding risk-taking behavior of groups: A “decision analysis” perspective

Past research has extensively investigated the effect of media, especially focusing on how anonymity increases risk-related behaviors of groups when using computer-mediated communication (CMC). This study extends prior research by examining the differences in group risk-taking behaviors between face-to-face groups and completely non-anonymous CMC groups (i.e., groups working in a fully identified, synchronous CMC environment similar to popular instant messaging systems utilized widely within organizations). Drawing on the “decision analysis” perspective, a key framework for understanding organizational decision-making, the study also examines the effects of the firm's risk preferences as well as the type of information distribution among group members (i.e., full information known to all group members versus partial information know by only some of the members) on the groups' risk-taking behaviors. Results from a laboratory experiment using student subjects found no differences in risk-taking behaviors between CMC and face-to-face groups; additionally, no differences were found related to how information was distributed among group members. A significant effect was found, however, for the risk preference of the firm, showing that risk-neutral firms influenced groups to make riskier decisions than groups from risk-averse firms. Finally, groups within risk-neutral firms receiving partial information made riskier decisions than groups receiving full information. The implications of these results for future research and practice are examined.