Search

Researchers have proposed that the contradictions observed between past group support system (GSS) laboratory and field research may be partially accounted for by the ad-hoc nature of the groups that are often used in the laboratory. To examine this, a laboratory experiment examining the influence of group history (i.e., established versus ad-hoc groups) and the level of computer support (i.e., communicating via a computer-mediated system versus face-to-face) was conducted. Dependent variables examined in the research include information-sharing performance, decision quality, and member perceptions. Subjects completed a hidden profile task--a task where some information is held by all group members prior to the meeting, while other information is held only by a subset of the group. As expected, established groups discussed less unique information than ad-hoc groups. In addition, information sharing was positively related to the quality of group decisions. Members of established groups were more satisfied than members of ad-hoc groups; members using the computer-mediated system were less satisfied than those communicating face-to-face. In addition, group cohesion was positively related to satisfaction and decision quality. The results are discussed in the context of prior theory and research. Opportunities for future research are also described. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the use of computer-mediated systems for group work grows, the need for a better understanding of the impact of such systems becomes more important. Studies of non-computer-mediated group work have long been guided by mathematical models of group interaction and performance, but recent research suggests that these models do not fit the unique capabilities of computer-mediated systems. This article builds on Previous group research to create a mathematical model of computer-mediated group performance which is then tested using data from two prior studies. This testing enabled us to conclude that models of computer-mediated groups run counter to the many guiding models of non-computer-mediated groups. We therefore discuss the implications of these differences in relation to users of this technology and to future developmental and empirical research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Presents an experimental study that measured the idea generation performance of groups of four and eight members in both proximate and distributed conditions using the same synchronous computer-mediated communication system. Method of study; Results; Conclusions.

Structured decision techniques have been a mainstay of prescriptive decision theory for decades. Group Support Systems (GSSs) automate many of the features found in decision techniques, yet groups often choose to ignore both the technique and the technology in favor of more familiar decision processes. This research empirically tests propositions and hypotheses for a specific instantiation of Adaptive Structuration Theory. A controlled laboratory experiment tests the ability of three appropriation mediators (e.g., facilitation, GSS configuration, and training) to directively affect group decision making through guidance and restrictiveness. The experiment used a hidden-profile task and structured decision technique which directed group members to reach a decision by identifying the problem, choosing criteria, and selecting a solution. The results supported the proposition that appropriation mediators can increase the faithful use of structured decision techniques and that faithful use can improve decision quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study of negotiating groups, whether distributive between competing parties (i.e. "win-lose") or integrative between essentially friendly parties from the same organization (i.e., "win-win"), remains important. While much previous research in this area has focused on key analytical issues such as evaluating proposed options, much less research has addressed the equally important initial stage of negotiation: generating options for mutual gain. In general, groups do this poorly, as there are many obstacles that inhibit successful option generation. Recent advances in computer technology provide additional approaches that can be used to support option generation as one component in an overall Negotiation Support System. This paper presents an integrated series of laboratory and field studies that investigated various aspects of computer-supported option generation for groups that meet at the same place and time. The use of anonymity to separate personalities from the issues and promote more objective evaluation was found to improve option generation in some circumstances, particularly those with increased criticalness and/or power differences among the participants. Larger groups were found to be more effective than smaller groups, several smaller groups combined, and nominal groups. We present several implications for theory development and system design and use, as well as a tentative model for computer-supported group option generation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A laboratory experiment was used to evaluate the effects of anonymity and evaluative tone on computer-mediated groups using a group decision support system to perform an idea-generation task. Evaluative tone was manipulated through a confederate group member who entered supportive or critical comments into the automated brainstorming system. Groups working anonymously and with a critical confederate produced the greatest number of original solutions and overall comments, yet average solution quality per item and average solution rarity were not different across conditions. Identified groups working with a supportive confederate were the most satisfied and had the highest levels of perceived effectiveness, but produced the fewest original solutions and overall comments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]