The equalizing impact of a group support system on status differentials

ABSTRACT

This study investigates the impact of the electronic communication capability of a group support system (GSS) on status differentials in small groups. A laboratory experiment was used to answer the research questions. Three support levels were studied: manual, face-to-face GSS, and dispersed GSS. Two task types were examined: intellective and preference. Five dependent variables reflecting different aspects of status differentials were measured: status influence, sustained influence, residual disagreement, perceived influence, and decision confidence. The results show that manual groups had higher status influence, sustained influence, and decision confidence, but lower residual disagreement than face-to-face GSS and dispersed GSS groups. Preference task groups also produced higher status influence and sustained influence, but lower residual disagreement compared to intellective task groups. In addition, manual groups working on the preference task reported higher perceived influence than face-to-face GSS and dispersed GSS groups working on the same task. These findings suggest that when groups are engaged in activities for which status differentials are undesirable, a GSS can be used in both face-to-face and dispersed settings to dampen status differentials. Moreover, when a task amplifies status differentials, the use of a GSS tends to produce corresponding stronger dampening effects.

REFERENCES

• 1: ANDERSON, L. R. AND AGER, J. W. 1978. Analysis of variance and small group research. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 4, 2, 341-345.
• 2: BERGER, J., FISEK, M. H., NORMAN, R. Z., AND ZELDITCH, M. 1977. Status Characteristics and Social Interaction. North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
• 3: Danial L. Clapper , Ephraim R. McLean , Richard T. Watson, An experimental investigation of the effect of a group decision support system on normative influence in small groups, Proceedings of the twelfth international conference on Information systems, p.273-282, January 1991, New York, New York, United States
• 4: COOK, T. D. AND CAMPBELL, D. T. 1979. Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Setting. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, MA.
• 5: COTTRELL, N., TACK, D., SEKARAK, G., AND RITTLE, R. 1968. Social facilitation of dominant responses by the presence of an audience and mere presence of others. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 9, 2, 245-250.
• 6: R L Daft , R H Lengel, Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design, Management Science, v.32 n.5, p.554-571, May 1986 [doi>10.1287/mnsc.32.5.554]
• 7: DENNIS, A. R. AND GALLUPE, R. B. 1993. A history of group support systems empirical research: Lessons learned and future directions. In Group Support Systems: New Perspectives, L. M. Jessup and J. S. Valacich, Eds. Macmillan, New York, NY, 59-77.
• 8: DIENER, E., FRASER, S., BEAMAN, A. L., AND KELEM, R. T. 1976. Effects of deindividuating variables on stealing by halloween trick-or-treaters. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 33, 2.
• 9: DUBROVSKY, V. g., KIESLER, S., AND SETHNA, B. N. 1991. The equalization phenomenon: Status effects in computer-mediated and face-to-face decision-making groups. Human-Comput. Interact. 6, 2, 119-146.
• 10: GUALLUPE, R. B., BASTIANUTTI, L., AND COOPER, W. H. 1991. Unblocking brainstorms. J. Appl. Psychol. 76, 1, 137-142.
• 11: GARDIN, H., KAPLAN, K. J., FIRESTONE, J. J., AND COWAN, G. 1973. Proxemic effects on cooperation, attitude, and approach-avoidance in a prisoner's dilemma game. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 27, 1, 13-18.
• 12: HOFSTEDE, G. 1991. Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. McGraw-Hill, London, UK.
• 13: HOLLANDER, E. P. 1964. Leader, Groups, and Influence. Oxford University Press, NJ.
• 14: JABLIN, F. M. AND SEIBOLD, D. R. 1978. Implications for problem solving groups of empirical research on 'brainstorming': A critical review of the literature. South. States Speech Commun. J. 43, 327-356.
• 15: R. A. Johnson , D. W. Wichern, Applied multivariate statistical analysis, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1988
• 16: KAPLAN, M. F. AND MILLER, C. E. 1987. Group decision making and normative versus informational influence effects of type of issue and assigned decision rule. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 53, 2, 306-313.
• 17: KEPPEL, G. 1991. Design and Analysis: A Researcher's Handbook. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ.
• 18: KIRK, R. E. 1982. Experimental Design: Procedures for the Behavioral Sciences. Brooks-Cole, CA.
• 19: LATANE, B. AND WOLF, S. 1981. The social impact of majorities and minorities. Psychol. Rev. 88, 5, 438-453.
• 20: LAUGLIN, P. R. AND EARLEY, P. C. 1982. Social combination models, persuasive arguments theory, social comparisons theory, and choice shift. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 42, 2, 273-280.
• 21: LEVINE, J. M. AND RUSSO, E. M. 1987. Majority and minority influence. In Group Processes, C. Hendrick, Ed. Sage Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, 13-54.
• 22: LINDE, C. 1988. The quantitative study of communicative success: Politeness and accidents in aviation discourse. Society 17, 3, 375-399.
• 23: MAASS, A. AND CLARK, R. D. 1984. Hidden impact of minorities: Fifteen years of minority influence research. Psychol. Bull. 95, 3, 428-450.
• 24: MCGRATH, J. E. 1984. Groups: Interaction and Performance. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ.
• 25: MCGRATH, J. E. AND HOLLINGSHEAD, A. B. 1993. Putting the 'group' back in group support systems: Some theoretical issues about dynamic processes in groups with technological enhancements. In Group Support Systems: New Perspectives, L. M. Jessup and J. S. Valacich, Eds. Macmillan, New York, NY, 78-96.
• 26: McGUIRE, T. W., KIESLER, S. B., AND SIEGEL, J. 1987. Group and computer-mediated discussion effects in risk decision making. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 52, 5, 917-930.
• 27: MEHRABIAN, A. 1972. Nonverbal Communication. Aldine-Atherton, Chicago, IL.
• 28: MONGE, P. R., ROTHMAN, L. W., EISENBERG, E. M., MILLER, K. L., AND KIRSTE, K. K. 1985. The dynamics of organizational proximity. Manage. Sci. 31, 9, 1129-1141.
• 29: MoscovIcI, S. 1976. Social Influence and Social Change. Academic Press Ltd., London, UK.
• 30: MoscovIcI, S. 1980. Toward a theory of conversion behavior. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 13, L. Berkowitz, Ed. Academic Press, Inc., New York, NY, 209-239.
• 31: NEMETH, C.J. 1986. Differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psychol. Rev. 93, 1, 23-32.
• 32: NEMETH, C. J. AND WACHTLER, J. 1983. Creative problem solving as a result of majority versus minority influence. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 13, 1, 45-55.
• 33: NEMETH, C. g., WACHTLER, g., AND ENDICOTT, g. 1977. Increasing the size of the minority: Some gains and some losses. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 7, 1, 15-26.
• 34: NUNNALLY, J. C. 1978. Psychometric Theory. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, NY.
• 35: PATTERSON, M. 1983. Nonverbal Behavior: A Functional Perspective. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY.
• 36: POOLE, M. S. AND JACKSON, M. H. 1993. Communication theory and group support systems. In Group Support Systems: New Perspectives, L. M. Jessup and J. S. Valacich, Eds. Macmillan, New York, NY, 281-293.
• 37: RIDGEWAY, C. L. 1981. Nonconformity, competence, and influence in groups: A test of two theories. Am. Sociol. Rev. 46, 3, 333-347.
• 38: RIDGEWAY, C. L., BERGER, g., AND SMITH, L. 1985. Nonverbal cues and status: An expectation states approach. Am. J. Sociol. 90, 5, 955-978.
• 39: L Sproull , S Kiesler, Reducing social context cues: electronic mail in organizational communication, Management Science, v.32 n.11, p.1492-1512, Nov. 1986 [doi>10.1287/mnsc.32.11.1492]
• 40: Richard T. Watson, Yin and Yang, Social Forces, and Meeting Desgin, Proceedings of the IFIP TC8/WG8.4 Working Conference on The Open Systems Future: Leveraging the LAN: Local Area Network Applications, p.197-213, August 29-September 02, 1993
• 41: Richard T. Watson , Gerardine DeSanctis , Marshall Scott Poole, Using a GDSS to facilitate group consensus: some intended and unintended consequences, MIS Quarterly, v.12 n.3, p.463-478, Sept. 1988 [doi>10.2307/249214]
• 42: WEISBAND, S. P. 1992. Group discussion and first advocacy effects in computer-mediated and face-to-face decision making groups. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 53, 3, 352-380.
• 43: WEISBERG, S. 1985. Applied Linear Regression. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY.
• 44: WILLIAMS, E. 1975. Coalition formation over telecommunications media. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 5, 4, 503-507.
• 45: WILLIAMS, E. 1977. Experimental comparisons of face-to-face and mediated communication: A review. Psychol. Bull. 84, 5, 963-976.
• 46: WOHLSTETTER, R. 1962. Pearl Harbor. Standford University Press, Standford, CA.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.4 INFORMATION SYSTEMS APPLICATIONS

Additional Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)

  J. Computer Applications

General Terms:
Management, Theory

Keywords:
electronic communication, group support systems, status differentials, task type