|
 ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to investigate the use of computer conferencing and face-to-face communications to support the work of student teams in a systems analysis project. The study compares the differences in decision quality associated with the projects accomplished by these teams, such team's confidence in the group decision, and each team's satisfaction with the overall decision process.
The research questions were: (1) Will the computer conferencing groups produce solutions of higher decision quality, as measured by group scores for decision quality, analytical strength, technical strength, research base for drawing conclusions, and the effectiveness of the group presentation; and (2) Will the face-to-face groups feel greater confidence in the group decision and greater satisfaction with the group decision process, because of the personal relationships that have been developed, as measured by confidence in the group decision, satisfaction with the group decision process, and peer evaluations of participation of their teammates and effectiveness of their teammates.
Based upon the findings, computer conferencing afforded opportunities for handling evaluative tasks more effectively than face-to-face meetings. Computer conferencing offers the benefits of producing better decisions because of broader participation, expression of a wider range of opinions, and greater analysis. Computer conferencing can lower time pressures and create the psychological distance among participants needed to engage in more open, candid exchanges of opinions. Its shortcomings are the time it takes to exchange messages, the increased difficulty of coordinating and clarifying ideas, and the increased time it takes to develop a consensus and to arrive at a decision.
REFERENCES
Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.
| |
1
|
Adrianson, L. and Hjelmquist, E. "Group processes in faceto-face and computer-mediated communication. Behavior and Information Technology, V. I0, No. 4, 1991, pp. 281- 296.
|
| |
2
|
Couger, J.D., Higgins, LF., and Mcl_ntyre, S.C., Unstmcturcd creativity in information systems organizations, MIS u~, December 1993, pp. 375-397.
|
| |
3
|
|
| |
4
|
George, J.F., Easton, G.K., Nunamaker, J.F., and Northcraft, G.B., "A study of collaborative group work with and without computer-based support," Information Systems Research, V. 1, No. 4, 1990, pp. 394-415.
|
| |
5
|
Hiltz, S., Johnson, K., and Turoff, M., "Experiments in group decision-making, I: communications process and outcome in face-to-face computer conferences." Human Communication Research. V. 13, No. 2, 1986, pp. 225-252.
|
| |
6
|
Ocker, Rosalie, Starr Roxanne Hiltz, Murray Turoff, and Jerry Fjermestad, "The Effects of Distributed Group Support and Process Structuring on Software Requirements Development Teams: Results on Creativity and Quality." Journal of Management Information Systems, Winter 1995- 96, Vol. l 2, No. 3, pp. 127-153.
|
| |
7
|
Siegel, J., Dubrovsky, V. Kiesler, S., and McGuire, T., "Group processes in computer-mediated communication." Organizati0nal Behavior and Human Decision Proce_sses, V. 37, 1986, pp. 157-187.
|
| |
8
|
Weisband, S., "Group discussion and first advocacy effects in computer-mediated and face-to, face decision-making groups." Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes V. 53, 1992, pp. 352-380.
|
| |
9
|
Wilson, E. Vance, Joline P. Morrison, Angela M. Napier, "Perceived Effectiveness of Computer-Mediated Communications and Face-to-Face Communications in Student Software Development Teams," Journal of Computer Information Systems, Winter 1997-1998, pp 2-7.
|
| |
10
|
|
|
Adobe Acrobat
QuickTime
Windows Media Player
Real Player
Pdf