IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v13y2002i1p70-90.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Group Polarization and Computer-Mediated Communication: Effects of Communication Cues, Social Presence, and Anonymity

Author

Listed:
  • Choon-Ling Sia

    (Department of Information Systems, City University of Hong Kong, 83 Tat Chee Avenue, Kowloon, Hong Kong)

  • Bernard C. Y. Tan

    (Department of Information Systems, National University of Singapore, 3 Science Drive 2, Singapore 117543, Republic of Singapore)

  • Kwok-Kee Wei

    (Department of Information Systems, National University of Singapore, 3 Science Drive 2, Singapore 117543, Republic of Singapore)

Abstract

Group polarization is the tendency of people to become more extreme in their thinking following group discussion. It may be beneficial to some, but detrimental to other, organizational decisions. This study examines how computer-mediated communication (CMC) may be associated with group polarization. Two laboratory experiments were carried out. The first experiment, conducted in an identified setting, demonstrated that removal of verbal cues might not have reduced social presence sufficiently to impact group polarization, but removal of visual cues might have reduced social presence sufficiently to raise group polarization. Besides confirming the results of the first experiment, the second experiment showed that the provision of anonymity might also have reduced social presence sufficiently to raise group polarization. Analyses of process data from both experiments indicated that the reduction in social presence might have increased group polarization by causing people to generate more novel arguments and engage in more one-upmanship behavior. Collectively, process and outcome data from both experiments reveal how group polarization might be affected by level of social presence. Specifically, group discussion carried out in an unsupported setting or an identified face-to-face CMC setting tends to result in weaker group polarization. Conversely, group discussion conducted in an anonymous face-to-face CMC setting or a dispersed CMC setting (with or without anonymity) tends to lead to stronger group polarization. Implications of these results for further research and practice are provided.

Suggested Citation

  • Choon-Ling Sia & Bernard C. Y. Tan & Kwok-Kee Wei, 2002. "Group Polarization and Computer-Mediated Communication: Effects of Communication Cues, Social Presence, and Anonymity," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(1), pages 70-90, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:13:y:2002:i:1:p:70-90
    DOI: 10.1287/isre.13.1.70.92
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.13.1.70.92
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/isre.13.1.70.92?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Terri L. Griffith & Mark A. Fuller & Gregory B. Northcraft, 1998. "Facilitator Influence in Group Support Systems: Intended and Unintended Effects," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 9(1), pages 20-36, March.
    2. Lee Sproull & Sara Kiesler, 1986. "Reducing Social Context Cues: Electronic Mail in Organizational Communication," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(11), pages 1492-1512, November.
    3. Bhappu, Anita D. & Griffith, Terri L. & Northcraft, Gregory B., 1997. "Media Effects and Communication Bias in Diverse Groups," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 199-205, June.
    4. Paese, Paul W. & Bieser, Mary & Tubbs, Mark E., 1993. "Framing Effects and Choice Shifts in Group Decision Making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 149-165, October.
    5. Wiseman, David B. & Levin, Irwin P., 1996. "Comparing Risky Decision Making Under Conditions of Real and Hypothetical Consequences," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 241-250, June.
    6. Marshall Scott Poole & Michael Holmes & Gerardine Desanctis, 1991. "Conflict Management in a Computer-Supported Meeting Environment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(8), pages 926-953, August.
    7. Weisband, Suzanne P., 1992. "Group discussion and first advocacy effects in computer-mediated and face-to-face decision making groups," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 352-380, December.
    8. Butler, John K. & Crino, Michael D., 1992. "Effects of initial tendency and real risk on choice shift," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 14-34, October.
    9. Terri L. Griffith & Gregory B. Northcraft, 1994. "Distinguishing Between the Forest and the Trees: Media, Features, and Methodology in Electronic Communication Research," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 272-285, May.
    10. Joseph B. Walther, 1995. "Relational Aspects of Computer-Mediated Communication: Experimental Observations over Time," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(2), pages 186-203, April.
    11. Terry Connolly & Leonard M. Jessup & Joseph S. Valacich, 1990. "Effects of Anonymity and Evaluative Tone on Idea Generation in Computer-Mediated Groups," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(6), pages 689-703, June.
    12. Alan R. Dennis & Susan T. Kinney, 1998. "Testing Media Richness Theory in the New Media: The Effects of Cues, Feedback, and Task Equivocality," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 9(3), pages 256-274, September.
    13. Siegel, Jane & Dubrovsky, Vitaly & Kiesler, Sara & McGuire, Timothy W., 1986. "Group processes in computer-mediated communication," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 157-187, April.
    14. Joey F. George & George K. Easton & J. F. Nunamaker & Gregory B. Northcraft, 1990. "A Study of Collaborative Group Work With and Without Computer-Based Support," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 1(4), pages 394-415, December.
    15. Detmar Straub & Elena Karahanna, 1998. "Knowledge Worker Communications and Recipient Availability: Toward a Task Closure Explanation of Media Choice," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(2), pages 160-175, April.
    16. Whyte, Glen, 1993. "Escalating Commitment in Individual and Group Decision Making: A Prospect Theory Approach," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 430-455, April.
    17. Bernard C. Y. Tan & Kwok-Kee Wei & Richard T. Watson & Danial L. Clapper & Ephraim R. McLean, 1998. "Computer-Mediated Communication and Majority Influence: Assessing the Impact in an Individualistic and a Collectivistic Culture," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(9), pages 1263-1278, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sam Ransbotham & Gerald C. Kane & Nicholas H. Lurie, 2012. "Network Characteristics and the Value of Collaborative User-Generated Content," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 387-405, May.
    2. Sergei Monakhov, 2021. "How analysis of mobile app reviews problematises linguistic approaches to internet troll detection," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-10, December.
    3. Sergei Monakhov, 2020. "Early detection of internet trolls: Introducing an algorithm based on word pairs / single words multiple repetition ratio," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-16, August.
    4. Sora Kang & Kai H. Lim & Min Soo Kim & Hee-Dong Yang, 2012. "Research Note ---A Multilevel Analysis of the Effect of Group Appropriation on Collaborative Technologies Use and Performance," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 214-230, March.
    5. Rob Gleasure & Kieran Conboy & Lorraine Morgan, 2019. "Talking Up a Storm: How Backers Use Public Discourse to Exert Control in Crowdfunded Systems Development Projects," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 447-465, June.
    6. Lionel P. Robert Jr & Alan R. Dennis & Manju K. Ahuja, 2018. "Differences are Different: Examining the Effects of Communication Media on the Impacts of Racial and Gender Diversity in Decision-Making Teams," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 525-545, September.
    7. Kunsch, P.L. & Kavathatzopoulos, I. & Rauschmayer, F., 2009. "Modelling complex ethical decision problems with operations research," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 1100-1108, December.
    8. Jordan W. Moffett & Judith Anne Garretson Folse & Robert W. Palmatier, 2021. "A theory of multiformat communication: mechanisms, dynamics, and strategies," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 441-461, May.
    9. Chih-Hung Peng & Nicholas H. Lurie & Sandra A. Slaughter, 2019. "Using Technology to Persuade: Visual Representation Technologies and Consensus Seeking in Virtual Teams," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(3), pages 948-962, September.
    10. Burton, F. Greg & Coller, Maribeth & Tuttle, Brad, 2006. "Market responses to qualitative information from a group polarization perspective," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 107-127, February.
    11. Anne-Francoise Rutkowski & Bartel Walle, 2005. "Cultural Dimensions and Prototypical Criteria for Multi-Criteria Decision Support in Electronic Markets: A Comparative Analysis of Two Job Markets," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 285-306, July.
    12. Naume Sonhera & David Mhlanga, 2022. "Reducing Cyber Incidents through Good Online Behavioral Norms: Lessons from South Africa," Eurasian Journal of Social Sciences, Eurasian Publications, vol. 10(1), pages 37-48.
    13. Koorank Beheshti, Mohammadali & Gopinath, Mahesh & Ashouri, Sama & Zal, Saeed, 2023. "Does polarizing personality matter in influencer marketing? Evidence from Instagram," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    14. Bernhard Kittel & Wolfgang Luhan, 2013. "Decision making in networks: an experiment on structure effects in a group dictator game," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(1), pages 141-154, January.
    15. Ni Huang & Yili Hong & Gordon Burtch, 2015. "Digital Social Visibility, Anonymity and User Content Generation: Evidence from Natural Experiments," Working Papers 15-04, NET Institute.
    16. Wei Zeng & Hua Wei & Meiting Liu, 2023. "Need for Distinctiveness Leads to Pathological Internet Use? The Perspective of Cognitive Behavioral Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-13, January.
    17. Hutzinger, Clemens & Weitzl, Wolfgang J., 2021. "Co-creation of online service recoveries and its effects on complaint bystanders," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 525-538.
    18. Jingchuan Pu & Yuan Chen & Liangfei Qiu & Hsing Kenneth Cheng, 2020. "Does Identity Disclosure Help or Hurt User Content Generation? Social Presence, Inhibition, and Displacement Effects," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 297-322, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Daily, Bonnie F. & Teich, Jeffrey E., 2001. "Perceptions of contribution in multi-cultural groups in non-GDSS and GDSS environments," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(1), pages 70-83, October.
    2. Wilson, Jeanne M. & Straus, Susan G. & McEvily, Bill, 2006. "All in due time: The development of trust in computer-mediated and face-to-face teams," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 16-33, January.
    3. Bernard C. Y. Tan & Kwok-Kee Wei & Richard T. Watson & Danial L. Clapper & Ephraim R. McLean, 1998. "Computer-Mediated Communication and Majority Influence: Assessing the Impact in an Individualistic and a Collectivistic Culture," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(9), pages 1263-1278, September.
    4. Michele Griessmair & Sabine T. Koeszegi, 2009. "Exploring the Cognitive-Emotional Fugue in Electronic Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 213-234, May.
    5. Chih-Hung Peng & Nicholas H. Lurie & Sandra A. Slaughter, 2019. "Using Technology to Persuade: Visual Representation Technologies and Consensus Seeking in Virtual Teams," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(3), pages 948-962, September.
    6. Stephanie Watts Sussman & Lee Sproull, 1999. "Straight Talk: Delivering Bad News through Electronic Communication," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 150-166, June.
    7. Catherine Durnell Cramton, 2001. "The Mutual Knowledge Problem and Its Consequences for Dispersed Collaboration," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 346-371, June.
    8. Martha L. Maznevski & Katherine M. Chudoba, 2000. "Bridging Space Over Time: Global Virtual Team Dynamics and Effectiveness," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(5), pages 473-492, October.
    9. Lionel P. Robert & Alan R. Dennis & Manju K. Ahuja, 2008. "Social Capital and Knowledge Integration in Digitally Enabled Teams," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 19(3), pages 314-334, September.
    10. Dandi, Roberto, 2002. "E-mail and Direct Participation in Decision Making: A Literature Review," MPRA Paper 14397, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Lionel P. Robert Jr & Alan R. Dennis & Manju K. Ahuja, 2018. "Differences are Different: Examining the Effects of Communication Media on the Impacts of Racial and Gender Diversity in Decision-Making Teams," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 525-545, September.
    12. Bhappu, Anita D. & Griffith, Terri L. & Northcraft, Gregory B., 1997. "Media Effects and Communication Bias in Diverse Groups," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 199-205, June.
    13. Swaab, Roderick I. & Phillips, Katherine W. & Schaerer, Michael, 2016. "Secret conversation opportunities facilitate minority influence in virtual groups: The influence on majority power, information processing, and decision quality," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 17-32.
    14. Sutton, Robert I. & Neale, Margaret A. & Owens, David, 2000. "Technologies of Status Negotiation: Status Dynamics in Email Discussion Groups," Research Papers 1612, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    15. Ned Kock, 2004. "The Psychobiological Model: Towards a New Theory of Computer-Mediated Communication Based on Darwinian Evolution," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 327-348, June.
    16. Youngjin Kim & Starr Roxanne Hiltz & Murray Turoff, 2002. "Coordination Structures and System Restrictiveness in Distributed Group Support Systems," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 11(5), pages 379-404, September.
    17. Nada Korac-Kakabadse & Alexander Kouzmin & Andrew Korac-Kakabadse, 2000. "Information Technology-Enabled Communication and Organizational Effectiveness," International Review of Public Administration, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 17-36, June.
    18. Kent Marett & Joey F. George, 2013. "Barriers to Deceiving Other Group Members in Virtual Settings," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 89-115, January.
    19. Meng Ma & Ritu Agarwal, 2007. "Through a Glass Darkly: Information Technology Design, Identity Verification, and Knowledge Contribution in Online Communities," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 18(1), pages 42-67, March.
    20. Baltes, Boris B. & Dickson, Marcus W. & Sherman, Michael P. & Bauer, Cara C. & LaGanke, Jacqueline S., 2002. "Computer-Mediated Communication and Group Decision Making: A Meta-Analysis," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 156-179, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:13:y:2002:i:1:p:70-90. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.