IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/grdene/v9y2000i5d10.1023_a1008780324737.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Cognitive Three-Process Model of Computer-Mediated Group Interaction

Author

Listed:
  • Brian Whitworth

    (New Jersey Institute of Technology, University Heights)

  • Brent Gallupe

    (Queens University)

  • Robert McQueen

    (University of Waikato)

Abstract

Current theories imply text-based computer networks are socially barren, but computer-mediated interaction (CMI) research contradicts this. A cognitive perspective suggests individuals in groups construct cognitions regarding the task (purpose), other people (relationships), and the group (identity), and these drive the interaction. Three core psychological process follow: resolving task information, relating to others and representing the group. This gives three types of influence: informational, personal and normative, and three group purposes: task resolution, interpersonal relationships and group unity. Group unity occurs when group members represent a common identity. The traditional communication threads of message content and sender context therefore require a third - behavioural position. Many-to-many exchange of member positions allows the group position to be transmitted to the group. A picture emerges of three parallel processes overlapping in behaviour, although CMI allows them to be isolated and investigated. This model extends most theories of computer-mediated group interaction. It implies there is no “best” type of group interaction support, because there is no best process. The groupware challenge is to offer the flexibility to support all three processes in combination.

Suggested Citation

  • Brian Whitworth & Brent Gallupe & Robert McQueen, 2000. "A Cognitive Three-Process Model of Computer-Mediated Group Interaction," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 9(5), pages 431-456, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:9:y:2000:i:5:d:10.1023_a:1008780324737
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1008780324737
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1023/A:1008780324737
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1008780324737?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lee Sproull & Sara Kiesler, 1986. "Reducing Social Context Cues: Electronic Mail in Organizational Communication," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(11), pages 1492-1512, November.
    2. Laughlin, Patrick R. & Chandler, John S. & Shupe, Ellen I. & Magley, Vicki J. & Hulbert, Lorne G., 1995. "Generality of a Theory of Collective Induction: Face-to-Face and Computer-Mediated Interaction, Amount of Potential Information, and Group versus Member Choice of Evidence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 98-111, July.
    3. Richard L. Daft & Robert H. Lengel, 1986. "Organizational Information Requirements, Media Richness and Structural Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(5), pages 554-571, May.
    4. David M. Boje & J. Keith Murnighan, 1982. "Group Confidence Pressures in Iterative Decisions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(10), pages 1187-1196, October.
    5. Alain Pinsonneault & Henri Barki & R. Brent Gallupe & Norberto Hoppen, 1999. "Electronic Brainstorming: The Illusion of Productivity," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 110-133, June.
    6. Laughlin, Patrick R. & Hollingshead, Andrea B., 1995. "A Theory of Collective Induction," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 94-107, January.
    7. Joseph B. Walther, 1995. "Relational Aspects of Computer-Mediated Communication: Experimental Observations over Time," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(2), pages 186-203, April.
    8. Heath, Chip & Gonzalez, Rich, 1995. "Interaction with Others Increases Decision Confidence but Not Decision Quality: Evidence against Information Collection Views of Interactive Decision Making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 305-326, March.
    9. 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.
    10. Sniezek, Janet A., 1992. "Groups under uncertainty: An examination of confidence in group decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 124-155, June.
    11. Gerardine DeSanctis & R. Brent Gallupe, 1987. "A Foundation for the Study of Group Decision Support Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(5), pages 589-609, May.
    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. Valerie L. Bartelt & Alan R. Dennis & Lingyao Yuan & Jordan B. Barlow, 2013. "Individual Priming in Virtual Team Decision-Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 873-896, September.
    2. Domingo Ribeiro-Soriano & David Urbano, 2009. "Overview of Collaborative Entrepreneurship: An Integrated Approach Between Business Decisions and Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 18(5), pages 419-430, September.
    3. Gwendolyn L. Kolfschoten & Gert-Jan Vreede & Robert O. Briggs & Henk G. Sol, 2010. "Collaboration ‘Engineerability’," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 301-321, May.

    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. 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.
    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. Jennifer D. Parlamis & Ingmar Geiger, 2015. "Mind the Medium: A Qualitative Analysis of Email Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 359-381, March.
    4. Meissner, Jens O., 2005. "Relationship Quality in the Context of Computer-Mediated Communication - A social constructionist approach," Working papers 2005/15, Faculty of Business and Economics - University of Basel.
    5. Sumita Raghuram & Philipp Tuertscher & Raghu Garud, 2010. "Research Note ---Mapping the Field of Virtual Work: A Cocitation Analysis," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 983-999, December.
    6. 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.
    7. Eva-Maria Pesendorfer & Sabine T. Koeszegi, 2006. "Hot Versus Cool Behavioural Styles in Electronic Negotiations: The Impact of Communication Mode," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 141-155, March.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Rajiv D. Banker & Robert J. Kauffman, 2004. "50th Anniversary Article: The Evolution of Research on Information Systems: A Fiftieth-Year Survey of the Literature in Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(3), pages 281-298, March.
    11. 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.
    12. Cristina B. Gibson & Jennifer L. Gibbs & Taryn L. Stanko & Paul Tesluk & Susan G. Cohen, 2011. "Including the “I” in Virtuality and Modern Job Design: Extending the Job Characteristics Model to Include the Moderating Effect of Individual Experiences of Electronic Dependence and Copresence," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(6), pages 1481-1499, December.
    13. John W. Boudreau, 2004. "50th Anniversary Article: Organizational Behavior, Strategy, Performance, and Design in Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(11), pages 1463-1476, November.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. Chernyshenko, Oleksandr S. & Miner, Andrew G. & Baumann, Michael R. & Sniezek, Janet A., 2003. "The impact of information distribution, ownership, and discussion on group member judgment: The differential cue weighting model," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 12-25, May.
    18. Joel Harmon, 1998. "Electronic Meetings and Intense Group Conflict: Effects of a Policy-Modeling Performance Support System and an Audio Communication Support System on Satisfaction and Agreement," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 131-153, March.
    19. 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.
    20. Lyn M. Van Swol & Paul Hangsan Ahn & Andrew Prahl & Zhenxing Gong, 2021. "Language Use in Group Discourse and Its Relationship to Group Processes," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(1), pages 21582440211, March.

    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:spr:grdene:v:9:y:2000:i:5:d:10.1023_a:1008780324737. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.