Who controls the technology in group support systems? determinants and consequences

Authors:
Laurel C. Austin;Jeffrey K. Liker;Poppy L. McLeod
Affiliations:
Department of Social and Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA;Department of Industrial and Operations Engineering, Ann Arbor, MI;School of Business Administration, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA
Venue:
Human-Computer Interaction
Year:
1993

Citing 5
Cited 0

“Information technology to support electronic meetings"

Management Information Systems Quarterly
“A study of influence in computer-mediated group decision making"

Management Information Systems Quarterly
Using a GDSS to facilitate group consensus: some intended and unintended consequences

MIS Quarterly
Capturing the capture concepts: a case study in the design of computer-supported meeting environments

CSCW '88 Proceedings of the 1988 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work
Exploring the impact of face-to-face collaborative technology on group writing

Journal of Management Information Systems

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Student groups completed a rank-ordering task in a "low-structure" computerized meeting room where all group members had equal access to a shared computer with a large monitor. Strategies used by the groups to distribute control over the public monitor, determinants of which members took control, and the consequences of control strategies were examined. Groups adopted either a dedicated-scribe strategy, in which one member had control throughout the session, or a non-dedicated-scribe strategy, in which control of the public monitor passed among members. Groups with at least one member who had low proficiency with the technology were very likely to adopt a dedicated-scribe strategy. Social influence within the group, proficiency with the computer system, and gender predicted which group members would take control of the public monitor. The results suggest that a group's social structure may be altered by the use of low-structure computer support, depending on the distribution of technical proficiency in the group. Dedicated-scribe groups had marginally better task performance but reported less increase in satisfaction (over previous work together) than non-dedicated-scribe groups. The implications of this research for the design and use of group computer support are discussed.