Marcela Borge
John M. Carroll
ABSTRACT
In this paper, patterns of communication are examined in order to unpack the extent to which verbal equity is a critical factor in determining group success. A microanalysis of 20 teams working to complete a complex, information dependent, collaborative task was conducted. Interaction analysis methods were used as means to determine patterns of interaction and the sophistication of cognitive activity that teams engaged in. Findings suggest that verbal equity may not be as important as previous research indicates. A more critical variable may be cognitive specialization. The authors explain their findings by drawing on theories of cognition, thereby contributing to a better understanding of collective intelligence.
- Ainsworth, S. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 183--198.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Borge, M., Ganoe, C., Shih, S., and Carroll, J. (2012). Patterns of team processes and breakdowns in information analysis tasks. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. (CSCW '12). ACM, New York, New York. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Brown T. , Miller, C. (2000). Communication networks in task-performing groups: effects of task complexity, time pressure, and interpersonal dominance. Small Group Res. 31(2):131--57Google ScholarCross Ref
- Carroll, J., Borge, M., & Shih, S. (2013). Cognitive Artifacts as a Window on Design. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvlc.2013.05.001i Google ScholarCross Ref
- Convertino, G., Mentis, H., Bhambare, P., Ferro, C., Carroll, J. M., & Rosson, M. B. (2008). Comparing media in emergency planning. In Proceedings of the 5th International ISCRAM Conference, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
- Convertino, G., Mentis, H. M., Rosson, M. B., Slavkovic, A., & Carroll, J. M. (2009). Supporting content and process common ground in computer-supported teamwork. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 2339--2348). ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Cooke, N.J., DeJoode, J.A., Pedersen, H.K., Gorman, J.C., Connor, O.O., & Kiekel, P.A. (2004). The role of individual and team cognition in uninhabited air vechicle command-and-control. Technical Report for AFOSR Grant Nos. F49620-01--1-0261and F49620-03--1-00248.Google Scholar
- Dillenbourg, P., & Traum, D. (1999). The long road from a shared screen to a shared understanding. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Computer Support for Collaborative Learning (CSCL) 1999 Conference, Palo Alto, California. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Fiore, S., Rosen, M., Smith-Jentsch, K., & Salas, E. (2010). Toward an Understanding of Macrocognition in Teams: Predicting Processes in Complex Collaborative Contexts. Human Factors.Google Scholar
- Harris, A., Rick, J., Bonnett, V., Yuill, N., Fleck, R., Marshall, P., & Rogers, Y. (2009, June). Around the table: are multiple-touch surfaces better than single-touch for children's collaborative interactions?. In Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Computer supported collaborative learning-Volume 1 (pp. 335--344). International Society of the Learning Sciences. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. The journal of the learning sciences, 4(1), 39--103.Google Scholar
- Kaput, J. J. (1989). Linking representations in the symbol systems of algebra. In S. Wagner, & C. Kieran, Research issues in the learning and teaching of algebra (pp. 167--194). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Kerr, N. L., & Tindale, R. S. (2004). Group performance and decision making. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 55, 623--655.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kirschner, P. A. (2002). Cognitiv load theory: Implications of cognitive load theory on the design of learning. Learning and instruction, 12(1), 1--10.Google Scholar
- Landis, J. R., Koch, G. G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33 (1977), 159--174.Google Scholar
- Letsky, M., & Warner, N. (2008). Macrocognition in teams. In M. Letsky, N. Warner, S. Fiore & C. Smith (Eds.), Macrocognition in Teams: Theories and Methodologies. Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
- Norman, D. A. (1990). Four (more) issues for cognitive science. Department of Cognitive Science, University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
- Marshall, P., Hornecker, E., Morris, R., Dalton, N. S., & Rogers, Y. (2008, October). When the fingers do the talking: A study of group participation with varying constraints to a tabletop interface. In Horizontal Interactive Human Computer Systems, 2008. TABLETOP 2008. 3rd IEEE International Workshop on (pp. 33--40). IEEE.Google Scholar
- Schafer, W.A., Ganoe, C.H. & Carroll, J.M. Supporting community emergency management through a geocollaboration software infrastructure. Computer- Supported Cooperative Work: The Journal of Collaborative Computing, 16 (2007), 501--537. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Schraw, G., Crippen, K. J., & Hartley, K. (2006). Promoting self-regulation in science education: Metacognition as part of a broader perspective on learning. Research in Science Education, 36(1--2), 111--139.Google Scholar
- Shimoda, T., White, B., Borge, M., & Frederiksen, J. (2013). Designing for science learning and collaborative discourse. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children (pp. 247--256). ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Stahl, G. (2006). Knowledge negotiation online. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Group Cognition (pp. 177--189). Cambridge. MA: MIT Press.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 409--426). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of personality and social psychology, 48(6), 1467.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and instruction, 4(4), 295--312.Google Scholar
- Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational psychology review, 17(2), 147--177.Google Scholar
- Warner, N., Burkman, L., & Biron, C. H. Special operations reconnaissance (SOR) scenario: Intelligence analysis and mission planning, No. NAWCADPAX/TM-2008/184, 2008.Google Scholar
- West, G. P. Collective Cognition: When Entrepreneurial Teams, Not Individuals, Make Decisions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31,1 (2007), 77-- 102.Google Scholar
- White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and instruction, 16(1), 3--118.Google Scholar
- Woolley, A., Chabris, C., Pentland, A., Hashmi, M., & Malone, T. Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Science, 330, 6004 (2010), 686--688.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Verbal Equity, Cognitive Specialization, and Performance
Recommendations
"Complex Sociotechnical Joint Cognitive Work Systems"?
In recent years researchers have used various phrases to distinguish types of systems, including "complex systems," "adaptive systems," and "sociotechnical systems." This essay explores the question of whether such modifiers add specific and useful ...
Performance of Cognitive Radio Network with Novel Hybrid Spectrum Access Schemes
In this paper two novel spectrum access schemes, a hybrid spectrum access scheme (HSAS) and a modified hybrid spectrum access scheme (MHSAS) combining underlay and overlay, are proposed to enhance the performance of cognitive radio (CR) enabled ...
Analysis of secondary user performance in cognitive radio networks with reactive spectrum handoff
Cognitive radio networks use dynamic spectrum access of secondary users (SUs) to deal with the problem of radio spectrum scarcity . In this paper, we investigate the SU performance in cognitive radio networks with reactive-decision spectrum handoff. ...
Comments