Search results

Online knowledge integration has been an important concern of the online knowledge community as it can lead to various positive outcomes of online knowledge coproduction. This paper identifies online knowledge integration factors by considering group heterogeneity and group interaction process.

Based on the categorization-elaboration model (CEM) and interactive team cognition (ITC) theory, a research model that reflects the antecedent's factors and mediating factors of online knowledge integration was developed and empirically examined based on data collected from 2,339,836 data extracted from Wikipedia.

Group interaction process plays an essential mediator role in online knowledge integration. Group knowledge heterogeneity negatively influences online knowledge integration and group experience heterogeneity positively, and they both positively promote online knowledge integration through group interaction process with different paths.

Our research concerns the OKC context in one setting (Wikipedia). We expect that the results will generalize to other OKC platforms.

The findings of the study could assist the online knowledge community's organizers to understand the motivational mechanisms of online knowledge integration. Group interaction process could be regarded as the key role to promote group wisdom and maintain group independence.

We advance the understanding of the online knowledge integration and gain a richer understanding of the importance of group interaction independence for online knowledge integration based on the agreement of group wisdom. It suggested keeping group interaction independence is an important aspect for highly online knowledge integration among heterogeneity groups.

This study extends CEM and ITC theory to the domain of knowledge integration context and finds the mechanism between group heterogeneity and online knowledge integration by introducing the group interaction process.

Group interaction networks are networks whose relations are defined by who engages with whom in communication, coordination, or other forms of joint activity. These interaction networks represent the patterns of action that unfold between members of a group and have the potential to inform research on how groups communicate, how psychological states inform, and how communication patterns can impact team performance. Interaction networks are unique in that they can be defined in terms of both structure and temporality; each interaction can be coded as an event that occurs at a specific point in time. Accordingly, interaction networks are well suited for process theories and methods. Further, the growing availability of fine-grained digital trace data makes it easier for researchers to study these networks in depth. In this chapter, theories of structure and time are reviewed in relation to group networks and interactions. A process-oriented relational event-based paradigm for studying group interaction networks is introduced as a possible alternative to prior methods. The chapter concludes with a comparison of relevant social network approaches, as well as a discussion of potential future research.

This study aims to explore the use of a Computer‐mediated Communication (CMC) system in‐group conflict management, with specific attention directed toward analyzing the task effect on conflict management patterns of groups in CMC interaction.

Two tasks are used in experimental design to analyze interactions and conflict management patterns within e‐mail communication environment. Group composition and communication medium were kept constant. The group working relations coding system (GWRCS) was used to examine group interaction patterns that characterize the conflict management process.

The results demonstrate that task type influences the group conflict management process and the extent to which a group employs different levels of confrontiveness strategy in its interaction and conflict management patterns. Specifically, intellective task conflict is best handled by a high confrontiveness while cognitive task conflict is best handled by a moderate confrontiveness strategy.

The study used small group size and did not take into account variation in group size. Thus, the degree to which a larger size groups might affect the results is unknown. The study showed that group effectiveness requires different conflict management and interaction patterns for different tasks even within the same communication medium.

The study outlined the importance of task types in conflict management within the same group and within the same communication technology. It also stressed the fact that individuals apply technology differently to negotiate conflict based on tasks.

Early efforts in the study of groups had an inherently temporal dimension, notably work on group dynamics and the related study of phases in group problem solving. Not surprisingly, the majority of work linking time to groups has focused on team development. By contrast, work on team performance has tended to take the form Input-Process-Output, in which the passage of time is implied. There is rarely a discussion of how processes might be affected by timing. We suggest ways in which the two literatures might be brought together. We review models of group development and group performance, propose ways in which temporal issues can be integrated into performance models, and conclude by raising questions for future theory and empirical investigation.

Despite the potentially vital implications of time pressure for group performance in general and team effectiveness in particular, research has traditionally neglected the study of time limits and group effectiveness. We examine the small, but growing, body of research addressing the effect of time pressure on group performance and introduce our Attentional Focus Model of group effectiveness (Karau & Kelly, 1992). We examine recent research on the utility of the model and identify selected implications of the model for how time pressure may interact with other factors such as task type, group structure, and personality to influence team performance. Finally, we discuss methodological issues of studying attention, interaction processes, and team performance.

Mobile technology research focuses on supporting the individual mobile worker. CCSW research has primarily focused on supporting distributed, but fixed‐site workers. This research bridges both research foci by expanding to include mobile, anytime, anyplace support. The VLab (Virtual laboratory) provides anytime, anyplace process support for mobile software development teams. A longitudinal evaluation of group interactions in multiple extant teams establishes a baseline that helps to identify process support requirements. This baseline can be used to judge the effect of introducing process support technology that addresses specific context variables in group interactions.

The aim of this paper is to test the moderating role of emotion regulation in the transformation of both task and process conflict into relationship conflict.

A field study of multi-teams systems, in which (94) respondents are engaged in interpersonal and inter-team interactions, was conducted to test the effects of the interaction of emotion regulation and task and process conflict on the emergence of relationship conflict in 23 multi-team client/supplier systems.

The findings show that when collective emotion regulation strategies are effective, process conflict is less likely to transform into relationship conflict. An emerging finding of this study shows that process conflict mediates the interaction between task conflict and emotion regulation on relationship conflict in multi-team systems.

This study uses a relatively small number of projects and participants: further studies with larger samples are recommended; in addition, longitudinal studies would allow for further testing the effect of team longevity in the emergence of effective emotion regulation strategies.ct transforming into relationship conflicts.

The findings imply that managers of multi-team systems should actively try to stimulate their teams to develop effective emotion regulation strategies as effective emotion regulation mechanisms minimize the risk of process conflict transforming into relationship conflicts.

The paper looks at a real-world (as opposed to lab-situation) environment; it addresses a contingency model of intra-group conflict and tests the transformation of task and process conflicts into relationship conflict taking into account the moderating effect of emotion regulation.

This qualitative study investigated how small group communication influences the development of shared mental models in a committee of public librarians addressing a problem-solving task. It examines the influence of communication themes, functions, roles, and rules on the group's development of shared mental models about the task and about team interaction. Data were collected over the course of a year from group meetings, email messages, group documents, and participant interviews and then analyzed using existing coding schemes and qualitative coding techniques. The findings indicate that within the group there was a strong superficial convergence around the task mental model and the team interaction mental model but a weaker convergence at a deeper level. Analysis of the group communication data shows that the group focused discussion on understanding the problem and identifying tasks, enacting group roles and rules that facilitated sharing information. The functions of their messages focused on task communication. The findings suggest that, in this group, communication themes most heavily influenced the development of a shared mental model about the task, while communication roles, rules, and functions were more influential toward the development of a shared mental model about team interaction. Implications for practice include adopting intentional tactics for surfacing mental models at various points in the group life and anchoring the emerging model within the collective cognition of the group through devices such as narratives, objects, or documentary materials.

Among the many influences on group decision making efficacy that have been identified by group researchers, the process that a group follows in arriving at a decision is widely regarded as one of the most important. This chapter reviews the research on group decision making processes for the purpose of explicating (a) the nature of group process, (b) the factors that influence group process, (c) the role that communication plays in group process, and (d) the influence of group process on decision making efficacy. The chapter concludes with suggestions for future research.