This study investigates how the regulation of interaction on the performative level (types and functions of interactions) and the referential level (relations of concepts) varies depending on the modality of communication: face-to-face, synchronous, and asynchronous text-based computer-mediated communication. In the experimental setting, six groups consisting of four experts cooperated per one of the three modalities in planning a marketing campaign for solar energy systems. The communication transcripts were analyzed on the performative level by SYMLOG. On the referential level, a network analysis was established to examine how relevant concepts were introduced in the discussion. The group output was measured with regard to group work, satisfaction, and performance. The results show that all communication modalities differ on the performative and on the referential level. No differences between the modalities were found regarding group work and satisfaction of the members. Group performance was judged better in face-to-face than in computer-mediated groups.
Adrianson, L., & Hjelmquist, E. (1999). Group processes in solving two problems: FTF and computer-mediated communication. Behavior and Information Technology, 18(3), 179-198.
2.
Allison, P. D., & Liker, J. K. (1982). Analyzing sequential categorical data on dyadic interaction: A comment on Gottman. Psychological Bulletin, 91, 393-403.
3.
Armstrong, D. J., & Cole, P. (1996). Managing distances in geographically distributed groups. In S. E. Jackson & M. N. Ruderman (Eds.), Diversity in work teams: Research paradigms for a changing workplace (pp.187-215). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
4.
Bakeman, R., & Gottmann, J. M. (1986). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
5.
Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Cambridge, UK: Addison-Wesley.
6.
Bales, R. F. (1953). The equilibrium problem in small groups. In T. Parsons, R. F. Bales, & E. A. Shils (Eds.), Working papers in the theory of action (pp. 111-161). Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
7.
Bales, R. F., & Cohen, S. P. (1982). SYMLOG. Ein System für die mehrstufige Beobachtung von Gruppen [SYMLOG. A system for the multiple level observation of groups]. Stuttgart, Germany: Klett-Cotta.
8.
Baltes, B. B., Dickson, M. W., Sherman, M. P., Bauer, C. C., & LaGanke, J. (2002). Computer-mediated communication and group decision making: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 87(1), 156-179.
9.
Becker-Beck, U. (1989). Methoden der Interaktionsprozeßdiagnostik. Eine Anwendung sequentieller Analysemethoden auf SYMLOG-Kodierungen von Gruppeninteraktionen [Methods for diagnosing interaction processes. An application of sequential analytic methods to SYMLOG coded interaction of groups]. Gruppendynamik, 20, 243-257.
10.
Becker-Beck, U. (1994). Strukturanalyse des Interaktionsverhaltens in Diskussionsgruppen [A structural analysis of the interaction behavior in discussion groups]. Gruppendynamik, 25, 95-106.
11.
Becker-Beck, U. (1997). Soziale Interaktion in Gruppen: Struktur- und Prozeßanalyse [Social interaction in groups: analyses of structure and processes]. Opladen, Germany: Westdeutscher Verlag.
12.
Becker-Beck, U. (2001). Methods for diagnosing interaction strategies: An application to group interaction in conflict situations. Small Group Research, 32, 259-282.
13.
Becker-Beck, U., & Fisch, R. (1987). Issues in the sequential analysis of group interaction processes. International Journal of Small Group Research, 3, 198-212.
14.
Berger, J., Fisek, H., Norman, R. Z., & Zelditch, M. (1977). Status characteristics and social interaction. New York: Elsevier.
15.
Boston Consulting Group. (2002, February). Company communication trends: Growth of new communication technologies demands rethinking of companies’internal communication strategies (A survey report by the Boston Consulting Group). Available at www.bcg.com/publications/files/Company_Comm_Trends_Rpt_Feb02.pdf
16.
Clark, H. H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
17.
Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991). Grounding in communication. In L. B. Resnick & J. M. Levine (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 127-149). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
18.
Clark, H. H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22, 1-39.
19.
Coleman, L. H., Paternite, C. E., & Sherman, R. C. (1999). A reexamination of deindividuation in synchronous computer-mediated communication. Computers in Human Behavior, 15(1), 51-65.
20.
Culnan, M. J., & Markus, M. L. (1987). Information technologies. In F. M. Jablin, L. L. Putnam, K. H. Roberts, & L. W. Porter (Eds.), Handbook of organizational communication: An inter-disciplinary perspective (pp. 420-443). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
21.
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32, 554-571.
22.
Diehl, M., & Ziegler, R. (2000). Informationsaustausch und Ideensammlung in Gruppen [Information exchange and brainstorming in groups]. In M. Boos, K. J. Jonas, & K. Sassenberg (Eds.), CMC in Organisationen (pp. 89-102). Göettingen, Germany: Hogrefe.
23.
Döring, N. (1997). Kommunikation im Internet: Neun theoretische Ansätze [Communication on the Internet: Nine theoretical approaches]. In B. Batinic (Ed.), Internet für Psychologen (pp. 267-298). Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe.
24.
Döring, N. (1999) Sozialpsychologie des Internet: Die Bedeutung des Internet für Kommunikationsprozesse, Identitäten, soziale Beziehungen und Gruppen [Social psychology of the Internet: The impact of the Internet on communication processes, identities, social relations, and groups]. Göttingen, Germany; Bern, Switzerland; Toronto, Canada; Seattle, WA: Hogrefe Verlag für Psychologie.
25.
Fleiss, J. L. (1981). Statistical methods for rates and proportions. New York: John Wiley.
26.
Gottmann, J. M., & Roy, A. K. (1990). Sequential analysis: A guide for behavioral researchers. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
27.
Hancock, J. T., & Dunham, P. J. (2001). Language use in computer-mediated communication: The role of coordination devices. Discourse Processes, 31, 91-110.
28.
Herring, S. (1999). Interactional coherence in CMC. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 4. Available at www.ascusc.org/jcmc/
29.
Herrmann, T. (1992). Sprechen und Sprachverstehen [Speaking and comprehension of speech]. In H. Spada (Ed.), Lehrbuch Allgemeine Psycholgie (2nd ed., pp. 281-322). Bern, Switzerland: Huber.
30.
Hiltz, S. R., Johnson, K., & Turoff, M. (1986). Experiments in group decision making: Communication process and outcome in FTF versus computerized conferences. Human Communication Research, 13, 225-252.
31.
Hollingshead, A. B. (1996a). Information suppression and status persistence in group decision making: the effects of communication media. Human Communication Research, 23(2), 193-219.
32.
Hollingshead, A. B. (1996b). The rank-order effect in group decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 68(3), 181-193.
33.
Hollingshead, A. B. (2001). Communication technologies, the Internet, and group research. In M. A. Hogg & R. S. Tindale (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Group processes (pp. 557-573). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
34.
Hollingshead, A. B., & McGrath, J. E. (1995). Computer-assisted groups: A critical review of the empirical research. In R. A. Guzzo & E. Salas (Eds.), Team effectiveness and decision making in organizations (pp. 46-78). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
35.
Hooff, J. A. R. A. M. van. (1982). Categories and sequences of behavior: Methods of description and analysis. In K. R. Scherer & P. Ekman (Eds.), Handbookof methods in nonverbal behavior research (pp. 362-439). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
36.
Hron, A., Hesse, F. W., Reinhard, P., & Picard, E. (1997). Strukturierte Kooperation beim computer-unterstützten kollaborativen Lernen [Structured cooperation in computer mediated collaborative learning]. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 25, 56-69.
37.
Jonas, K. J., & Linneweh, K. (2000). Computerunterstuetzte Kreativitaetstechniken fuer Gruppen [Computer-assisted creativity techniques for groups]. In M. Boos, K. J. Jonas, & K. Sassenberg (Eds.), CMC in Organisationen (pp. 115-126). Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe.
38.
Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., & McGuire, T. W. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39(10), 1123-1134.
39.
Klimoski, R., & Mohammed, S. (1994). Team mental model: Construct or metaphor?Journal of Management, 20, 403-407.
40.
Krauss, R. M., & Chiu, C.-Y. (1998). Language and social behavior. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 41-88). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
41.
Krauss, R. M., & Fussell, S. R. (1990). Mutual knowledge and communicative effectiveness. In J. Galegher, R. E. Kraut, & C. Egido (Eds.), Intellectual teamwork: Social and technological foundations of cooperative work (pp. 111-145). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
42.
Krauss, R. M., Fussell, S. R., & Chen, Y. (1995). Coordination of perspective in dialogue: Intrapersonal and interpersonal processes. In I. Markovà, C. F. Graumann, & K. Foppa (Eds.), Mutualities in dialogue (pp. 124-145). New York: Cambridge University Press.
43.
Kraut, R. E., & Lewis, S. H. (1984). Feedback and the coordination of conversation. In H. Sypher & J. Applegate (Eds.), Communication by children and adults: Social, cognitive, and strategic processes (pp. 231-260). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
44.
Leary, T. (1957). Interpersonal diagnosis of personality. New York: Ronald Press.
45.
Levin, J. A., Kim, H., & Riel, M. M. (1990). Analyzing instructional interactions on electronic message networks. In L. M. Harasim (Ed.), Online education: Perspectives on a new environment (pp. 185-213). New York: Praeger.
46.
Lisch, K. (1979). Assoziationsstrukturanalyse (ASA). Ein Vorschlag zur Weiterentwicklung der Inhaltsanalyse [Association structure analysis (ASA): A proposal for the further development of content analysis]. Publizistik, 24, 65-83.
47.
McGrath, J. E. (1984). Groups: interaction and performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
48.
McGrath, J. E., & Hollingshead, A. B. (1994). Groups interacting with technology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
49.
McKinlay, A., Procter, R., Masting, O., Woodburn, R., & Arnott, J. (1994). Studies of turn taking in computer-mediated communications. Interacting with Computers, 6, 151-171.
50.
Mennecke, B. E., Valacich, J. S., & Wheeler, B. C. (2000). The effects of media and task on user performance: A test of the task-media fit hypothesis. Group Decision and Negotiation, 9(6), 507-529.
51.
Orford, J. (1986). The rules of interpersonal complementarity: Does hostility beget hostility and dominance, submission?Psychological Review, 93, 365-377.
52.
Orlikowski, W. J., & Yates, J. A. (1994). Genre repertoire: The structuring of communicative practices in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 541-574.
53.
Pappi, F. U. (1987). Methoden der Netzwerkanalyse [Methods of networkanalysis]. München, Germany: Oldenbourg.
54.
Peck, S. B., & Scherf, M. (1997). Building your own web conferences. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly & Associates.
55.
Pfister, H.-R., Muehlpfordt, M., & Mueller, W. (2003). Lernprotokollunterstuetztes Lernen ein Vergleich zwischen unstrukturiertem und systemkontrolliertem diskursivem Lernen im Netz [Learning with learning protocols—A comparison between unstructured and system-controlled net-based discursive learning]. Zeitschrift fur Psychologie, 211(2), 98-109.
56.
Reid, F. J. M., Malinek, V., Stott, C. J. T., & Evans, J. S. B. T. (1996). The messaging threshold in computer-mediated communication. Ergonomics, 39(8), 1017-1037.
57.
Rutter, D.R. (1987). Communicating by telephone. Oxford, UK: Pergamon.
58.
Sackett, G. P. (1979). The lag sequential analysis of contingency and cyclicity in behavioral interaction research. In J. Osofsky (Ed.), Handbook of infant development (pp. 623-649). New York: John Wiley.
59.
Harvard Business Review. (1997). Sharing knowledge through BP’s virtual team network, 75, 152-153.
60.
Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. London: Wiley.
61.
Siegel, J., Dubrovsky, V., Kiesler, S., & McGuire, T. W. (1986). Group processes in computer-mediated communication. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 157-187.
62.
Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1992). Social influence and the influence of the “social” in computer-mediated communication. In M. Lea (Ed.), Contexts of computer mediated communication (pp. 30-65). New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
63.
Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1994). Panacea or panopticon? The hidden power in computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 21, 427-459.
64.
Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32, 1492-1512.
65.
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, 1467-1478.
66.
Straus, S. G., & McGrath, J. E. (1994). Does the medium matter? The interaction of task type and technology on group performance and member reactions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(1), 87-97.
67.
Strong, S. R., Hills, H. I., Kilmartin, C. T., DeVries, H., Lanier, K., Nelson, B. N., et al. (1988). The dynamic relations among interpersonal behaviors: A test of complementarity and anticomplementarity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 798-810.
68.
Traxler, M. J., & Gernsbacher, M. A. (1992). Improving written communication through minimal feedback. Language and Cognitive Process, 7(1), 1-22.
69.
Valacich, J. S., Dennis, A. R., & Connolly, T. (1994). Idea generation in computer-based groups: A new ending to an old story. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 57(3), 448-467.
70.
Walther, J. B. (1992). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A relational perspective. Communication Research, 19(1), 52-90.
71.
Walther, J. B. (1994). Anticipated ongoing interaction versus channel effects on relational communication in computer-mediated interaction. Human Communication Research, 20(4), 473-501.
72.
Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23(1), 3-43.
73.
Walther, J. B., Anderson, J. F., & Park, D. W. (1994). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A meta-analysis of social and antisocial communication. Communication Research, 21(4), 460-487.
74.
Walther, J. B., & Burgoon, J. K. (1992). Relational communication in computer-mediated interaction. Human Communication Research, 19(1), 50-88.
75.
Walther, J. B., Slovacek, C. L., & Tidwell, L. C. (2001). Is a picture worth a thousand words?: Photographic images in long-term and short-term computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 28(1), 105-134.
76.
Wilkes-Gibbs, D., & Clark, H. H. (1992). Coordinating beliefs in conversation. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 183-194.
77.
Wintermantel, M. (1991a). Dialogue between expert and novice. In I. Morkovà & K. Foppa (Eds.), Asymmetries in dialogue (pp. 124-142). New York: Harvester.
78.
Wintermantel, M. (1991b). Sprechen und Verstehen im Dialog: Eine sprachpsychologische Analyse. [Speaking and comprehending in dialogue: A psycholinguistic analysis]. In M. Herzog & C. F. Graumann (Eds.), Sinn und Erfahrung (pp. 211-224). Heidelberg, Germany: Asanger
79.
Wintermantel, M., & Becker-Beck, U. (2000). Feinsteuerung der Interaktion in computervermittelt vs. face-to-face kooperierenden Gruppen [Principles of fine-tuning in groups interacting computer mediated vs. face-to-face]. In W. Kallmeyer (Ed.), Sprache und neue Medien (pp. 179-194). Berlin, Germany: de Gruyter.
80.
Wintermantel, M., & Laier, R. (1994). Hörer-Orientierungin technischen Instruktionen [Listener adaption in technical instructions]. In K. Ehlich, C. Noack, & S. Scheiter (Eds.), Instruktion durch Text und Diskurs. Zur Linguistik “Technischer Texte” (pp. 100-115). Opladen, Germany: Westdeutscher Verlag.
81.
Wintermantel, M., & Siegerstetter, J. (1988). Hearer questioning and instruction. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 7, 231-227.
