This article reports the results of an experiment that was conducted to determine the impact of media synchronicity theory (MST) training on media-fit behavior, communication quantity, communication quality, and group effectiveness. MST training introduces students to a framework for assessing a media’s capabilities and matching those capabilities to a particular task. From three technical communication courses, 80 participants were randomly divided into two groups and compared using a between-subjects design. The MST training group reported significantly higher levels of media-fit behavior, communication quantity, and the communication-performance qualities of discussion quality, richness, and openness. The article discusses practical ways to implement MST training into technical communication group projects.
AckermanM. S.McDonaldD. W. (2000). Collaborative support for informal information in collective memory systems. Information Systems Frontiers, 2, 333–347.
2.
AlexanderK. P. (2012). Collaborative composing: Practices and strategies for implementing team projects into writing classrooms. In HunzerK. M. (Ed.), Collaborative learning and writing: Essays on using small groups in teaching English and composition (pp. 181–200). Jefferson, NC: McFarland.
3.
BacabacF. (2012). Revisiting collaborative writing and electronic dialogues in business communication. In HunzerK. M. (Ed.), Collaborative learning and writing: Essays on using small groups in teaching English and composition (pp. 166–180). Jefferson, NC: McFarland.
4.
BakerG. (2002). The effects of synchronous collaborative technologies on decision making: A study of virtual teams. Information Resources Management Journal (IRMJ), 15, 79–93.
5.
BarkerR. T.FranzakF. J. (1997). Team building in the classroom: Preparing students for their organizational future. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 27, 303–315.
6.
BreuchL.-A. K. (2002). Thinking critically about technological literacy: Developing a framework to guide computer pedagogy in technical communication. Technical Communication Quarterly, 11, 267–288.
7.
BurgoonJ. K.BonitoJ. A.RamirezA.DunbarN. E.KamK.FischerJ. (2002). Testing the interactivity principle: Effects of mediation, propinquity, and verbal and nonverbal modalities in interpersonal interaction. Journal of communication, 52, 657–677.
8.
BurgoonJ. K.WaltherJ. B. (1990). Nonverbal expectancies and the evaluative consequences of violations. Human Communication Research, 17, 232–265.
9.
CarlsonJ. R.GeorgeJ. F. (2004). Media appropriateness in the conduct and discovery of deceptive communication: The relative influence of richness and synchronicity. Group Decision and Negotiation, 13, 191–210.
10.
CohenJ. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155.
11.
CorneliusC.BoosM. (2003). Enhancing mutual understanding in synchronous computer-mediated communication by training trade-offs in judgmental tasks. Communication Research, 30, 147–177.
12.
DaftR. L.LengelR. H. (1984). Information richness: A new approach to managerial behavior and organizational design. Research in Organizational Behavior, 6, 191–233.
13.
DeLucaD.ValacichJ. S. (2005, 1). Outcomes from conduct of virtual teams at two sites: Support for media synchronicity theory. In SpragueR.Jr. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (p. 50b). Los Alamites, CA: IEEE Computer Society.
14.
DeLucaD.ValacichJ. S. (2006). Virtual teams in and out of synchronicity. Information Technology & People, 19, 323–344.
15.
DennisA. R.FullerR. M.ValacichJ. S. (2008). Media, tasks, and communication processes: A theory of media synchronicity. MIS Quarterly, 32, 575–600.
16.
DennisA. R.KinneyS. T. (1998). Testing media richness theory in the new media: The effects of cues, feedback, and task equivocality. Information systems research, 9, 256–274.
17.
DennisA. R.ValacichJ. S. (1999). Rethinking media richness: Towards a theory of media synchronicity. In Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 10–17). Los Alamites, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.
18.
DennisA. R.ValacichJ. S.SpeierC.MorrisM. G. (1998, 1). Beyond media richness: An empirical test of media synchronicity theory. In Proceedings of the 31 Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 48–57). Los Alamites, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.
19.
DennisA. R.WixomB. H.VandenbergR. J. (2001). Understanding fit and appropriation effects in group support systems via meta-analysis. MIS Quarterly, 25, 167–193.
20.
DuffelmeyerB. B. (2003). Learning to learn: New TA preparation in computer pedagogy. Computers and Composition, 20, 295–311.
21.
FoxS.LeichtR. M.MessnerJ. I. (2010). Assessing the relevance of media synchronicity theory to the use of communication media in the AECO industry. Journal of Architectural Engineering, 16, 54–62.
22.
HaneyC.BanksW.ZimbardoP. (1973). Interpersonal dynamics in a simulated prison. International Journal of Criminology and Penology, 1, 69–97.
23.
HassellM.LimayemM. (2010). Working in the new way: A preliminary study of media synchronicity and job satisfaction. Proceedings of Americas Conference on Information Systems, 1–10.
24.
HungY. T.DuyenN.KongW. C.ChuaA. L. (2008). Reexamining media capacity theories using workplace instant messaging. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 51, 352–368.
25.
HunzerK. M. (Ed.). (2012). Collaborative learning and writing: Essays on using small groups in teaching English and composition. Jefferson, NC: McFarland.
26.
JungD. I.SosikJ. J. (2002). Transformational leadership in work groups: The role of empowerment, cohesiveness, and collective-efficacy on perceived group performance. Small Group Research, 33, 313–336.
27.
LamC. (2013). The efficacy of text messaging to improve connectedness and team attitude in student technical communication projects. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 27, 180–208.
28.
LindM. R. (1999). The gender impact of temporary virtual work groups. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 42, 276–285.
29.
LoberA.GrimmS.SchwabeG. (2006). Audio vs. chat: Can media speed explain the differences in productivity? In Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Information Systems (pp. 2172–2183). Gothenburg, Sweden: Association for Information Sciences Electronic Library.
30.
LohnesS.KinzerC. (2007). Questioning assumptions about students’ expectations for technology in college classrooms. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 3, 2.
31.
LowryP. B.RobertsT. L.RomanoN. C.CheneyP. D.HightowerR. T. (2006). The impact of group size and social presence on small-group communication: Does computer-mediated communication make a difference?. Small Group Research, 37, 631–661.
32.
MuhrenW. J.Van Den EedeG.Van de WalleB. (2009). Making sense of media synchronicity in humanitarian crises. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 52, 377–397.
33.
MunzerS.HolmerT. (2008). Bridging the gap between media synchronicity and task performance: Effects of media characteristics on process variables and task performance indicators in an information pooling task. Communication Research, 36, 76–103.
34.
MurthyU. S.KerrD. S. (2003). Decision making performance of interacting groups: An experimental investigation of the effects of task type and communication mode. Information and Management, 40, 351–360.
35.
NiinimakiT.PiriA.LasseniusC. (2009, 7). Factors affecting audio and text-based communication media choice in global software development projects. In Proceedings of the 2009, Fourth IEEE international conference on global software engineering (pp. 153–162). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.
36.
NiinimakiT.PiriA.LasseniusC.PaasivaaraM. (2010, 8). Reflecting the choice and usage of communication tools in GSD projects with media synchronicity theory. In Proceedings of the 2010, 5th IEEE International Conference on Global Software Engineering (pp. 3–12). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.
37.
O’ReillyC. A.RobertsK. H. (1977). Task group structure, communication, and effectiveness in three organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 674.
38.
PrenskyM. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9, 1–6.
39.
SavickiV.KelleyM.AmmonB. (2002). Effects of training on computer-mediated communication in single or mixed gender small task groups. Computers in Human Behavior, 18, 257–269.
40.
SchoutenA. P.Van den HooffB.FeldbergF. (2010). Real decisions in virtual worlds: Team collaboration and decision making in 3D virtual worlds. In Proceedings of the Thirty First International Conference on Information Systems (pp. 1–19). Retrieved from Association for Information Systems Electronic Library. Available at: http://aisel.aisnet.org/icis2010
41.
SelwynN. (2009). The digital native–myth and reality. New Information Perspectives, 61, 364–379.
42.
WolfeJ. (2000). Gender, ethnicity, and classroom discourse: Communication patterns of Hispanic and white students in networked classrooms. Written Communication, 17, 491–519.
43.
WolfeJ. (2010). Team writing: A guide to working in groups. Boston, MA: Bedford.
44.
WolfeJ.AlexanderK. P. (2005). The computer expert in a mixed-gendered collaborative writing group. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 19, 135–170.
45.
WolfeJ.PowellE. (2006). Gender and expressions of dissatisfaction: A study of complaining in mixed-gendered student work groups. Women and Language, 29, 13–21.
46.
WoodfieldR. (2000). Women, work, and computing. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
