Computer-mediated group work: The interaction of member sex and anonymity

Communication Research

Volumn 29, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 66-96

  Flanagin, Andrew J ^a   Tiyaamornwong, Vanessa ^a   O'Connor, Joan ^a   Seibold, David R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0036101319     PISSN: 00936502     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0093650202029001004     Document Type: Review

References (71)

1. Andrews, P. H. (1992). Sex and gender differences in group communication: Impact on the facilitation process. Small Group Research, 23, 74-94.
2. Anonymous. (1998). To reveal or not to reveal: A theoretical model of anonymous communication. Communication Theory, 8, 381-407.
3. Baird, J. E., & Bradley, P. H. (1979). Styles of management and communication: A comparative study of men and women. Communication Monographs, 46, 101-111.
4. Bray, J. H., & Maxwell, S. E. (1985). Multivariate analysis of variance. Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences (Series No. 07-054). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
5. Canary, D. J., & Hause, K. S. (1993). Is there any reason to research sex differences in communication? Communication Quarterly, 41, 129-144.
6. Connolly, T., Jessup, L. M., & Valacich, J. S. (1990). Effects of anonymity and evaluative tone on idea generation in computer-mediated groups. Management Science, 36, 689-703.
7. Contractor, N. S., & Eisenberg, E. M. (1990). Communication networks in organizations. In J. Fulk & C. W. Steinfield (Eds.), Organizations and communication technology (pp. 143-172). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
8. Courter, C. (1999). Reactions to female leadership: The influence of small group gender composition in the context of two Tavistock Group Relations Conferences. Dissertation Abstracts International, 60(6-B), 3015. (University Microfilms No. AAI99-32149)
9. DeSanctis, G. L., & Gallupe, B. (1987). A foundation for the study of group decision support systems. Management Science, 33, 589-609.
10. DeSanctis, G., & Poole, M. S. (1997). Transitions in teamwork in new organizational forms. In B. Markovsky, M. J. Lovaglia, & L. Troyer (Eds.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 14, pp. 157-176). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
11. Dose, J. (1996). The role of diversity in group processes and outcomes: Values and sex composition. Dissertation Abstracts International, 56(9-B), 5207. (University Microfilms No. AAM95-44553)
12. Dubrovsky, V. J., Kiesler, S., & Sethna, B. N. (1991). The equalization phenomenon: Status effects in computer-mediated and face-to-face decision-making groups. Human Computer Interaction, 6, 119-146.
13. Eagly, A. H., & Johnson, B. T. (1990). Gender and leadership style: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 233-256.
14. Ellemers, N. (1993). The influence of socio-structural variables on identity management strategies. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 27-57). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
15. Eveland, J. D., & Bikson, T. K. (1988). Work group structures and computer support: A field experiment. Transactions on Office Information Systems, 6, 354-379.
16. Fulk, J., & Collins-Jarvis, L. (2001). Wired meetings: Technological mediation of organizational gatherings. In F. M. Jablin & L. L. Putnam (Eds.), The new handbook of organizational communication (pp. 624-663). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
17. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society. Berkeley: University of California Press.
18. Gopal, A., Mirana, S. M., Robichaux, B. P., & Bostrom, R. P. (1997). Leveraging diversity with information technology: Gender, attitude, and intervening influences in the use of group support systems. Small Group Research, 28, 29-71.
19. Green, S. G., & Taber, T. D. (1980). The effects of three social decision schemes on decision group process. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 25, 97-106.
20. Hardy, V., Hodgson, V., & McConnell, D. (1994). Computer conferencing: A new medium for investigating issues in gender and learning. Higher Education, 28, 403-418.
21. Hawkins, K. W. (1995). Effects of gender and communication content on leadership emergence in small task-oriented groups. Small Group Research, 26, 234-249.
22. Hayes, N., & Walsham, G. (2000). Competing interpretations of computer-supported cooperative work in organizational contexts. Organization, 7, 49-67.
23. Heinssen, R., Glass, C., & Knight, L. (1987). Assessing computer anxiety: Development and validation of Computer Anxiety Rating Scale. Computers in Human Behavior, 3, 49-59.
24. Herring, S. (1996). Posting in a different voice: Gender and ethics in CMC. In C. Ess (Ed.), Philosophical perspectives on computer-mediated communication (pp. 115-145). Albany: State University of New York Press.
25. Herschel, R. T. (1994). The impact of varying gender composition on group brainstorming performance in a GSS environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 10, 209-222.
26. Herschel, R. T., Cooper, T. R., Smith, L. F., & Arrington, L. (1994). Exploring numerical proportions in a unique context: The group support systems meeting environment. Sex Roles, 31, 99-123.
27. Hinds, P., & Kiesler, S. (1995). Communication across boundaries: Work, structure, and use of communication technologies in a large organization. Organization Science, 6, 373-393.
28. Jaffe, J. M., Lee, Y., Huang, L., & Oshagan, H. (1999). Gender identification, interdependence, and pseudonyms in CMC: Language patterns in an electronic conference. The Information Society, 15, 221-234.
29. Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1998). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3. Retrieved January, 2000, from http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol3/issue4/jarvenpaa.html.
30. Jessup, L. M., Connolly, T., & Tansik, D. A. (1990). Toward a theory of automated group work: The deindividuating effects of anonymity. Small Group Research, 21, 333-348.
31. Jessup, L. M., & Tansik, D. A. (1991). Decision making in an automated environment: The effects of anonymity and proximity with a group decision support system. Decision Sciences, 22, 266-279.
32. Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books.
33. Kenny, D. A. (1995). The effect of nonindependence on significance testing in dyadic research. Personal Relationships, 2, 67-75.
34. Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., & McGuire, T. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39, 1123-1134.
35. Klein, E. E., & Dologie, D. G. (2000). The role of computer support tools and gender composition in innovative information system idea generation by small groups. Computers in Human Behavior, 16, 111-139.
36. Lea, M., O'Shea, T., Fung, P., & Spears, R. (1992). "Flaming" in computer-mediated communication: Observations, explanations, implications. In M. Lea (Ed.), Contexts of computer-mediated communication (pp. 89-112). London: Harvester-Wheatsheaf.
37. Lockheed, M. E., & Hall, K. P. (1976). Conceptualizing sex as a status characteristic: Applications to leadership training strategies. Journal of Social Issues, 32, 111-124.
38. Mabry, E. A. (1985). The effects of gender composition and task structure on small group interaction. Small Group Behavior, 16, 75-96.
39. Mardia, K. V. (1971). The effects of nonnormality on some multivariate tests and robustness to nonnormality in the linear model. Biometrika, 58, 105-121.
40. Martin, C. G., & Games, P. A. (1977). ANOVA tests for homogeneity of variance: Nonnormality and unequal samples. Journal of Educational Statistics, 2, 187-206.
41. Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709-734.
42. Monge, P., & Fulk, J. (1999). Communication technology for global network organizations. In G. DeSanctis & J. Fulk (Eds.), Shaping organizational form: Communication, connection, and community (pp. 71-100). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
43. Myers, D. (1987). Anonymity is part of the magic: Individual manipulation of computer mediated communication contexts. Qualitative Sociology, 10, 251-266.
44. Orlikowski, W. (1992). The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. Organization Science, 13, 398-427.
45. Orlikowski, W., & Robey, D. (1991). Information technology and the structuring of organizations. Information Systems Research, 2, 143-169.
46. Pearce, J. L., Sommer, S. M., Morris, A., & Frideger, M. (1992). A configurational approach to interpersonal relations: Profiles of workplace social relations and task interdependence. Unpublished manuscript. Graduate School of Management, University of California, Irvine.
47. Piliavin, J. A., & Martin, R. R. (1978). The effects of the sex composition of groups on style of social interaction. Sex Roles, 4, 281-296.
48. Pinsonneault, A., & Kraemer, K. L. (1990). The effects of electronic meetings on group processes and outcomes: An assessment of the empirical research. European Journal of Operational Research, 46, 143-161.
49. Poole, M. S., & DeSanctis, G. (1990). Understanding the use of group decision support systems: The theory of adaptive structuration. In J. Fulk & C. W. Steinfield (Eds.), Organizations and communication technology (pp. 173-193). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
50. Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (in press). Contextual moderators of gender differences and stereotyping in computer-mediated group discussions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.
51. Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1998). Breaching or building social boundaries? SIDE-effects of computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 25, 689-715.
52. Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Lea, M. (2000). The formation of group norms in computer-mediated communication. Human Communication Research, 26, 341-371.
53. Propp, K. M. (1996, November). Information evaluation in small group decision making: An experimental examination of biological sex as a status cue. Paper presented at the Speech Communication Association, San Diego, CA.
54. Scott, C. (1999). Communication technology and group communication. In L. R. Frey, D. S. Gouran, & M. S. Poole (Eds.), The handbook of group communication theory and research (pp. 432-472). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
55. Seashore, S. E. (1954). Group cohesiveness in the industrial work group. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
56. 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.
57. Sosik, J. J., Avolio, B. J., & Kahai, S. S. (1997). Effects of leadership style and anonymity on group potency and effectiveness in a group decision support system. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 89-103.
58. 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). London: Harvester-Wheatsheaf.
59. Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1994). Panacea or panopticon? The hidden power in computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 21, 427-459.
60. Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1991). Connections: New ways of working in the networked organization. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
61. Valacich, J. S., Dennis, A. R., Jr., & Nunamaker, J. F. (1992). Group size and anonymity effects on computer-mediated idea generation. Small Group Research, 23, 49-73.
62. Van Hiel, A., & Schittekatte, M. (1998). Information exchange in context: Effects of gender composition of group, accountability, and intergroup perception on group decision making. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 2049-2067.
63. Walsham, G. (1993). Interpreting information systems in organizations. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
64. Walther, J. B. (1992). Interpersonal effects in computer mediated interaction. Communication Research, 19, 52-90.
65. Walther, J. B. (1994). Anticipated ongoing interaction versus channel effects on relational communication in computer mediated interaction. Human Communication Research, 20, 473-501.
66. Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 3-43.
67. Walther, J. B. (1997). Group and interpersonal effects in international computer mediated collaboration. Human Communication Research, 23, 342-369.
68. 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, 46-87.
69. Warkentin, M. E., Sayeed, L., & Hightower, R. (1997). Virtual teams versus face-to-face teams: An exploratory study of a web-based conference system. Decision Sciences, 28, 975-995.
70. Weldon, E., & Mustari, E. L. (1988). Felt dispensability in groups of coactors: The effects of shared responsibility and explicit anonymity on cognitive effort. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 41, 330-351.
71. Wheelan, S. A., & Verdi, A. F. (1992). Differences in male and female patterns of communication in groups: A methodological artifact? Sex Roles,27, 1-15.