Misattribution in virtual groups: The effects of member distribution on self-serving bias and partner blame

Human Communication Research

Volumn 33, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 1-26

  Walther, Joseph B ^a,b   Bazarova, Natalya N ^a,b  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Department of Obstetrics Gynecology   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33846423200     PISSN: 03603989     EISSN: 14682958     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00286.x     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Adams, J. B., Adams, J., Rice, R. W., & Instone, D. (1985). Effects of perceived group effectiveness and group role on attributions of group performance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 15, 387-398.
2. Anderson, L. R., & Ager, J. W. (1978). Analysis of variance in small group research. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4, 341-345.
3. Ballinger, G. A. (2004). Using generalized estimating equations for longitudinal data analysis. Organizational Research Methods, 7, 127-150.
4. Bazarova, N. N., & Walther, J. B. (2005, May). Attributional judgments in virtual teams. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, New York.
5. Bonazzi, G. (1983). Scapegoating in complex organizations: The results of a comparative study of symbolic blame-giving in Italian and French public administration. Organization Studies, 4(1), 1-18.
6. Bradner, E., & Mark, G. (2002). Why distance matters: Effects on cooperation, persuasion and deception. Proceedings of the 2002 ACM conference on computer-supported cooperative work (pp. 226-235). New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
7. Burke, K., Aytes, K., Chidambaram, L., & Johnson, J. J. (1999). A study of partially distributed work groups: The impact of media, location, and time perceptions and performance. Small Group Research, 30, 453-490.
8. Clatterbuck, G. W. (1979). Attributional confidence and uncertainty in initial interaction. Human Communication Research, 5, 147-157.
9. Cramton, C. D. (2001). The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration. Organization Science, 12, 346-371.
10. Cramton, C. D. (2002). Attribution in distributed work groups. In P. J. Hinds & S. Kiesler (Eds.), Distributed work (pp. 191-212). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
11. Eagle, J., & Newton, P. M. (1981). Scapegoating in small groups: An organizational approach. Human Relations, 34, 283-301.
12. Fiol, C. M., & O'Connor, E. J. (2005). Identification in face-to-face, hybrid, and pure virtual teams: Untangling the contradictions. Organization Science, 16, 19-32.
13. Gilbert, D. T., Pelham, B. W., & Krull, D. S. (1988). On cognitive busyness: When person perceivers meet persons perceived. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 733-740.
14. Harwood, J., Giles, H., & Palomares, N. A. (2005). Intergroup theory and communication processes. In J. Harwood & H. Giles (Eds.), Intergroup communication: Multiple perspectives (pp. 1-17). New York: Peter Lang.
15. Herzog, T. A. (1999). Effects of alcohol intoxication on social inferences. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 7, 448-453.
16. Hewstone, M. (1990). The "ultimate attribution error"? A review of the literature on intergroup causal attribution. European Journal of Social Psychology, 20, 311-355.
17. Hinds, P., & Kiesler, S. (Eds.). (2002). Distributed work. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
18. Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 10, 791-815.
19. Jehn, K. A., Northcraft, G. B., & Neale, M. A. (1999). Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 741-763.
20. Jonas, K. J., Boos, M., & Sassenberg, K. (2002). Unsubscribe, pleeezz!!!: Management and training of media competence in computer-mediated communication. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 5, 315-329.
21. Jones, E. E., & Nisbett, R. E. (1971). The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. In E. E. Jones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior (pp. 79-94). Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
22. Kelley, H. H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. In D. Levine (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 192-240). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
23. Kelley, H. H. (1971). Causal schemata and the attribution process. In E. E. Jones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior (pp. 151-174). Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
24. Kenny, D. A. (1995). The effect of nonindependence on significance testing in dyadic research. Personal Relationships, 2, 67-75.
25. Kenny, D. A., & Judd, C. M. (1986). Consequences of violating the independence assumption in analysis of variance. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 422-431.
26. Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Bolger, N. (1998). Data analysis in social psychology. In D. Gilbert, S. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 233-265). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
27. Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., Mannetti, L., Pierro, A., & Livi, S. (2002). The statistical analysis of data from small groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 126-137.
28. Kenny, D. A., & La Voie, L. (1985). Separating individual and group effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 339-348.
29. Krull, D. S. (1993). Does the grist change the mill? The effect of the perceiver's inferential goal on the process of social inference. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 340-348.
30. Krull, D. S., & Dill, J. C. (1996). On thinking first and responding fast: Flexibility in social inference processes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 949-959.
31. Latane, B., Liu, J. H., Nowak, A., Benevento, M., & Zheng, L. (1995). Distance matters: Physical space and social impact. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 795-805.
32. Lau, D. C., & Murnighan, J. K. (2005). Interactions within groups and subgroups: The effects of demographic faultiness. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 645-659.
33. Lea, M., Spears, R., & de Groot, D. (2001). Knowing me, knowing you: Anonymity effects on social identity processes within groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 526-537.
34. Leary, M. R., & Forsyth, D. R. (1987). Attributions of responsibility for collective endeavors. Review of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 167-188.
35. Lee, F., & Hallahan, M. (2001). Do situational expectations produce situational inferences? The role of future expectations in directing inferential goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 545-556.
36. Lupfer, M. B., Clark, L. F., & Hutcherson, H. W. (1990). Impact of context on spontaneous trait and situational attributions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 239-249.
37. Malloy, T. E., & Albright, L. (2001). Multiple and single interaction dyadic research designs: Conceptual and analytic issues. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 23, 1-19.
38. Manusov, V. (2007). Attributions and interpersonal communication: Out of our heads and into behavior. In D. R. Rosko-Ewoldsen & J. Monahan (Eds.), Communication and social cognition: Theories and methods (pp. 141-169). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
39. McCroskey, J. C., & McCain, T. A. (1974). The measurement of interpersonal attraction. Speech Monographs, 41, 261-266.
40. Mezulis, A. H., Abramson, L. Y., Hyde, J. S., & Hankin, B. L. (2004). Is there a universal positivity bias in attributions? A meta-analytic review of individual, developmental, and cultural differences in the self-serving attribution bias. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 711-747.
41. Moritz, S. E., & Watson, C. B. (1998). Levels of analysis issues in group psychology: Using efficacy as an example of a multilevel model. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 2, 285-298.
42. O'Connor, B. (2004). SPSS and SAS programs for addressing interdependence and basic levels-of-analysis issues in psychological data. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36, 17-28.
43. Pettigrew, T. (1979). The ultimate attribution error: Extending Allport's cognitive analysis of prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 5, 461-476.
44. Postmes, T., & Baym, N. (2005). Intergroup dimensions of the Internet. In J. Harwood & H. Giles (Eds.) Intergroup communication: Multiple perspectives (pp. 213-238). New York: Peter Lang.
45. Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Lea, M. (2002). Intergroup differentiation in computer-mediated communication: Effects of depersonalization. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6, 3-16.
46. Pratt, M. G. (2001). Social identity dynamics in modern organizations: An organizational psychology/organizational behavior perspective. In M. Hogg & D. J. Terry (Eds.), Social identity processes in organizational contexts (pp. 13-30). Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
47. Reicher, S., Spears, R., & Postmes, T. (1995). A social identity model of deindividuation phenomena. European Review of Social Psychology, 6, 161-198.
48. Robins, R. W., Mendelsohn, G. A., & Spranca, M. D. (1996). The actor-observer effect revisited: Effects of individual differences and repeated social interactions on actor and observer attributions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 375-389.
49. Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 173-220). New York: Academic Press.
50. SAS Institute (2005, November). The GLIMMIX procedure Nov. 2005. Retrieved February 20, 2006, from http://support.sas.com/rnd/app/papers/glimmix. pdf
51. SAS Institute (2006). Production GLIMMIX procedure. Retrieved February 20, 2006, from http://support.sas.com/rnd/app/da/glimmix.html
52. Schabenberger, O. (2005, September). Introducing the GLIMMIX procedure for generalized linear mixed models. Paper presented at the North East SAS Users Group Inc. 18th Annual Conference, Portland, ME. Rpt. Retrieved February 19, 2006, from http://www.nesug.org/html/Proceedings/nesug05/an/an4.pdf
53. Shaw, J. B. (2004). The development and analysis of a measure of group faultlines. Organizational Research Methods, 7, 66-100.
54. 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.
55. Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1467-1478.
56. Stokes, M. E. (1999, April). Recent advances in categorical data analysis. Paper presented at the 24th annual meeting of the SAS Users Group International Conference, Miami Beach. Retrieved February 1, 2006, from http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/sas/library/categorical.pdf
57. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7-24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
58. Tanis, M. (2003). Cues to identity in CMC: The impact on person perception and subsequent interaction outcomes. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Amsterdam.
59. Thatcher, S. M., Jehn, K. A., & Zanutto, E. (2003). Cracks in diversity research: The effects of diversity faultlines on conflict and performance. Group Decision and Negotiation, 12, 217-241.
60. Van Boven, L., Kamada, A., White, K., & Gilovich, T. (2003). Intuitions about situational correction in self and others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 249-258.
61. Walther, J. B. (1994). Anticipated ongoing interaction versus channel effects on relational communication in computer-mediated interaction. Human Communication Research, 20, 473-501.
62. Walther, J. B. (2002). Time effects in computer-mediated groups: Past, present, and future. In P. Hinds & S. Kiesler (Eds.), Distributed work (pp. 235-257). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
63. Walther, J. B., Boos, M., & Jonas, K. J. (2002). Misattribution and attributional redirection in distributed virtual groups. In Proceedings of the 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Washington, DC: ICEE Computer Society.
64. Walther, J. B., & Bunz, U. (2005). The rules of virtual groups: Trust, liking, and performance in computer-mediated communication. Journal of Communication, 55, 828-846.
65. Warkentin, M., & Beranek, P. M. (1999). Training to improve virtual team communication. Information Systems Journal, 9, 271-289.
66. Watson, D. (1982). The actor and the observer: How are their perceptions of causality divergent? Psychological Bulletin, 92, 683-700.
67. Webster, D. M. (1993). Motivated augmentation and reduction of the overattribution bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 261-271.
68. Weiner, B. (1983). Some methodological pitfalls in attributional research. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 530-543.
69. Wilson, J. M., Straus, S. G., & McEvily, B. (2005). All in due time: The development of trust in computer-mediated and face-to-face teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Performance, 99, 16-33.