Attributions in virtual groups: Distances and behavioral variations in computer-mediated discussions

Small Group Research

Volumn 40, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 138-162

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

^a Cornell University ^*  (United States)

^b MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Attribution; Distances; Virtual groups

Indexed keywords

EID: 62349097562     PISSN: 10464964     EISSN: 15528278     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1046496408328490     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Bazarova, N., Walther, J., McLeod, P., & Shami, S. (2007, May). Minority influence in distributed groups: A comparison of four theories of minority influence. Paper presented at the annual conference of the International Communication Association, San Francisco, CA.
2. Cramton, C.D. (2001). The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration. Organization Science, 12, 346-371.
3. 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.
4. Cramton, C.D., Orvis, K.L., & Wilson, J.M. (2007). Situational invisibility and attribution in distributed collaborations. Journal of Management, 33, 525-546.
5. 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.
6. Gibson, C.B., & Gibbs, J.L. (2006). Unpacking the concept of virtuality: The effects of geographic dispersion, electronic dependence, dynamic structure, and national diversity on team innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51, 451-495.
7. Hinds, P.J., & Bailey, D.E. (2003). Out of sight, out of sync: Understanding conflict in distributed teams. Organization Science, 14, 615-632.
8. Hinds, P.J., & Mortensen, M. (2005). Understanding conflict in geographically distributed teams: The moderating effects of shared identity, shared context, and spontaneous communication. Organization Science, 16, 290-307.
9. Jarvenpaa, S.L., & Leidner, D.E. (1998). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3 (4). Retrieved August 26, 2006, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol3/issue4/jarvenpaa. html
10. 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. Wiener (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior (pp. 79-94). Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
11. Kelley, H.H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. In D. Levine (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 192-240). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
12. Kelley, H.H., & Michela, J.L. (1980). Attribution theory and research. Annual Review of Psychology, 31, 457-501.
13. Kenny, D.A. (1995). The effect of non-independence on significance testing in dyadic research. Personal Relationships, 2, 67-75.
14. Kenny, D.A. (1996). The design and analysis of social-interaction research. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 59-86.
15. Malle, B.F. (2006). The actor-observer asymmetry in causal attribution: A (surprising) meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 895-919.
16. Malle, B.F., Knobe, J., & Nelson, S. (2007). Actor-observer asymmetries in explanations of behavior: New answers to an old question. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 491-514.
17. 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.
18. Manusov, V. (2002). Thought and action: Connecting attributions to behaviors in married couples' interactions. In P. Noller & J. A. Feeney (Eds.), Understanding marriage: Developments in the study of couple interaction (pp. 14-31). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
19. McGill, A.L. (1989). Context effects in judgments of causation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 189-200.
20. McGill, A.L. (1991). The influence of the causal background on the selection of causal explanations. British Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 79-87.
21. 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 attributional bias. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 711-747.
22. Miller, F.D., Smith, E.R., & Uleman, J. (1981). Measurement and interpretation of situational and dispositional attributions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 17, 80-95.
23. Mortensen, M., & Hinds, P.J. (2001). Conflict and shared identity in geographically distributed teams. International Journal of Conflict Management, 12, 212-238.
24. O'Laughlin, M.J., & Malle, B.F. (2002). How people explain actions performed by groups and individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 33-48.
25. O'Leary, M.B., & Cummings, J.N. (2007). The spatial, temporal, and configurational characteristics of geographic dispersion in teams. MIS Quarterly, 31, 433-452.
26. Olson, G.M., & Olson, J.S. (2000). Distance matters. Human-Computer Interaction, 15, 139-178.
27. Polzer, J.T., Crisp, C.B., Jarvenpaa, S.L., & Kim, J.W. (2006). Extending the faultline model to geographically dispersed teams: How collocated subgroups can impair group functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 679-692.
28. Robins, R.W., Mendelsohn, G.A., & Spranca, M.D. (1996). The actor-observer revisited: Effects of individual differences and repeated social interactions on actor and observer attributions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 375-389.
29. Sillars, A.L. (1980). Attributions and communication in roommate conflicts. Communication Monographs, 47, 180-200.
30. 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.
31. Walther, J.B. (1997). Group and interpersonal effects in international computer-mediated collaboration. Human Communication Research, 23, 342-369.
32. Walther, J.B., & Bazarova, N. (2007). Misattribution in virtual groups. Human Communication Research, 33, 1-26.
33. Walther, J.B., Boos, M., & Jonas, K.J. (2002). Misattribution and attributional redirection in distributed virtual groups. Proceedings of the 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
34. Weiner, B. (1983). Some methodological pitfalls in attributional research. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 530-543.