Creativity in asynchronous virtual teams: Putting the pieces together

Higher Creativity for Virtual Teams: Developing Platforms for Co-Creation

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 26-47

  Ocker, Rosalie J ^a  

^a PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 80053368745     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-59904-129-2.ch002     Document Type: Chapter

References (57)

1. Amabile, T. M. (1979). Effects of external evaluation on artistic creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 221-233.
2. Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357-376.
3. Amabile, T. M. (1988). Within you, without you: The social psychology of creativity and beyond. In B. M. S. L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (pp. 123-167). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
4. Amabile, T. M., Hadley, C. N., & Kramer, S. J. (2002, August). Creativity under the gun. Harvard Business Review, 52-61.
5. Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
6. Barron, F. B., & Harrington, D. M. (1981). Creativity, intelligence, and personality. Annual Review of Psychology, 32, 439-476.
7. Brown, T. M., & Miller, C. E. (2000). Communication networks in task-performing groups: Effects of task complexity, time pressure, and interpersonal dominance. Small Group Research, 31(2), 131-157.
8. Callaway, M. R., Marriott, R. G., & Esser, J. K. (1985). Effects of dominance on group decisionmaking: Towards a stress-reduction explanation of groupthink. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 949-952.
9. Camacho, L. J. (1995). The role of social anxiousness in group brainstorming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(6), 1071-1080.
10. Connelly, T., Jessup, L. M., & Valacich, J. S. (1990). Effects of anonymity and evaluative tone on idea generation in computer-mediated groups. Management Science, 36(6), 689-702.
11. Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Normal personality assessment in clinical practice: The NEO Personality Inventory. Psychological Assessment, 4, 5-13.
12. Dubrovsky, V. J., Kiesler, S., & Sethna, B. N. (1991). The equalization phenomena: Status effects in computer-mediated and face-to-face decision making groups. Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 6, 119-146.
13. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 432-550.
14. Gallivan, M. J., & Benbunan-Fich, R. (2005). A framework for analyzing levels of analysis issues in studies of e-collaboration. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 48(1), 87-104.
15. Gallupe, R. B., Bastianutti, L. M., & Cooper, W. H. (1991). Unblocking brainstorms. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(1), 137-142.
16. Gallupe, R. B., Dennis, A. R., Cooper, W. H., Valacich, J. S., Bastianutti, L. M., & Nunamaker, J. F. (1992). Electronic brainstorming and group size. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 350-369.
17. Gallupe, R. B., DeSanctis, G., & Dickson, G. W. (1988). Computer-based support for group problem-finding: An experimental investigation. MIS Quarterly, 12(2), 277-296.
18. George, J. F., Easton, G. K., Nunamaker, J. F., & Northcraft, G. B. (1990). A study of collaborative group work with and without computer-based support. Information Systems Research, 1(4), 394-415.
19. Glaser, B. & Strauss, A. (1967). Discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine.
20. Goel, V. P. (1989). Motivating the notion of generic design within information-processing theory: The design problem space. AI Magazine, 10(1), 18-35.
21. Goldberg, L. R. (1993). The structure of personality. American Psychologist, 48, 26-34.
22. Gough, H. G., & Heilbrun, A. B. (1983). The adjective check list manual. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press Inc.
23. Guilford, J. P. (1984). Varieties of divergent production. Journal of Creative Behavior, 18(1), 1-10.
24. Hackman, J. R. (1987). The design of work teams. In J. Lorsch (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior (pp. 315-342). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
25. Hackman, J. R., & Morris, C. G. (1975). Group tasks, group interaction processes, and group performance effectiveness, a review and proposed integration. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 47-99). New York: Academic Press.
26. Halfhill, T., Sundstrom, E., Lahner, J., Calderone, W., & Nielsen, T. M. (2005). Group personality composition and group effectiveness: An integrative review of empirical research. Small Group Research, 36(1), 83-105.
27. Hiltz, S. R., Johnson, K., & Turoff, M. (1986). Experiments in group decision making, 1: Communications process and outcome in face-to-face vs. computerized conferences. Human Communication Research, 13(2), 225-252.
28. Hoffman, L. R. (1959). Homogeneity of member personality and its effect on group problem-solving. Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 58, 27-32.
29. Hoffman, L. R., & Maier, N. R. F. (1961). Quality and acceptance of problem solutions by members of homogeneous and heterogeneous groups. Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 62, 401-407.
30. Jackson, D. N. (1967). Personality research form manual. Goshen, NY: Research Psychologists Press.
31. King N., & Anderson, N. (1990). Innovation in working groups. In M. A. West & J. L. Farr, (Eds.), Innovation and creativity at work: Psychological and organizational strategies (pp. 81-100). Chichester, UK: Wiley & Sons.
32. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1992). Discriminant validity of NEO-PIR facet scales, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52, 229-237.
33. McGrath, J. E. (1984). Groups, interaction and performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall.
34. Myers, M. D. (1997, June). Qualitative research in information systems, MIS Quarterly, 22(2), 241-242.
35. MISQ Discovery, archival version, Retrieved June 1997, from http://www.misq.org/discovery/MISQD_isworld/
36. MISQ Discovery, updated version as of March 24, 2006.
37. Ocker, R. J. (1995). Requirements definition using a distributed asynchronous group support system: Experimental results on quality, creativity and satisfaction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Rutgers University, NJ.
38. Ocker, R. J. (2001, January). The relationship between interaction, group development, and outcome: A study of virtual communication. In Proceedings of the Thirty-Fourth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 34), HI (CD ROM). IEEE Computer Society.
39. Ocker, R. J. (2005). Influences on creativity in asynchronous virtual teams: A qualitative analysis of experimental teams. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 48(1), 22-39.
40. Ocker, R. J. (forthcoming). A balancing act: The interplay of status effects on dominance in virtual teams.
41. Ocker, R. J., & Fjermestad, J. (1998, January). Web-based computer-mediated communication: An experimental investigation comparing three communication modes for determining software requirements. In Proceedings of the Thirty-First Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, (HICSS 31) (CD ROM). IEEE Computer Society.
42. Ocker, R. J., Fjermestad, J., Hiltz, S. R., & Johnson, K. (1998). Effects of four modes of group communication on the outcomes of software requirements determination, Journal of Management Information Systems, 15(1), 99-118.
43. Ocker, R. J., Hiltz, S. R., Turoff M., & Fjermestad, J. (1996). The effects of distributed group support and process structuring on software requirements development teams, Journal of Management Information Systems, 12(3), 127-154.
44. Olson, J. S., Olson, G. M., Storrosten, M., & Carter, M. (1993). Groupwork close up: A comparison of the group design process with and without a simple group editor. ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems, 11, 321-348.
45. Parmeter, S. M., & Gaber, J. D. (1971, November). Creative scientists rate creativity factors. Research Management, 65-70.
46. Paunonen, S. V., & Ashton, M. C. (2001). Big five factors and facets and the prediction of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(3), 524-539.
47. Poole, M. S., & DeSanctis, G. (1992). Microlevel structuration in computer-supported group decision making. Human Communication Research, 19(1), 5-49.
48. Ridgeway, C. L. (1984). Dominance, performance and status in groups: A theoretical analysis. In E. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in group processes: Theory and research (Vol. 1, pp. 59-93). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
49. Sell, J., Lovaglia, M. J., Mannix, E. A., Samuelson, C. D., & Wilson, R. K. (1992). Investigating conflict, power, and status within and among groups. Small Group Research, 35(1), 44-72.
50. Sewell, W. H., Jr. (1992). A theory of structure: Duality, agency, and transformation. American Journal of Sociology, 98, 129.
51. Sherif, M., White, B. J., & Harvey, O. J. (1955). Status in experimentally produced groups. American Journal of Sociology, 66, 370-379.
52. Siegel, J., Dubrovsky, V., Kiesler, S., & McGuire, T. (1986). Group processes in computer-mediated communication. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 37, 157-187.
53. nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
54. Thompson, L. (2003). Improving the creativity of organizational work groups. Academy of Management Executive, 17(1), 96-109.
55. West, M. A. (1990). The social psychology of innovation in groups. In M. A. West & J. L. Farr (Eds.), Innovation and creativity at work: Psychological and organizational strategies (pp. 309-333). Chichester, UK: Wiley & Sons.
56. Woodman, R., & Schoenfeldt, L. F. (1989). Individual differences in creativity: An interactionist perspective. In J. A. Glover & C. R. Reynolds, (Eds.), Handbook of Creativity (pp. 77-92). New York: Plenum Press.
57. Yin, R. K. (1998). An abridged version of case study research: Design and method. Handbook of applied social research methods (pp. 229-260). Sage.