A VISUALIZATION TOOL AS A CATALYST FOR INTERPERSONAL EVALUATION OF KNOWLEDGE

Avoiding Simplicity, Confronting Complexity: Advances in Studying and Designing (Computer-Based) Powerful Learning Evironments

Volumn , Issue , 2006, Pages 195-205

  Leinonen, Piritta ^a   Järvelä, Sanna ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OULU   (Finland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84917028877     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1163/9789087901189_021     Document Type: Chapter

References (29)

1. Boland, R. J., Maheshwari, A. K., Te'eni, D., Schwartz, D. G., & Tenkasi, R. V (1992). Sharing perspectives in distributed decision making. In Proceedings of CSCW 1992 (pp.306-313). New York: ACM Press.
2. Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(3), 271-315.
3. Chi, M. T. H., Siler, S. A., & Jeong, H. (2004). Can tutors monitor students' understanding accurately? Cognition and Instruction, 22(3), 363-387.
4. Cramton, C. D. (2001). The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration. Organiation Science, 12(3), 346-371.
5. Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Larson, R. (1987). Validity and reliability of the Experience-Sampling Method. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 175(9), 526-536.
6. Dillenbourg, P., & Traum, D. (2006). Sharing solutions: Persistence and grounding in multi-modal collaborative problem solving. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(1), 2006.
7. Fischer, F., & Mandi, H. (2005). Knowledge convergence in computer-supported collaborative learning: The role of external representation tools. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(3), 405-441.
8. Fussell, S. R., & Krauss, R. M. (1991). Accuracy and bias in estimates of others' knowledge. European Journal a/Social Psychology, 21, 445-454.
9. Goldman, S. R., Zech, L. K., Biswas, G., Noser, T., & The Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1999). Computer technology and complex problem solving: Issues in the study of complex cognitive activity. Instructional Science, 27, 235-268.
10. Guzdial, M., & Tums, J. (2000). Effective discussion through a computer-mediated anchored forum. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 437-469.
11. Hewitt, J. (2005). Towards an understanding of how threads die in asynchronous computer conferences. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(4), 256-598.
12. Jarvelii, S., & Hiikkinen, P. (2002). Web-based cases in teaching and learning - the quality of discussions and a stage of perspective taking in asynchronous communication. Interactive Learning Environments, 10(1),1-22.
13. Kraut, R. E., Fussel, S. R., Brennan, S. E., & Siegel, J. (2002). Understanding effects of proximity on collaboration: Implications for technologies to support remote collaborative work. In P. Hinds & S. Kiesler (Eds.), Distributed work (pp.137-164). Cambirdge: The MIT Press.
14. Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., & Jochems, W. (2003). Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: A review of the research. Computers in Human Behaviour, 19, 335-353.
15. Larkin, J. H., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth of ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 2, 65-99.
16. Leinonen, P., Jarvelii, S., & Hiikkinen, P. (2005). Conceptualizing the awareness of collaboration: A qualitative study of a global virtual team. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 14, 301-322.
17. Levine, J. L., Resnick, L. B., & Higgins, E. T. (1993). Social foundations of cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 44, 585-612.
18. Nelson, T., Kruglanski, A., & Jost, J. (1998). Knowing thyself and others: Progress in metacognitive social psychology. In V. Yzerbyt, G. Lories, & B. Dardenne (Eds.), Metacognition. Cognitive and social dimensions (pp. 69-89), London: Sage Publications.
19. Nisbett, R. E., Caputo, C., Legant, P. & Marecek, J. (1973). Behavior as seen by the actor and as seen by the observer. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27(3), 154-164.
20. Ploetzner, R., & Rowe, R. (2004). Dynamic visualisations and learning. Learning and Instruction, 14(3), 235-240.
21. Richards, L. (1999). Using NVivo in Qualitative Research. London: Sage. Publications.
22. Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of categorization. In E. Rosch & B. B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and categoriation. (pp. 27-48). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
23. Salas, E., & Fiore, S. M. (2004). Why team cognition? An overview. In E. Salas & S. M. Fiore (Eds.), Team cognition. Understanding the factors that drive process and pe, jormance (pp. 3-8), Washingotn, DC: American Psychological Association.
24. Salomon, G., & Globerson, T. (1989). When teams do not function the way they ought to. International Journal of Educational Research, 13, 89-100.
25. Shirouzu, H., Miyake, N., & Masukawa, H. (2002). Cognitively active externalization for situated reflection. Cognitive Science, 26, 469-501.
26. Strijbos, J.-W., Martens, R. L., Prins, F., & Jochems, W. M. (2006). Content analysis: What are they talking about? Computers & Education, 46, 29-48.
27. Tynjiilii, P., & Hiikkinen, P. (2005). E-leaming at work: Theoretical underpinnings and pedagogical challenges. The Journal of Workplace Learning, 17(5/6), 318-336.
28. Weinberger, A., Stegmann, K., & Fischer, F. (2005). Computer-supported collaborative learning in higher education: Scripts for argumentative knowledge construction in distributed groups. In T. Koschmann, D. Suthers, & T. -W. Chan (Eds.), Computer Supported Collaborative Learning 2005: The Next 10 Years (pp. 717-726). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
29. Weisband, S., & Atwater, L. (1999). Evaluating self and others in electronic and face-to-face groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(4), 632-639.