Wireless brainstorming: Overcoming status effects in small group decisions

Proceedings of the 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS 2003

Volumn , Issue , 2003, Pages

  Davis, J ^a   Zaner, M ^a   Farnham, S ^a   Marcjan, C ^a   McCarthy, B P ^b  

^a MICROSOFT RESEARCH   (United States)

^b NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; COMPUTER GAMES; DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS; HAND HELD COMPUTERS;

FACE TO FACE; FACE-TO-FACE GROUPS; GROUP DECISION; GROUP MEMBERS; SOCIAL FACTOR; SOCIAL INFLUENCE; WIRELESS DEVICES; WIRELESS HAND-HELD DEVICES;

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS;

EID: 84969560282     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/HICSS.2003.1173812     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (32)

1. Berger, J., Cohen, B. P., and Zelditch, M. (1973) Status characteristics and social interaction. In R. J. Ofshe (Ed.), Interpersonal Behavior in Small Groups (pp. 194-216). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
2. Deutsch, M., and Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 629-636.
3. Diener, E., Fraser, S., Beaman, A. L., and Kelem, R. T. (1976). Effects of deindividuating variables on stealing by Halloween trick-or-treaters. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 178-183.
4. Diehl, M., and Stroebe, W. (1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 497-509.
5. Dubrovsky, V. J., Kiesler, S., and 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.
6. Gellerson, H-W. (1999). Handheld CSCW: Personal technologies for collaboration. Personal Technologies, 3, 1-7.
7. Henley, N. (1977). Body politics: Power, sex, and nonverbal communication (p. 181). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
8. Herring, S. C. (2000). Gender differences in CMC: Findings and implications. The Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR) Newsletter, 18, 1, hqp://www.cpsr.orgZpublications/newsletters/issues/2000/Winter2000/herring.html.
9. 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.
10. Indik, B. P. (1963). Some effects of organization size on member attitudes and behavior. Human Relations, 29, 687-697.
11. Jessup, L. M., Connolly, T., and Galegher, J. (1990). The effects of anonymity on GDSS group process with an idea-generating task. MIS Quarterly, 14, 312-321.
12. Kirchler, E., and Davis, J. H. (1986). The influence of member status differences and task type on group consensus and member position change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 83-91.
13. Kraemer, K. L., and King, J. L. (1988). Computer-based systems for cooperative work and group decision making. ACM Computing Surveys, 20, 115-146.
14. Latane, B., and Darley, J. (1970). The unresponsive bystander: Why doesn't he help? New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
15. Lewin, K. (1952). Group decision and social change. In Swanson, G. E., Newcombe, T. M., and Hartley, E. L. (Eds.), Readings in Social Psychology (pp. 459-473). New York, NY: Henry Holt and Company.
16. Maier, N. R. F. (1967). Assets and liabilities in group problem solving: The need for an integrative function. Psychological Review, 74, 239-249.
17. Matheson, K. (1991). Social cues in computer-mediated negotiations: Gender makes a difference. Computers in Human Behavior, 7,137-145.
18. McGrath, J. E. (1983). Groups: Interaction and performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
19. rd Asia Pacific, 363-366.
20. Myers, B. A., Stiel, H., and Gargiulo, R. (1998). Collaboration using multiple PDAs connected to a PC. Proceedings of the ACM CSCW '98 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work.
21. Nunamaker, J. F., Dennis, A. R., Valacich, J. S., Vogel, D. R., and George, J. F. (1991). Electronic meeting systems to support group work. Communications of the ACM, 34 (7), 40-62.
22. Patterson, M. (1983). Nonverbal behavior: A functional perspective. New York: Springer-Verlag.
23. Selfe, C. L. and Meyer, P. R. (1991). Testing claims for online conferences. Written Communication, 8, 163-192.
24. Siegal, J., Dubrovsky, V., Kiesler, S., and McGuire, T. W. (1986). Group processes in computer-mediated communication. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 157-187.
25. Sproull, L., and Kiesler, S. (1991). Connections: New Ways of Working in the Networked Organization (pp. 56-77). The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
26. Tan, C. Y., Wei, K., and Watson, R. T. (1999). The equalizing impact of a group support system on status differentials. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 17, 77-100.
27. Thomas, E. J., and Fink, C. (1963). Effects of group size. Psychological Bulletin, 60, 371-384.
28. Torrance, E. P. (1954). Some consequences of power differences in decision-making in permanent and temporary three-man groups. Research Studies, 22, 130-140.
29. Turban, E. (1995). Decision support systems and expert systems (4th Ed.). USA: Prentice-Hall International.
30. Valacich, J. S., Dennis, A. R., and Nunamaker, J. F. (1992). Group size and anonymity effects on computer-mediated idea generation. Small Group Research, 23, 49-73.
31. Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 3-43.
32. Zander, A. (1977). The psychology of group processes. Annual Review of Psychology, 30, 417-451.