Effects of anonymity and gender on consensus, cohesion and satisfaction in group support systems;Efectos del anonimato y el género sobre el nivel de consenso, cohesión y satisfacción en grupos con apoyo de sistemas informáticos

Revista de Psicologia Social

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 107-120

  Martínez, Isabel Ma ^a   Mejías, Roberto J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITAT JAUME I   (Spain)

Author keywords

Anonimato; Anonymity; Cohesion; Cohesi n; Consensus levels; Gender; Group support systems; G nero; Nivel de consenso; Satisfacci n; Satisfaction; Trabajo en grupo

Indexed keywords

EID: 84992940133     PISSN: 02134748     EISSN: 15793680     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1174/021347403321645230     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Allport, F. H.(1924). The group fallacy in relation to social science. Journal Abnormal and Social Psychology, 29, 60-73.
2. Allport, F. H. (1967). Attitudes. En C. Murchison (Ed.), A handbook of Social Psychology (pp. 798-844). Nueva York. Russell and Russell.
3. Anderson, L. R. & Blanchard, E. N. (1982). Sex differences in task and social-emotional behavior. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 3, 109-139.
4. Arrow, H., Bercahl, K. B., Craig, K. M., Cumming, A., Lebie, L., McGrath, J. E., O’Conner, K. M., Rhoades, J. A. & Sch LOSSER, A. (1996). Time, techonology and group: an interaction. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 4, 253-261.
5. Baird, J. E. (1976). Sex differences in group communication: A review of relevant research. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 62, 179-192.
6. Beck, A. T. (1988). Love is never enough. Nueva York: Harper and Row.
7. Berdahl, J. L. & Craig, K. M. (1996). Equality of participation and influence in groups: the effects of communication medium and sex composition. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 4, 179-201.
8. Boyacigiller, N. & Adler, N. (1991). The parochial dinosaur: Organizational science in global context. Academy of Management Review, 16, 262-290.
9. Briggs, R. O., Nunamaker, J. & Sprague, R. (1997). 1001 Unanswered research questions in GSS. Journal of Management: Information Systems, 14, 3-21.
10. Connolly, T., Jessup, L. & Valacich, J. (1990). Effects of anonymity and evaluative tone on idea gegeration in generation computer-mediated groups. Management Science, 36, 689-703.
11. Deal, J. J. (2000). Gender differences in the intentional use of information in competitive negotiations. Small Group Research, 31, 6, 702-724.
12. Dennis, A. R., Nunamaker, J. F. & Vogel, D. R. (1990). A comparison of laboratory experiments and field studies in the study of electronic meeting systems. Journal of Management Information Systems, 7, 2, 107-135.
13. DeSanctis, G. & Gallupe, R. B. (1987). A foundation for the study of group decision support systems. Management Science, 33, 5, 589-609.
14. Diener, E. (1979). Desindividuacion: The absence of self-awarenes and self-regulation in group members. En P. Paulus (Ed.), Psychology of group influence (pp. 209-242). Hillsdale, NJ. Lawrence Erlbaum.
15. Doise, W. & Moscovici, S. (1973). Les decisions collectives. En S. Moscovici (Ed.), Introduction a la Psychologie Sociale (pp. 261-278). Paris: Larousse.
16. Festinger, (1951) Comunicacion social informal. En D. Cartwright & A. Zander, Dinamica de grupos. (1971) (pp. 205-214). Mexico: Trillas.
17. Gallupe, R. B., DeSanctis, G. & Dickson, G. (1988). Computer based support for group problem-finding: an experimental investigation. MIS Quarterly, 12, 2, 277-296.
18. Gallupe, R. B., Dennis, A. R., Cooper, W. H., Valacich, J. S., Bastianutti, L. M. & Nunamaker, J. (1992). Electronic brainstorming and group size. Academy of Management: Journal, 35, 350-369.
19. George, J. F., Easton, G., Nunamaker, J. & Northcraft, G. (1990). A study of collaborative group work with and without computer-based support. Information Systems Research, 1, 394-415.
20. Gil, F. & Garcia, M. (1994). Grupos en las organizaciones. Madrid: Eudema.
21. Gracia, F. J., Arcos, J. L. & Caballer, A. (2000). Influencia de la presion temporal en el trabajo en grupo en funcion del tipo de tarea y del canal de comunicacion. Psicothema, 12, 2, 241-246.
22. Green, S. & Taber T. (1990). The effects of three social decision schemes on decision group process. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 25, 97-106.
23. Groos, E. (1954). Primary functions of the small group. AmericanJournal Sociological Review, 21, 174-179.
24. HAWKINS, K. & POWER, C. B. (1999). Gender differences in questions asked during small decision-making group discussions. Small Group Research, 30, 2, 235-256.
25. Hiltz, S., Turloff, M. & Johnson, K. (1989). Disinhibition, deindivuduation, and group processes in pen name and real name computer conference. Decision Support Systems, 5, 217-232.
26. Hoffman, L. R., Harburg E. & Maier, N. R. E (1962). Differences and disagreemere as factors in creative group problem solving. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 64, 206-214.
27. Hollingshead, A. B., McGrath, J. E. & O’Connor, K. M. (1993). Group task performance and communication technology: a longitudinal study of computer-mediated versus face-to-face work groups. Small Groups Research, 3, 307-333.
28. Jessup, L., Connolly, T. & Galegher, J. (1990). The effects of anonymity on GDSS Group processes with an idea generating task. MIS Quarterly, 14, 3, 313-321.
29. Jessup L., Tansik D. & Laase, T. (1988). Group Problem solving in an automated environment: The effects of anonymity and proximity on group process and outcome with a GDSS”, Proceedings of the 9th Academy of Management Organizational Communication Division, 9, August, 1-20.
30. Jex, S. M., Bliese, P. D., Buzzell, S. & Primeau, J. (2001). The impact of self-efficacy on stresor-strain relations: coping style as an explanatory mechanism. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 3, 401-409.
31. Johnson, R. D. & Downing, L. J. (1979). Deindividuation and valence of cues: Effects of prosocial and antisocial behavior. Journal of Personality ans Social Psychology, 37, 1532-1538.
32. Kemper, S. (1984). When to speak like a lady. Sex Roles, 10, 435-443.
33. MAJCHRZAK, A. & BORYS, B. (1998). Computer-aided technology and work: moving the field forward. En C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 13, 305-354. Chischester: Wiley & Sons.
34. Mann, L. (1981). The baiting crowd in episodes of threatened suicide. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 703-709.
35. Marquis, D. G. (1962). Individual responsability and group decision involving risk. IndustrialReview, 3, 8-23.
36. Martinez, I. M. & Mejias, R.(2001). Efectos del anonimato en grupos con apoyo de sistemas informaticos. un estudio longitudinal. Revista de Psicologta Generaly Aplicada, 54, 4, 671-680.
37. Martinez, I. M., Cifre, E., Llorens, S. & Salanova, M. (2000). Contagio de emociones en grupo en tareas de laboratorio asistidas por ordenador. En D. Caballero, M. T. Mendez & J. Pastor (Eds.), La Mirada Psicologica: Grupos, Procesos Lenguajey Culturas (pp. 266-272). Madrid: Biblioteca Nueva.
38. Martinez, I. M., Cifre, E., Llorens, S. & Salanova, S., (2002a). Efectos de la tecnologia asistida por ordenador en el bienestar psicologico afectivo: un estudio experimental longitudinal. Psicothema, 14, 1, 118-123.
39. Martinez, I. M., Cifre, E. Llorens, S. & Salanova, M. (2002b). Study of health variables in working teams with ICT: An experimental-longitudinal lab study. Castellon: Publicaciones Universitat Jaume I.
40. Mejias, R., Shepherd M., Vogel, D. & Lazaneo, L. (1996). Consensus and perceived satisfaction levels: A cross-cultural comparison of GSS and non-GSS outcomes within and between the U.S. and Mexico. Journal ofInformation Systems, 13, 137-161.
41. Morales, B., Moriera, H. & Vogel, D. (1995). Group support for regional development in Mexico. Proceding of the 28h Hawai International Conference on System Sciences.
42. Nunamaker, J., Dennis, A., Valacich, J. & Vogel, D. (1991). Information technology for negotiation groups: Generating opinions for mutual gain. Management Science, 37, 1325-1346.
43. NUNAMAKER, J., BRIGGS, R. O., MITTLEMAN, D. D., VOGEL, D. R. & BALTHAZARD, P. A. (1997). Lessons from a dozen years of group support systems research: A discussion of lab and field findings. J of Management: Information Systems, 13, 163-207.
44. Postmes, T. & Spears, R. (1998). Deindividuation and anti-normative behaviour: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 238-259.
45. Postmes, T., Spears, R. & Lea, M. (1998). Breaching or building social boundaries? SIDE-effects of computer-mediated communication. Communication research, 25, 689-715.
46. Reicher, S. (1987). Conducta de masa como accion social. En J. C. Turner, Redescubrir el grupo Social (1990) (pp. 235-274). Madrid: Morata.
47. Rogelberg, S. G. & Rumey, S. M. (1996). Gender diversity, team decision quality, time on task, and interpersonal cohesion. Small Group Research, 27, 1, 78-90.
48. Salanova, M., Martinez, I. M., Bravo, M. J. & Rodriguez, I. (1998). Development of shared mental models and expertise in teams working with new information technologies: a longitudinal experiment. Paper presented at First International Work Psychology Conference. Sheffield, July, 1-3.
49. Sashkin, M. & Maier, N. R. E., (1971). Sex effects in delegation. Personnel Psychology, 86, 291-298.
50. Shaw, M. E. (1994). Dinamica de Grupo. Barcelona. Herder.
51. Sheriff, M. (1966). The Psychology of social norms. Nueva York: Harper and Row.
52. Spivey C. B. & Prentice Dun, S. (1990). Assessing the directionality of deindividuated behavior: Effects for deindividuation, modeling, and private self-consciousness on aggresive and prosocial responses. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 4, 115-127
53. Stevik, M. (1987). Beyond the chalkboard: Computer support for collaboration and problem-solving meetings. Communications of the ACM, 30, 1.
54. Stoner, J. A. F. (1961). A comparison of individual and group decisions involving risk. Tesis de maestria no publicada. Massachusetts Institute os Technology. Cambridge.
55. Citada en M. A., Wallac, N. Kogan & D. J. Bem (1992), Group influence on individual risk taking. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 65, 75-86.
56. Tajfel, H. (1981). Human Group and Social Categories: studies in Social Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Trad. cast.: Grupos humanos y categorlas sociales, Barcelona: Herder, 1984).
57. Tannen, D. (1990). You just don’t understand: Women and men in conversation. Nueva York: William Morrow, Ballantine.
58. Tannen, D. (1994). Talking from 9 to 5. Nueva York: William Morrow
59. Valacich, J., Dennis, A. & Nunamaker, J. (1991). Electronic meeting support: The group systems concept. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 34, 261-282.
60. Valacich, J. S., Jessup, L. M., Dennis, A. R. & Nunamaker, J. F. (1992). Conceptual Framework of anonymity in group support systems. Group Decision and Negotiations, 1, 219-241
61. VENTANA CORPORATION SOFTWARE (1999). GroupSystems 2.1. Tucson. Arizona. Workgroup Edition.
62. Walters, A. E., Stuhlmacher, A. F. & Meyer, L. L. (1998). Gender and negotiator competitiveness: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decisions Processes, 76, 1, 1-29
63. Watson, R., DeSanctis, G. & Poole, M. (1988). Using a GDSS to facilitate group consensus: Some intended and unintended consequences. MIS Quarterly, 12, 3, 463-478.
64. Wood, W., Poleck, D. & Atkin, C. (1985). Sex differences in group task performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 63-71.
65. Zigurs, I., Poole, M. & DeSanctis, G. (1988). A Study of Influence in Computer-Mediated Group Decision Making. MIS Quarterly, 13, 4, 625-644.
66. Zimbardo, P. G. (1970). The human choice: individuation, reason, and order versus deindividuation, impluse and chaos. En W. J. Arnold & D. Levine (Eds.), Nebraska Symposium on motivation, 1969 (pp. 237-307). Lincolm: University of Nebraska Press.