Lay Theories Regarding Computer-Mediated Communication in Remote Collaboration

Karl Parke; Nicola Marsden; Cornelia Connolly

doi:10.5944/openpraxis.9.1.502

Lay Theories Regarding Computer-Mediated Communication in Remote Collaboration

Open Praxis

Volume 9 (2017): Issue 1

By: Karl Parke , Nicola Marsden and Cornelia Connolly

Open Access

|Jan 2017

Abstract

Computer-mediated communication and remote collaboration has become an unexceptional norm as an educational modality for distance and open education, therefore the need to research and analyze students’ online learning experience is necessary. This paper seeks to examine the assumptions and expectations held by students in regard to computer-mediated communication and how their lay theories developed and changed within the context of their practical experiences in conducting a remote collaborative project, through computer-mediated communication. We conducted a qualitative content analysis of students’ final reports from an inter-institutional online course on computer-mediated communication and remote collaboration. The results show that students’ assumptions were altered and indicate the strong benefits of teaching how to collaborate remotely, especially if a blended approach of theory and practical application are combined.

References

Andersen, R., & Ponti, M. (2014). Participatory pedagogy in an open educational course: challenges and opportunities. Distance education, 35(2), 234–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2014.917703
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ang, C. S., Talib, M. A., Tan, K. A., Tan, J. P., & Yaacob, S. N. (2015). Understanding computer-mediated communication attributes and life satisfaction from the perspectives of uses and gratifications and self-determination. Computers in Human Behavior, 49, 20–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.02.037
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Carlson, J. R., Zivnuska, S., Harris, R. B., Harris, K. J., & Carlson, D. S. (2016). Social Media Use in the Workplace: A Study of Dual Effects. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing (JOEUC), 28(1), 15–31.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Chen, K. C., Yen, C. D., Hung, S. Y., & Huang, H. A. (2008). An exploratory study on the selection of communication media: the relationship between flow and communication outcomes. Decision Support Systems, 45(4), 822–832.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Cheney, G., & Ashcraft, K. L. (2007). Considering “the professional” in communication studies: Implications for theory and research within and beyond the boundaries of organizational communication. Communication theory, 17(2), 146–175. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00290.x
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
December, J. (1996), Units of Analysis for Internet Communication. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 1, 0. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1996.tb00173.x
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Dennen, V. P. (2005). From message posting to learning dialogues: Factors affecting learner participation in asynchronous discussion. Distance Education, 26(1), 127–148. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01587910500081376
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Dennen, V. P., Darabi, A. A., & Smith, L. J. (2007). Instructor–learner interaction in online courses: The relative perceived importance of particular instructor actions on performance and satisfaction. Distance education, 28(1), 65–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01587910701305319
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41(10), 1040.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ebersole, S., (2000). Uses and gratifications of the web among students. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 6(1), 1–17.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ellison, N. B., Gibbs, J. L., & Weber, M. S. (2014). The Use of Enterprise Social Network Sites for Knowledge Sharing in Distributed Organizations: The Role of Organizational Affordances. American Behavioral Scientist. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764214540510
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (2013). Social cognition: From brains to culture: Sage.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Furnham, A. (2013). Lay theories: Everyday understanding of problems in the social sciences. Pergamon Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Groeben, N. (2014). Die Handlungsperspektive als Theorierahmen für Forschung im pädagogischen Feld. In Informationsverarbeitung und Entscheidungsverhalten von Lehrern, M. Hofer Ed. Urban & Schwarzenberg, München, 17–48.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Groeben, N. & Scheele, B. (2000). Dialogue-hermeneutic method and the research program subjective theories. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 1(2), Retrieved from http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1079
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Haridakis, P., & Hanson, G., (2009). Social interaction and co-viewing with YouTube: blending mass communication reception and social connection. Journal of Broadcasting Electronic Media, 53(2), 317–335.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hong, Y. Y., Levy, S. R., & Chiu, C. Y. (2001). The contribution of the lay theories approach to the study of groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 98–106.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Howard, C. D. (2011). An instructional paradigm for the teaching of computer-mediated communication. Instructional Science, 40(3), 493–513. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-011-9187-0
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hunt, D., Atkin, D., & Krishnan, A., (2012). The Influence of computer-mediated communication apprehension on motives for facebook use. Journal of Broadcasting Electronic Media 56(2), 187–202.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Igou, E. R. (2004). Lay theories in affective forecasting: The progression of affect. Journal of experimental social psychology, 40(4), 528–534.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kaye, B. K., & Johnson, T. J. (2002). Online and in the know: uses and gratifications of the web for political information. Journal of Broadcasting Electronic Media, 46(1), 54–71.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Knight-McCord, J., Cleary, D., Grant, N., Herron, A., Lacey, T., Livingston, T., & Emanuel, R. (2016). What social media sites do college students use most? Journal of Undergraduate Ethnic Minority Psychology, 2, 21.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kruglanski, A. W. (2013). The psychology of closed mindedness. Psychology Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Levy, S. R. (1999). Reducing Prejudice: Lessons From Social Cognitive Factors Underlying Perceiver Differences in Prejudice. Journal of Social Issues, 55(4), 745–765.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Levy, S. R., Plaks, J. E., Hong, Y., Chiu, C., & Dweck, C. S. (2001). Static versus dynamic theories and the perception of groups: Different routes to different destinations. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(2), 156–168.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Marsden, N., & Connolly, C. (2010). Pedagogical Patterns for Computer-Mediated Communication. In M. B. Nunes & M. McPherson (Eds.), Proceedings of the IADIS International Conference e-Learning 2010 (Vol. II) (pp. 27–32): IADIS Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mayring, P. (2014). Qualitative content analysis: theoretical foundation, basic procedures and software solution. Beltz, Klagenfurt.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
McQuail, D. (2005). Mcquail’s Mass Communication Theory. London: SAGE Publications.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ou, C. X. J., & Davison, R. M. (2011). Interactive or interruptive? Instant messaging at work. Decision Support System, 52(1), 61–72.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Papacharissi, Z., Rubin, A. M. (2000). Predictors of Internet use. Journal of Broadcasting Electronic Media, 44(2), 175–196.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Sheldon, K. M., Abad, N., & Hinsch, C. (2011). A two-process view of Facebook use and relatedness need-satisfaction: disconnection drives use, and connectedness rewards it. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(4), 766–775.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Sjoberg, U. (1999). The rise of the electronic individual: a study of how young Swedish teenagers use and perceive the Internet. Journal of Telematics Informatics, 16(3), 113–133.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Snyder, M. (1984). When belief creates reality. Advances in experimental social psychology, 18, 247–305.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
St. Amant, K., (2002). When cultures and computers collide rethinking computer-mediated communication according to international and intercultural communication expectations. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 16(2), 196–214.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Sun, S. (2008). An examination of disposition, motivation, and involvement in the new technology context. Journal of Computers in Human Behavior, 24(6), 2723–2740.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Sun, S., Rubin, A. M., & Haridakis, P. M. (2009). The role of motivation and media involvement in explaining internet dependency. Journal of Broadcasting Electronic Media, 52(3), 408–431.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Thompson, E. W., & Savenye, W. C. (2007). Adult Learner Participation in an Online Degree Program: A program-level study of voluntary computer-mediated communication. Distance Education, 28(3), 299–312. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01587910701611336
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Treem, J. W., Dailey, S. L., Pierce, C. S., & Leonardi, P. M. (2015). Bringing Technological Frames to Work: How Previous Experience with Social Media Shapes the Technology’s Meaning in an Organization. Journal of Communication, 65(2), 396–422. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12149
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Walther, J. B. (2013). Commentary: Affordances, Effects, and Technology Errors. Annals of the International Communication Association, 36(1), 190–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2013.11679131
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Walther, J. B. & Parks, M. R. (2002). Cues filtered out, cues filtered in: Computer-mediated communication and relationships. Handbook of interpersonal communication, 3, 529–563.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Walther, J. B., Van Der Heide, B., Ramirez Jr, A., Burgoon, J. K., & Peña, J. (2015). Interpersonal and Hyperpersonal Dimensions of Computer-Mediated Communication. In S. Shyam Sundar (Ed.). The Handbook of the Psychology of Communication Technology, First Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Wolfradt, U., & Doll, J. (2001). Motives of adolescents to use the Internet as a function of personality traits, personal and social factors. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 24(1), 13–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.2190%2FANPM-LN97-AUT2-D2EJ
Search in Google Scholar Back to article