Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
H5b: Satisfaction with the decision process will
be higher in parallel communication groups than
in sequential communication groups.
lel communication mode, all discussion items
are open concurrently to the group from the very
beginning, until the experiment is completed. All
group members concurrently discuss any topic at
any time in any order throughout the experiment.
In the sequential communication, when the ex-
periment begins, groups are informed of all of the
topics to discuss during the experiment. However,
groups discuss one topic at a time sequentially.
Once a group moves to the next discussion topic,
it may not revisit previously discussed topics. This
step-by-step communication leaves no freedom
to deviate from a system-defined linear interac-
tion procedure.
researCh methodology:
Controlled experiment with
2x2 FaCtorial design
operationalization of
independent variables
A group leader selected by group members
during a training session is given the flexibility
to change any interaction rules or structure, as
necessary. In groups with a group leader, these
rules and structure thus are not adhered to strictly
during the experiment. Groups without a leader,
however, are asked simply to adhere to the given
interaction rules and structure; they do not have
flexibility to modify them.
Communication structuring is arranged in two
different modes: parallel and sequential. Gener-
ally, research on the impact of communication
structuring compares the parallel communication
mode through CMCS in GSS-supported groups
and the sequential communication mode of turn-
taking in face-to-face groups. What is different
in this study is the control of human parallel
processing (Gray, 1988). With human parallel
processing, all group members contribute at the
same time in an effort to eliminate communica-
tion inefficiencies, such as airtime fragmentation
or production blocking (Nunamaker et al., 1991)
of sequential face-to-face communication. In
both the parallel and sequential communication
modes in this study, human parallel processing
always is allowed, because all communication
takes place through CMCS. The difference be-
tween the parallel and sequential communication
mode, as operationalized for the experiment, is
the difference in the number of discussion items
open for group discussion at a time. In the paral-
experimental task
The task developed for the study is the Invest-
ment Club Task (Kim et al., 2002). In performing
this task, participants attempt to maximize their
portfolio value by agreeing to invest in at least
one but no more than three stocks out of 15 can-
didate stocks to be held for at least six months.
Basic information about each stock is provided,
and group members are free to gather additional
information from any source. The task in a GSS
experiment study is usually one of McGrath's
Circumplex Task Types (McGrath, 1984). The
problem with this task classification is its insis-
tence upon the mutually exclusive categorization
of tasks based on performance processes (Rana
et al., 1997). The investment club task, however,
has characteristics of both Intellective and deci-
sion-making task types (McGrath, 1984). It has
the characteristics of a decision-making task,
because when a decision is made at the end of
the experiment, there is no way to have objective
knowledge of the decision quality. On the other
hand, after the decision horizon is reached (at
least six months after the experiment), objective
decision quality can be evaluated by measuring
actual changes in stock prices.
Search WWH ::
Custom Search