Communication patterns during synchronous Web-based military training in problem solving

Orvis, Kara L.; Wisher, Robert A.; Bonk, Curtis J.; Olson, Tatana M.

doi:10.1016/s0747-5632(02)00018-3

Cited by 36 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hew and Cheung 2010;Orvis et al 2002) claimed that online interactions between learners follow certain patterns. With the purpose of developing higher-order cognitive skills (such as knowledge synthesis, decision-making, and collaborative problem solving), Orvis et al (2002) conducted a study to analyze the communication patterns during a synchronous Web-based military training course in problem solving. A total of 6,601 acts of chat were coded into one of three interaction categories (on-task, social, or technology-related) and analyzed the frequency and relative change over time.…”

Section: Online Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our study also examined the effect of the Process-Writing Wizard on students' synchronous chats. In this study, we adopted Orvis' et al (2002) coding scheme and categorized synchronous chats into three categories: (1) article-related interactions, (2) social interactions, and (3) system operation-related interactions. As facilitators are instrumental in shaping or influencing the chats, it is assumed that the procedural facilitation provided by the system will scaffold students into producing more chats in the category of article-related interactions.…”

Section: Design Parameters and Research Questions Of The Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, Lebie et al (1996) constructed a fourcategory coding system to analyze chat data: (1) planning activity, (2) interactive composing activity, (3) the mechanics of the production process, and (4) interpersonal and social activity. Cooney (1998) coded synchronous chats as: (1) discourse about the content, (2) discourse about the task, and (3) off-task talk (Cited in Orvis et al 2002). Based on Cooney's (1998) scheme, Orvis et al (2002) constructed a three-category coding system to analyze synchronous chats: (1) on task, (2) social interaction, and (3) mechanics.…”

Section: Instrumentation and Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cooney (1998) coded synchronous chats as: (1) discourse about the content, (2) discourse about the task, and (3) off-task talk (Cited in Orvis et al 2002). Based on Cooney's (1998) scheme, Orvis et al (2002) constructed a three-category coding system to analyze synchronous chats: (1) on task, (2) social interaction, and (3) mechanics. In this study, the synchronous chats of both the experimental and control groups were coded with an augmented version of the above coding schemes.…”

Section: Instrumentation and Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Scaffolding collaborative technical writing with procedural facilitation and synchronous discussion

Yeh

Huang

2011

Computer Supported Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With the advent of computer technology, researchers and instructors are attempting to devise computer support for effective collaborative technical writing. In this study, a computer-supported environment for collaborative technical writing was developed. This system (Process-Writing Wizard) provides process-oriented scaffolds and a synchronous online chat room to facilitate real-time collaborative writing practice. It allows multiple students to work synchronously on collaborative writing tasks via the Internet. It also helps develop collaborative writing strategies, such as creating team agendas, brainstorming, creating team outlines, and generating team articles. An experiment was conducted to examine the effect of the system on EFL (English as a Foreign Language) students' collaborative writing experiences. First, an attitude questionnaire was used to evaluate learners' perceptions, acceptance, attitudes, and continuing motivation toward the functionalities and guidance provided by the system. Second, students' writing products were examined to evaluate the effect of the system on EFL students' collaborative writing quality, especially on content and organization. Finally, this study analyzed and coded students' synchronous chats with three categories (article-related interactions, social interactions, and system operation-related interactions) to evaluate the effect of the system on students' interactions. The results of the experiment showed: (1) the students had positive attitudes toward the system and continuing motivation to use the system in future writing tasks; (2) analysis of writing products suggested that students produced better content and organization with the support of the system; (3) the procedural facilitation provided by the system successfully scaffolded students to converse more in the category of article-related interactions. Limitations and future research directions are also discussed.

show abstract

Section: Online Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Design Parameters and Research Questions Of The Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Instrumentation and Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Instrumentation and Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Scaffolding collaborative technical writing with procedural facilitation and synchronous discussion

Yeh

Huang

2011

Computer Supported Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A number of studies have provided evidence indicating that online discussion can facilitate the collaborative learning of complex scientific concepts (Roschelle, 1992), inter-professional collaboration (Connor, 2003), and social construction of knowledge (Warschauer, 1997;Dehler & Parras-Hernandez, 1998;Hara et al, 2000). Some other studies showed that online discussion fosters the use of high-level cognitive skills such as reasoning and argumentation skills (Marttunen & Laurinen, 2002;Pilkington & Walker, 2003), critical thinking, reflection, problem-solving (Orvis et al, 2002), and learning in general (Booth & Hulte´n, 2003;Comeaux & McKenna-Byington, 2003). In addition, online discussion expands learning outside of classroom and is not restricted to time and space.…”

Section: Learning Effects Of Online Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Content analysis of online discussion on a senior-high-school discussion forum of a virtual physics laboratory

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study we content analyzed the online discussion of several senior-highschool groups on a forum of a virtual physics laboratory in Taiwan. The goal of our research was to investigate the nature of non-course-based online discussion and to find out some useful guidelines in developing such discussion forums for learning purposes. We adapted Henri's framework and models (1992) for our analysis. The content analysis was conducted in terms of participation rate, social cues, interaction types, and cognitive and metacognitive skills. In this study, we compared the result patterns of two discussion conditions ('required' (R-) condition versus 'non-required' (NR-) condition) of a non-course-based discussion forum and investigated how the quality of message content changed in the processes of discussion. In the R-condition, participants were required to reply to the thread before they were allowed to read other messages on the forum, whereas participants in the NR-condition were not restricted to this demand. The results showed that for both conditions, the most frequently involved interaction type was 'direct response', and the most frequently used cognitive skill was 'elementary clarification'. Fewer participants of the R-condition strayed from the subject under discussion in comparison to the NR-condition. However, larger percentage of message content containing metacognitive components was found in the NR-condition. When taking the sequences of postings into account, we found that for the R-condition, the percentage of metacognitive component in the message content tended to increase in the up-third postings, whereas for the up-third postings of the NR-condition the percentage of non-cognitive components substantially increased. Overall, the results of our study indicated that the way in which participants used cognitive and metacognitive skills during the discussions was related to the discussion conditions. The initial requirement of reply fostered the use of cognitive skills, but it did not necessarily induce the use of high-level cognitive or metacognitive skills. We concluded that beside the discussion conditions the moderators' guidance would be influential in determining the quality of online discussion on a non-course-based discussion forum.

show abstract

Igniting and resolving content disagreements during team interactions: A statistical discourse analysis of team dynamics at work

Lehmann‐Willenbrock

Chiu

2017

J Organ Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Disagreements are integral to fruitful team collaboration but have rarely been studied within actual team interactions. We develop a temporal account of how disagreement episodes begin and are resolved during team interactions, testing explanatory factors at multiple levels: team context (team conflict states and team productivity), individual characteristics and perceptions (individual status and perceptions of team viability), and behavioral patterns (problem solving versus off-task communication) with a statistical discourse analysis of 32,448 turns of talk by 259 employees during 43 team meetings. As hypothesized, problem-solving behaviors (e.g., describing problems and proposing solutions) ignited content disagreements, often by participants who perceived greater team viability. In contrast, after off-task behaviors or talk by higher status team members, participants started fewer content disagreements. Moreover, content disagreements started by higher status individuals were more likely than those started by others to be resolved with agreements, especially via agreements with higher status individuals. Also, problem-solving behaviors facilitated the resolution of disagreement episodes with agreement, whereas off-task behaviors hindered them. Contrary to our hypotheses, team conflict states and productivity were not linked to starting or ending disagreements. We discuss the conceptual and methodological importance of capturing team interaction dynamics at work and derive practical implications for managing content disagreement.

show abstract

Communication patterns during synchronous Web-based military training in problem solving

Cited by 36 publications

References 7 publications

Scaffolding collaborative technical writing with procedural facilitation and synchronous discussion

Scaffolding collaborative technical writing with procedural facilitation and synchronous discussion

Content analysis of online discussion on a senior-high-school discussion forum of a virtual physics laboratory

Igniting and resolving content disagreements during team interactions: A statistical discourse analysis of team dynamics at work

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About