Computer-Mediated Communication and Group Decision Making

Li, Shu‐Chu Sarrina

doi:10.1177/1046496407304335

Cited by 34 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 29 publications

(33 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Only 3 out of 56 participants (5%) were dissatisfied with the group answer in the IC groups, while 5 out of 63 participants (8%) were dissatisfied in the HC groups. This is in contrast to the literature on computer-mediated communication versus face-to-face groups [10,29], where lower satisfaction is reported in computer groups in general. The additional game component in the computer groups could be a possible explanation for these higher satisfaction levels.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Human Computation as a New Method for Evidence-Based Knowledge Transfer in Web-Based Guideline Development Groups: Proof of Concept Randomized Controlled Trial

Heselmans

Aertgeerts²,

Donceel³

et al. 2013

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundGuideline developers use different consensus methods to develop evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Previous research suggests that existing guideline development techniques are subject to methodological problems and are logistically demanding. Guideline developers welcome new methods that facilitate a methodologically sound decision-making process. Systems that aggregate knowledge while participants play a game are one class of human computation applications. Researchers have already proven that these games with a purpose are effective in building common sense knowledge databases.ObjectiveWe aimed to evaluate the feasibility of a new consensus method based on human computation techniques compared to an informal face-to-face consensus method.MethodsWe set up a randomized design to study 2 different methods for guideline development within a group of advanced students completing a master of nursing and obstetrics. Students who participated in the trial were enrolled in an evidence-based health care course. We compared the Web-based method of human-based computation (HC) with an informal face-to-face consensus method (IC). We used 4 clinical scenarios of lower back pain as the subject of the consensus process. These scenarios concerned the following topics: (1) medical imaging, (2) therapeutic options, (3) drugs use, and (4) sick leave. Outcomes were expressed as the amount of group (dis)agreement and the concordance of answers with clinical evidence. We estimated within-group and between-group effect sizes by calculating Cohen’s d. We calculated within-group effect sizes as the absolute difference between the outcome value at round 3 and the baseline outcome value, divided by the pooled standard deviation. We calculated between-group effect sizes as the absolute difference between the mean change in outcome value across rounds in HC and the mean change in outcome value across rounds in IC, divided by the pooled standard deviation. We analyzed statistical significance of within-group changes between round 1 and round 3 using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. We assessed the differences between the HC and IC groups using Mann-Whitney U tests. We used a Bonferroni adjusted alpha level of .025 in all statistical tests. We performed a thematic analysis to explore participants’ arguments during group discussion. Participants completed a satisfaction survey at the end of the consensus process.ResultsOf the 135 students completing a master of nursing and obstetrics, 120 participated in the experiment. We formed 8 HC groups (n=64) and 7 IC groups (n=56). The between-group comparison demonstrated that the human computation groups obtained a greater improvement in evidence scores compared to the IC groups, although the difference was not statistically significant. The between-group effect size was 0.56 (P=.30) for the medical imaging scenario, 0.07 (P=.97) for the therapeutic options scenario, and 0.89 (P=.11) for the drug use scenario. We found no significant differences in improvement in the degree of agree...

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Human Computation as a New Method for Evidence-Based Knowledge Transfer in Web-Based Guideline Development Groups: Proof of Concept Randomized Controlled Trial

Heselmans

Aertgeerts²,

Donceel³

et al. 2013

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As to detecting errors in MCQs no effect between the face-to-face and the virtual groups could be proved (0% explained variation) Also, as far as the increase of discriminatory power coefficients after the review is concerned, no difference between the groups was found. This result is consistent with other achievement comparison studies [ 3 ], [ 6 ], [ 7 ].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Gruppenleistungen beim Review von Multiple-Choice-Fragen - Ein Vergleich von face-to-face und virtuellen Gruppen mit und ohne Moderation

Kazubke

Schüttpelz-Brauns²

2010

GMS Zeitschrift Für Medizinische Ausbildung; 27(5):Doc68; ISSN 1860-3572

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The application of purely text-based communication is associated with particular challenges: users cannot easily express themselves in writing and the communication setting provides only reduced social context cues [10]. These characteristics can result in feelings of anonymity [11] and may undermine information exchange [12] and decision making [13], all of which may hinder establishment of interpersonal relationships [14]. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Advice Seekers’ Need Salience and Doctors’ Communication Style on Attitude and Decision Making: A Web-Based Mammography Consultation Role Play

Fissler¹,

Bientzle²,

Creß³

et al. 2015

JMIR Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPatients and advice seekers come to a medical consultation with typical needs, and physicians require adequate communication skills in order to address those needs effectively. It is largely unclear, however, to what extent advice seekers’ attitudes toward a medical procedure or their resulting decisions are influenced by a physician’s communication that ignores or explicitly takes these needs into account.ObjectiveThis experimental study tested how advice seekers’ salient needs and doctor’s communication styles influenced advice seekers’ attitudes toward mammography screening and their decision whether or not to participate in this procedure.MethodsOne hundred women (age range 20-47 years, mean 25.22, SD 4.71) participated in an interactive role play of an online consultation. During the consultation, a fictitious, program-controlled physician provided information about advantages and disadvantages of mammography screening. The physician either merely communicated factual medical information or made additional comments using a communication style oriented toward advice seekers’ typical needs for clarity and well-being. Orthogonal to this experimental treatment, participants’ personal needs for clarity and for well-being were either made salient before or after the consultation with a needs questionnaire. We also measured all participants’ attitudes toward mammography screening and their hypothetical decisions whether or not to participate before and after the experiment.ResultsAs assumed, the participants expressed strong needs for clarity (mean 4.57, SD 0.42) and for well-being (mean 4.21, SD 0.54) on 5-point Likert scales. Making these needs salient or not revealed significant interaction effects with the physician’s communication style regarding participants’ attitude change (F 1,92=7.23, P=.009, η2=.073) and decision making (F 1,92=4.43, P=.038, η2=.046). Those participants whose needs were made salient before the consultation responded to the physician’s communication style, while participants without salient needs did not. When the physician used a need-oriented communication style, those participants with salient needs had a more positive attitude toward mammography after the consultation than before (mean 0.13, SD 0.54), while they changed their attitude in a negative direction when confronted with a purely fact-oriented communication style (mean −0.35, SD 0.80). The same applied to decision modification (need-oriented: mean 0.10, SD 0.99; fact-oriented: mean −0.30, SD 0.88).ConclusionsThe findings underline the importance of communicating in a need-oriented style with patients and advice seekers who are aware of their personal needs. Ignoring the needs of those people appears to be particularly problematic. So physicians’ sensitivity for advice seekers’ currently relevant needs is essential.

show abstract

Computer-Mediated Communication and Group Decision Making

Cited by 34 publications

References 29 publications

Human Computation as a New Method for Evidence-Based Knowledge Transfer in Web-Based Guideline Development Groups: Proof of Concept Randomized Controlled Trial

Human Computation as a New Method for Evidence-Based Knowledge Transfer in Web-Based Guideline Development Groups: Proof of Concept Randomized Controlled Trial

Gruppenleistungen beim Review von Multiple-Choice-Fragen - Ein Vergleich von face-to-face und virtuellen Gruppen mit und ohne Moderation

The Impact of Advice Seekers’ Need Salience and Doctors’ Communication Style on Attitude and Decision Making: A Web-Based Mammography Consultation Role Play

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About