Situation Invisibility and Attribution in Distributed Collaborations

Abstract

This article expands theoretical and empirical understanding of interpersonal relationships under distributed conditions by highlighting the importance and consequences of situation invisibility. In a laboratory study, the authors demonstrate that distributed teammates are significantly more likely than collocated teammates to make internal dispositional attributions rather than situational attributions concerning negative partner behavior because of situation invisibility. These dispositional attributions in turn affect relational outcomes such as satisfaction and cohesion. The authors also demonstrate the impact of situational explanation as an antidote to situation invisibility.Advances in telecommunication and information technologies are facilitating the collaboration of people who do not share the same physical location. Technology-enabled, geographically distributed collaboration has become commonplace, particularly among 525 †The authors thank the editor and three reviewers for their thoughtful and helpful feedback on this article.

Extending Construal-Level Theory to Distributed Groups: Understanding the Effects of Virtuality

“…As such, construal level theory provides an alternate explanation for why distributed team members are more inclined to make person-based attributions about their fellow team members (Cramton, 2001;Cramton et al 2007). …”

Sensemaking in Virtual Teams: The Impact of Emotions and Support Tools on Team Mental Models and Team Performance

“…Information regarding the work context of team members is not easily available to members of a virtual team (Cramton, 2001;Hinds & Weisband, 2003), and members are often in ignorance of others' actions (Gutwin & Greenberg, 2002), which can lead to attribution errors. Cramton et al (2007), for example, reported that members of virtual teams are more likely to make internal dispositional attributions, opposed to members of collocated teams that tend to make situational attributions, about the negative behavior of team partners. Cramton and colleagues sensemaking, which leads to personal understandings and personal mental models as eloquently described by Weick and his colleagues (Weick, 1979;.…”

“…In virtual teams the interpretation of events was shown by Cramton et al (2007) to create attributions about teammates, which can evoke emotions toward these teammates. Suppose, for example, a teammate is said to not have completed assigned work; attributing this to laziness would likely lead to anger (Smith and Ellsworth, 1985).…”

“…Indeed, as noted by Ashforth, Keriner and Mel (2002) Since members of virtual teams often rely on electronic means of communication, they have limited access to information about other team members, and misattributions are likely to occur (Cramton et al, 2007). Communication patterns that "screen out" certain members from team interactions constrain their social information and interpersonal exchanges, which can make the influence of emotional content more or less efficient and accurate (Gibson & Early 2007).…”

Location, Working Hours and Creativity

“…In so far as research has addressed the effects of reduced working in the same location at set hours, attention typically has gone to issues of communication (Nardi & Whittaker, 2002), attribution (Cramton, 2002;Cramton et al, 2007), self-control (Clegg & Van Iterson, 2013), and conflict (Carmel, 1999;Hinds & Mortensen, 2005;Hinds & Bailey, 2003). In addition, perceptions of proximity in virtual work have been addressed (Wilson et al, 2008) as well as, obviously, individual and group performance of distributed work arrangements (Ahuja et al, 2003;Maznevski & Chudoba, 2000;Shin, 2004).…”