Structured modeling group support systems: a product design theory

Walsh, Kenneth R.; Dickey, Michael H.

doi:10.1016/j.im.2003.07.003

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, some GSS studies found that large groups tend to become less mutually aware and thus less effective [33]. In this study, we decided to adopt the majority view that sees group size as positively influencing group processes and performance.…”

Section: Group Sizementioning

confidence: 99%

Generating quality open content: A functional group perspective based on the time, interaction, and performance theory

Carillo

Okoli²

2011

Information & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Group Sizementioning

confidence: 99%

Generating quality open content: A functional group perspective based on the time, interaction, and performance theory

Carillo

Okoli²

2011

Information & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…There have been extensive studies on group support systems (GSS) and collaboration technologies in the past few decades. Some focused on theoretical, management, and technical aspects of GSS (e.g., Jessup & George, 1997;Walsh & Dickey, 2004), whereas others investigated the use of GSS and its impact on collaborative processes and outcomes, such as GSS adoption (Van Hillegersberg & Koenen, 2014), the use of GSS for knowledge management (Wang, Ding, Liu, & Li, 2016;Pyrko, Eden, & Howick, 2019), and the effect of group member and communication characteristics on group performance (Dennis, Wixom, & Vandenberg, 2001;Kim, 2006;Wilson, Griffin, & Jessup, 2010;Nahartyo & Utami, 2014).…”

Section: Collaboration Engineering and Technologies For Group Support Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

CE‐DIFF: An Approach to Identifying and Coping with Irregular Ratings in Collaborative Decision Making

Zhang

2020

Decision Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A key to collaborative decision making is to aggregate individual evaluations into a group decision. One of its fundamental challenges lies in the difficulty in identifying and dealing with irregular or unfair ratings and reducing their impact on group decisions. Little research has attempted to identify irregular ratings in a collaborative assessment task, let alone develop effective approaches to reduce their negative impact on the final group judgment. In this paper, based on the synergy theory, we propose a novel consensus-based collaborative evaluation method called Collaborative Evaluation based on rating DIFFerence (CE-DIFF) for identifying irregular ratings and mitigating their impact on collaborative decisions. CE-DIFF determines and assigns different weights automatically to individual evaluators or ratings based on the level of consistency of one's ratings with the group assessment outcome through continuous iterations. We conducted two empirical experiments to evaluate the proposed method. The results show that CE-DIFF has higher accuracy in dealing with irregular ratings than existing collaborative evaluation methods, such as arithmetic mean and trimmed mean. In addition, the effectiveness of CE-DIFF is independent of group size. This study provides a new and more effective method for collaborative assessment, as well as novel theoretical insights and practical implications on how to improve collaborative assessment.

show abstract

“…Participants often found it difficult to retrieve specific fragments of knowledge acquired from these discussions. This motivated the development of GDNSS that helped organize knowledge using argumentation models, concept mapping, and graphic representation of the history of discussions [7,37]. Nunamaker et al [25] developed systems that could organize ideas so that they could be synthesized and consolidated.…”

Section: Tools That Support Group Decision and Negotiationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Supporting dynamic group decision and negotiation processes: A traceability augmented peer-to-peer network approach

Mohan

Ramesh

2006

Information & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Structured modeling group support systems: a product design theory

Cited by 7 publications

References 38 publications

Generating quality open content: A functional group perspective based on the time, interaction, and performance theory

Generating quality open content: A functional group perspective based on the time, interaction, and performance theory

CE‐DIFF: An Approach to Identifying and Coping with Irregular Ratings in Collaborative Decision Making

Supporting dynamic group decision and negotiation processes: A traceability augmented peer-to-peer network approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About