Abstract
The discourse of small groups of 3–4 adults enrolled in a graduate business course was audio-recorded as they participated in a computer-supported simulation in which the group represented a firm and worked over a series of eight sessions in making a series of decisions. Discourse transcripts were analyzed using a coding scheme that classified utterances expressed during group interaction as types of topic-talk (constituting a part of the activity itself) vs. meta-talk (reflecting on the activity). Supporting our hypothesis regarding the importance of meta-level discourse about group process in a group’s achieving coordinated action and a successful outcome, analysis suggested that discourse about the group’s process, but not discourse about individuals’ actions, was associated with superior group outcomes.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Duhigg, C. (2016). Smarter faster better: The transformative power of real productivity. New York: Random House.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911.
Goldstone, R. L., Roberts, M. E., & Gureckis, T. M. (2008). Emergent processes in group behavior. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17, 10–15.
Graesser, A., Fiore, S., Greiff, S., et al. (2018). Advancing the science of collaborative problem solving. Psychological Science in the Public Interest. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100618808244.
Hogan, M., Dwyer, C., Harney, O., Noone, C., & Conway, R. (2016). Metacognitive skill development and applied systems science: A framework of metacognitive skills, self-regulatory functions and real-world applications. In A. Pena-Ayala (Ed.), Metacognition: Fundamentals, applications, and trends (pp. 75–106). New York: Springer.
Jacobson, M., Kapur, M., & Reimann, P. (2016). Conceptualizing debates in learning and educational research: Toward a complex systems conceptual framework of learning. Educational Psychologist, 51, 210–218.
Järvelä, S., Järvenoja, H., Malmberg, J., Isohätälä, J., & Sobocinski, M. (2016). How do types of interaction and phases of self-regulated learning set a stage for collaborative engagement? Learning and Instruction, 43, 39–51.
Kapur, M. (2008). Productive failure. Cognition and Instruction, 26, 379–424.
Kuhn, D. (2000). Metacognitive development. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9, 178–181.
Kuhn, D. (2015). Thinking together and alone. Educational Researcher, 44, 46–53.
Kuhn, D. (2019). Why is reconciling divergent views a challenge? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29, 27–32.
Kuhn, D., & Modrek, A. (2018). Do reasoning limitations undermine discourse? Thinking and Reasoning, 24, 97–116.
Kuhn, D., Ramsey, S., & Arvidsson, T. S. (2015). Developing multivariable thinkers. Cognitive Development, 35, 92–110.
Kuhn, D., Zillmer, N., Crowell, A., & Zavala, J. (2013). Developing norms of argumentation: Metacognitive, epistemological, and social dimensions of developing argumentive competence. Cognition & Instruction, 31, 456–496.
Macagno, F. (2016). Argument relevance and structure: Assessing and developing students’ uses of evidence. International Journal of Educational Research, 79, 180–194.
Morris, M., Savani, K., & Fincher, K. (2019). Metacognition fosters cultural learning: Evidence from individual differences and situational prompts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 116, 48–68.
Osiurak, F., & Reynaud, S. (2019). The elephant in the room: What matters cognitively in cumulative technological culture. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1017/SO140525X19003236.
Pease, M., & Kuhn, D. (2011). Experimental analysis of the effective components of problem-based learning. Science Education, 95, 57–86.
Pifarre, M., & Cobos, R. (2010). Promoting metacognitive skills through peer scaffolding in a CSCL environment. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5(2), 237–253.
Rapanta, C., Garcia-Mila, M., & Gilabert, S. (2013). What is meant by argumentative competence? An integrative review of methods of analysis and assessment in education. Review of Educational Research, 83, 483–520.
Shea, N., Boldt, A., Bang, D., Yeung, N., Heyes, C., & Frith, C. D. (2014). Supra-personal cognitive control and metacognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(4), 186–193.
Siqin, T., van Aalst, J., & Chu, S. K. W. (2015). Fixed group and opportunistic collaboration in a CSCL environment. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 10, 161–181.
Slof, B., Erkens, G., Kirschner, P., Janssen, J., & Jaspers, J. (2012). Successfully carrying out complex learning-tasks through guiding teams' qualitative and quantitative reasoning. Instructional Science, 40, 623–643.
Sloman, S., & Rabb, N. (2019). Thought as a determinant of political opinion. Cognition, 188, 1–7.
Vogel, F., Wecker, C., Kollar, I. et al. (2017) Socio-Cognitive Scaffolding with Computer-Supported Collaboration Scripts: a Meta-Analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 29, 477–511. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-016-9361-7
Yoon, S., Park, M., & Anderson, E. (2018). Identifying reflective and non-reflective group consensus strategies for evidence-based scientific argumentation. London: Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kuhn, D., Capon, N. & Lai, H. Talking about group (but not individual) process aids group performance. Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn 15, 179–192 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-020-09321-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-020-09321-7