Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Identifying collaborative problem-solver profiles based on collaborative processing time, actions and skills on a computer-based task

  • Published:
International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Understanding how individuals collaborate with others is a complex undertaking, because collaborative problem-solving (CPS) is an interactive and dynamic process. We attempt to identify distinct collaborative problem-solver profiles of Chinese 15-year-old students on a computer-based CPS task using process data from the 2015 Program for International Student Assessment (PISA, N = 1,677), and further to examine how these profiles may relate to student demographics (i.e., gender, socioeconomic status) and motivational characteristics (i.e., achieving motivation, attitudes toward collaboration), as well as CPS performance. The process indicators we used include time-on-task, actions-on-task, and three specific CPS process skills (i.e., establish and maintain shared understanding, take appropriate action to solve the problem, establish and maintain team organization). The results of latent profile analysis indicate four collaborative problem-solver profiles: Disengaged, Struggling, Adaptive, and Excellent. Gender, socioeconomic status, attitudes toward collaboration and CPS performance are shown to be significantly associated with profile membership, yet achieving motivation was not a significant predictor. These findings may contribute to better understanding of the way students interact with computer-based CPS tasks and inform educators of individualized and adaptive instructions to support student collaborative problem-solving.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abdi, B. (2010). Gender differences in social skills, problem behaviours and academic competence of Iranian kindergarten children based on their parent and teacher ratings. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 5, 1175–1179.

  • Ahonen, A. K., & Harding, S. M. (2018). Assessing online collaborative problem solving among school children in Finland: A case study using ATC21S TM in a national context. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 17(2), 138–158. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.17.2.9

  • Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261–271. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.84.3.261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews-Todd, J., & Forsyth, C. M. (2020). Exploring social and cognitive dimensions of collaborative problem solving in an open online simulation-based task. Computers in Human Behavior, 104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.10.025

  • Avry, S., Chanel, G., Bétrancourt, M., & Molinari, G. (2020). Achievement appraisals, emotions and socio-cognitive processes: How they interplay in collaborative problem-solving? Computers in Human Behavior, 107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106267

  • Bamaca-Colbert, M. Y., & Gayles, J. G. (2010). Variable-centered and person-centered approaches to studying Mexican-origin mother-daughter cultural orientation dissonance. Journal of Youth Adolescents, 39(11), 1274–1292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-009-9447-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caceres, M., Nussbaum, M., Marroquin, M., Gleisner, S., & Marquinez, J. T. (2018). Building arguments: Key to collaborative scaffolding. Interactive Learning Environments, 26(3), 355–371. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2017.1333010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Care, E., Scoular, C., & Griffin, P. (2016). Assessment of collaborative problem solving in education environments. Applied Measurement in Education, 29(4), 250–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2016.1209204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung, G., O’Neil, H., Jr., & Herl, H. (1999). The use of computer-based collaborative knowledge mapping to measure team process and team outcomes. Computers in Human Behavior, 15(3–4), 463–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conger, R., & Donnellan, M. (2007). An interactionist perspective on the socioeconomic context of human development. Annual Review of Psychology, 58(1), 175–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowden, R. G., Mascret, N., & Duckett, T. R. (2021). A person-centered approach to achievement goal orientations in competitive tennis players: Associations with motivation and mental toughness. Journal of Sport and Health Science, 10(1), 73–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cukurova, M., Luckin, R., Millán, E., & Mavrikis, M. (2018). The NISPI framework: Analyzing collaborative problem-solving from students’ physical interactions. Computers and Education, 116, 93–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Boeck, P., & Scalise, K. (2019). Collaborative problem solving: Processing actions, time, and performance. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1280. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delton, A., Cosmides, L., Guemo, M., Robertson, T., & Tooby, J. (2012). The psychosemantics of free riding: Dissecting the architecture of a moral concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(6), 1252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dindar, M., Järvelä, S., & Järvenoja, H. (2020). Interplay of metacognitive experiences and performance in collaborative problem solving. Computers and Education, 154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103922

  • Doise, W., & Mugny, G. (1984). The social development of the intellect. Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowell, N., Lin, Y., Godfrey, A., & Brooks, C. (2020). Exploring the relationship between emergent socio-cognitive roles, collaborative problem-solving skills and outcomes: A group communication analysis. Journal of Learning Analytics, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2020.71.4

  • Du, X., Zhang, L., Hung, J. L., Li, H., Tang, H., & Xie, Y. (2022). Understand group interaction and cognitive state in online collaborative problem solving: Leveraging brain-to-brain synchrony data. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00356-4

  • Eichmann, B., Goldhammer, F., Greiff, S., Brandhuber, L., & Naumann, J. (2020). Using process data to explain group differences in complex problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(8), 1546–1562. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, T. L. N., English, L. K., & McGoldrick, K. (2015). Evaluating the cooperative component in cooperative learning: A quasi-experimental study. Journal of Economic Education, 46(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.2014.978923

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emmen, R., Malda, M., Mesman, J., Van Ijzendoorn, M., Prevoo, M., & Yeniad, N. (2013). Socioeconomic status and parenting in ethnic minority families: Testing a minority family stress model. Journal of Family Psychology, 27(6), 896–904.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson-Patrick, K. (2020). Cooperative learning in Swedish classrooms: Engagement and relationships as a focus for culturally diverse students. Education Sciences, 10(11). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10110312

  • Gao, Q., Zhang, S., Cai, Z., Liu, K., Hui, N., & Tong, M. (2022). Understanding student teachers’ collaborative problem-solving competency: Insights from process data and multidimensional item response theory. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101097

  • Greiff, S., Molnár, G., Martin, R., Zimmermann, J., & Csapó, B. (2018). Students’ exploration strategies in computer-simulated complex problem environments: A latent class approach. Computers and Education, 126, 248–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gu, X., & Cai, H. (2019). How a semantic diagram tool influences transaction costs during collaborative problem solving. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 35(1), 23–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haataja, E., Malmberg, J., Dindar, M., & Jarvela, S. (2022). The pivotal role of monitoring for collaborative problem solving seen in interaction, performance, and interpersonal physiology. Metacognition and Learning, 17(1), 241–268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-021-09279-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hajovsky, D., Caemmerer, J., & Mason, B. (2022). Gender differences in children’s social skills growth trajectories. Applied Developmental Science, 26(3), 488–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hänze, M., & Berger, R. (2007). Cooperative learning, motivational effects, and student characteristics: An experimental study comparing cooperative learning and direct instruction in 12th grade physics classes. Learning and Instruction, 17(1), 29–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.11.004

  • Hao, J., Liu, L., von Davier, A., Kyllonen, P. C., & Kitchen, C. (2016). Collaborative problem solving skills versus collaboration outcomes: Findings from statistical analysis and data mining. EDM.

  • Herborn, K., Mustafic, M., & Greiff, S. (2017). Mapping an experiment-based assessment of collaborative behavior onto collaborative problem solving in PISA 2015: A cluster analysis approach for collaborator profiles. Journal of Educational Measurement, 54(1), 103–122. https://doi.org/10.1111/jedm.12135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herborn, K., Stadler, M., Mustafić, M., & Greiff, S. (2020). The assessment of collaborative problem solving in PISA 2015: Can computer agents replace humans? Computers in Human Behavior, 104, 105624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.07.035

  • Howard, C., Di Eugenio, B., Jordan, P., & Katz, S. (2017). Exploring initiative as a signal of knowledge co-construction during collaborative problem solving. Cognitive Science, 41(6), 1422–1449. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12415

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, G. M., & Goh, C. C. M. (2007). Cooperative learning in the language classroom. SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.

  • Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. Interaction Book Company.

  • Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2003). Assessing students in groups: Promoting group responsibility and individual accountability. Corwin Press.

  • Kim, J.-I., Kim, M., & Svinicki, M. D. (2012). Situating students’ motivation in cooperative learning contexts: Proposing different levels of goal orientations. Journal of Experimental Education, 80(4), 352–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2011.625996

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, C. H., & Liu, Z. Y. (2017). Collaborative problem-solving behavior of 15-year-old Taiwanese students in science education. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(10). https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/78189

  • Li, S., Pöysä-Tarhonen, J., & Häkkinen, P. (2022). Patterns of action transitions in online collaborative problem solving: A network analysis approach. International Journal of Computer-Based Collaborative. Learning, 17(2), 191–223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-022-09369-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, Y. (2021). A cross-cultural study of student self-efficacy profiles and the associated predictors and outcomes using a multigroup latent profile analysis. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 71, 101071

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, Y. (2022). Profiles of student attitudes toward science and its associations with gender and academic achievement. International Journal of Science Education, 1-20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma, Y., & Corter, J. (2019). The effect of manipulating group task orientation and support for innovation on collaborative creativity in an educational setting. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 33, 100587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maltz, D. N., & Borker, R. A. (1982). A cultural approach to male-female miscommunication. In J. J. Gumperz (Ed.), Language and social identity (pp. 195–216). Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. P., & Morin, A. J. (2016). A person-centered approach to commitment research: Theory, research, and methodology. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37(4), 584–612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, L., & Muthén, B. (2019). Mplus user’s guide (1998–2019). Muthén & Muthén.

  • Nichols, J. D., & Miller, R. B. (1994). Cooperative learning and student motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(2), 167–178. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1994.1015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2017). PISA 2015 Results (Volumn V): Collaborative Problem Solving. PISA, OECD Publishinghttps://doi.org/10.1787/9789264285521-en

  • Petty, R., Harkins, S., Williams, K., & Latane, B. (1977). The effects of group size on cognitive effort and evaluation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 3(4), 579–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reilly, J. M., & Schneider, B. (2019). Predicting the quality of collaborative problem solving through linguistic analysis of discourse. International Educational Data Mining Society.

  • Rosen, Y., Wolf, I., & Stoeffler, K. (2020). Fostering collaborative problem solving skills in science: The Animalia project. Computers in Human Behavior, 104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.02.018

  • Rummel, N., Mullins, D., & Spada, H. (2012). Scripted collaborative learning with the cognitive tutor algebra. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7, 307–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, R., & Gustafsson, J.-E. (2015). The relations among openness, perseverance, and performance in creative problem solving: A substantive-methodological approach. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 18, 4–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2015.04.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schindler, M., & Bakker, A. (2020). Affective field during collaborative problem posing and problem solving: A case study. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 105(3), 303–324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-09973-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. E. (1987). Ability grouping and student achievement in elementary schools: A best evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 57, 293–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spurk, D., Hirschi, A., Wang, M., Valero, D., & Kauffeld, S. (2020). Latent profile analysis: A review and “how to” guide of its application within vocational behavior research. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 120, 103445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stadler, M., Herborn, K., Mustafic, M., & Greiff, S. (2019). Computer-based collaborative problem solving in PISA 2015 and the role of personality. Journal of Intelligence, 7(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence7030015

  • Stoeffler, K., Rosen, Y., Bolsinova, M., & von Davier, A. A. (2020). Gamified performance assessment of collaborative problem-solving skills. Computers in Human Behavior, 104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.05.033

  • Summers, J. J., Beretvas, S. N., Svinicki, M. D., & Gorin, J. S. (2005). Evaluating collaborative learning and community. Journal of Experimental Education, 73(3), 165–188. https://doi.org/10.3200/jexe.73.3.165-188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun, C., Shute, V. J., Stewart, A., Yonehiro, J., Duran, N., & D’Mello, S. (2020). Towards a generalized competency model of collaborative problem solving. Computers and Education, 143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103672

  • Sun, C., Shute, V. J., Stewart, A. E. B., Beck-White, Q., Reinhardt, C. R., Zhou, G. J., Duran, N., & D’Mello, S. K. (2022). The relationship between collaborative problem solving behaviors and solution outcomes in a game-based learning environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 128, 14, Article 107120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.107120

  • Tang, P., Liu, H., & Wen, H. (2021). Factors predicting collaborative problem solving: Based on the data from PISA 2015. Frontiers in Education, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.619450

  • Teig, N., Scherer, R., & Kjærnsli, M. (2020). Identifying patterns of students’ performance on simulated inquiry tasks using PISA 2015 log-file data. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57(9), 1400–1429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Unal, E., & Cakir, H. (2021). The effect of technology-supported collaborative problem solving method on students’ achievement and engagement. Education and Information Technologies, 26(4), 4127–4150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10463-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Davier, A. A. (2017). Computational psychometrics in support of collaborative educational assessments. Journal of Educational Measurement, 54(1), 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/jedm.12129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Davier, M., Gonzalez, E., & Mislevy, R. (2009). What are plausible values and why are they useful. IERI Monograph Series, 2(1), 9–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the Development of Children, 23(3), 34–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang. (2018). Collaborative problem-solving performance and its influential factors of 15-year-old students in four provinces of China- Based on the PISA 2015 dataset. Research in Educational Development, 38(10), 60–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, N. M. (1982). Peer interaction and learning in cooperative small groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(5), 642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiner, B. (1972). Attribution theory, achievement motivation, and the educational process. Review of Educational Research, 42(2), 203–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, Z., Hu, B., Wu, H., Winsler, A., & Chen, L. (2020). Family socioeconomic status and Chinese preschoolers’ social skills: Examining underlying family processes. Journal of Family Psychology, 34(8), 969–979.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, S. H., & Li, M. J. (2019). Analysis on the student performance and influencing factors in the PISA 2015 collaborative problem-solving assessment: A case study of B-S-J-G (China). Educational Approach, 277, 9–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zheng, Y., Bao, H., Shen, J., & Zhai, X. (2020). Investigating sequence patterns of collaborative problem-solving behavior in online collaborative discussion activity. Sustainability (Basel, Switzerland), 12(20), 8522.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported and sponsored by Shanghai Pujiang Program [Grant Number 22PJC059].

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, No. 800 Dongchuan Road, Minhang District, Shanghai, 200240, China

    Yue Ma, Huilin Zhang & Li Ni

  2. Faculty of Education, Northeast Normal University, No. 5268 Renmin Street, Nanguan District, Changchun, 130024, Jilin Province, China

    Da Zhou

Authors
  1. Yue Ma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Huilin Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Li Ni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Da Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Da Zhou.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix PISA 2015 CPS sample unit: Xandar

OECD (2017), PISA 2015 Results (Volume V): Collaborative Problem Solving, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264285521-en

Appendix PISA 2015 CPS sample unit: Xandar

The detailed information of the PISA 2015 CPS sample unit, Xandar, can be found at https://www.oecd.org/pisa/test/CPS-Xandar-scoring-guide.pdf.

The unit consists of four independent parts; all parts and all items within each part are independent of one another. No matter which response a student selects for a particular item, the computer agents respond in a way so that the unit converges. All students are hence faced with an identical version of the next item.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ma, Y., Zhang, H., Ni, L. et al. Identifying collaborative problem-solver profiles based on collaborative processing time, actions and skills on a computer-based task. Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn 18, 465–488 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-023-09400-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-023-09400-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation