Interaction process in computer-mediated and face-to-face groups

  • Linda Lebie
  • Jonathan A. Rhoades
  • Joseph E. Mcgrath


This paper presents a comparative description of interactions in computer-mediated (CMC) and face-to-face (FTF) groups. For each of six weeks 16 CMC and 14 FTF groups of students collaborated on group essay assignments. We coded all verbal messages during these essay tasks. We explored four questions: 1.) Do CMC and FTF groups differ in the frequency of interaction acts, overall and within interaction categories?; 2.) If so, which interaction categories are used more by CMC and which by FTF groups?; 3.) Do these patterns of interaction activity vary over time?; 4.) Are there systematic differences in interaction patterns over time between media? Results showed that there were substantial differences between CMC and FTF groups in both the amount and type of interaction for each of four main categories of interaction. There were substantial over-time effects, collapsed across media, for several of the categories of behavior, but there were no significant differences in the way CMC and FTF groups changed over time. Although there was extensive variation among groups within a given medium, we did find some consistent patterns of behavior for groups within each medium, some of them distinctive for the medium. Although we offer evidence for differences in interaction processes of FTF and CMC groups, we note that the conclusions one makes depends upon one's perspective about the purpose of groups.

Key words

Computer-mediated communication computer-supported collaborative work group interaction patterns interaction processes group process data longitudinal study 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Daft, Richard L. and Lengel, Robert H. (1984): Information Richness: A New Approach to Managerial Behavior and Organizational Design.Research in Organizational Behavior, vol. 6, pp. 191–233.Google Scholar
  2. Dennis, Alan R. and Valacich, Joseph S. (1993): Computer Brainstorms: More Heads are Better Than One.Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 78, no. 4, pp. 531–537.Google Scholar
  3. Diehl, Michael and Stroebe, Wolfgang (1991): Productivity Loss in Brainstorming Groups: Tracking Down the Blocking Effect.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 61, pp. 392–403.Google Scholar
  4. Feiberg, Stephen E. (1977):The Analysis of Cross-Classified Data. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  5. Finholt, Tom and Sproull, Lee (1990): Electronic Groups at Work.Organizational Science, vol. 1, pp. 41–64.Google Scholar
  6. Fulk, Janet, Schmidt, J. and Steinfield, Charles W. (1990): A Social Influence Model of Technology Use. InOrganizations and communication technology, eds. Janet Fulk and Charles W. Steinfield. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications, pp. 117–140.Google Scholar
  7. Kiesler, Sara, Siegel, Jane and McGuire, Timothy W. (1984): Social Psychological Aspects of Computer-Mediated Communication.American Psychologist, vol. 39, pp. 1123–1134.Google Scholar
  8. Kiesler, Sara, Zubrow, David, Moses, Anne Marie and Geller, Valerie (1985): Affect in Computer-Mediated Communication: An Experiment in Synchronous Terminal-to-Terminal Discussion.Human-Computer Interaction, vol. 1, pp. 77–104.Google Scholar
  9. McGrath, Joseph E. (1990): Time Matters in Groups. InIntellectual Teamwork: Social and Technical Foundations of Cooperative Work, eds. Jolene Galegher, Robert E. Kraut, and Carmen Egido, Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 23–61.Google Scholar
  10. McGrath, Joseph E. (1991): Time, Interaction, and Performance (TIP): A Theory of Groups.Small Group Research, vol. 22, pp. 147–174.Google Scholar
  11. McGrath, Joseph E. (1993): Introduction: The JEMCO Workshop — Description of a Longitudinal Study.Small Group Research, vol. 24, pp. 285–306.Google Scholar
  12. McGrath, Joseph E. and Arrow, Holly (1996): Introduction: The JEMCO-2 Study of Time, Technology, and Groups.Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 4, pp. 107–126.Google Scholar
  13. McGrath, Joseph E. and Hollingshead, Andrea B. (1994).Groups Interacting with Technology. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  14. Poole, Marshall S. (1983): Decision Development in Small Groups III: A Multiple Sequence Model of Group Decision Development.Communication Monographs, vol. 50, pp 321–341.Google Scholar
  15. Poole, Marshall S. and DeSanctis, Gerardine (1992): Microlevel Structuration in Computer Supported Group Decision Making.Human Communications Research, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 5–49.Google Scholar
  16. Siegel, Jane, Dubrovsky, Vitaly, Kiesler, Sara and McGuire, Timothy W. (1986): Group Processes in Computer-Mediated Communication.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, vol. 37, pp. 157–198.Google Scholar
  17. Sproull, Lee and Kiesler, Sara (1986): Reducing Social Contact Cues: Electronic Mail in Organizational Communication.Management Science, vol. 32, pp. 1492–1512.Google Scholar
  18. Steiner, Ivan D. (1972):Group Process and Productivity. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  19. Straus, Susan G. and McGrath, Joseph E. (1994): Does the Medium matter? The Interaction of Task Type and Technology on Group Performance and Member Reactions.Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 79, pp. 87–97.Google Scholar
  20. Valacich, Joseph S., Mennecke, B. E., Wachter, R. and Wheeler, B. C. (1993): Computer-Mediated Idea Generation: The Effects of Group Size and Group Heterogeneity.1993 Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, vol. 4, pp. 152–160.Google Scholar
  21. Valacich, Joseph S., Dennis, Allan R. and Connelly, Terry (1994): Idea Generation in Computer-Based Groups: A New Ending to an Old Story.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, vol. 57, pp. 448–467.Google Scholar
  22. Walther, Joseph B. (1992): Interpersonal Effects in Computer — Mediated Interaction: A Relational Perspective.Communication Research, vol. 19, no. 1, February, pp. 52–90.Google Scholar
  23. Walther, Joseph B. and Burgoon, Judee K. (1992): Relational Communication in Computer-Mediated Interaction.Human Communication Research, vol. 19, no. 1, September, pp. 50–88.Google Scholar
  24. Williams, Ederyn (1977): Experimental Comparisons of Face-to-Face and Mediated Communications: A Review.Psychological Bulletin, vol. 84, pp. 963–976.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Linda Lebie
    • 1
  • Jonathan A. Rhoades
    • 1
  • Joseph E. Mcgrath
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignChampaignUSA

Personalised recommendations