Social Psychology of Education

, Volume 14, Issue 2, pp 283–298

Collaboration and psychological ownership: how does the tension between the two influence perceived learning?

Article

Abstract

Collaborative writing may evoke conflict between individuals’ feeling of contribution and their sense of ownership toward the collective outcomes. The present study tested the relations between perceived psychological ownership, perceived quality of the product, and perceived learning in five experimental conditions: two collaborative, two sharing, and a control. Analysis of the changes made between versions revealed differences in quantity and in types of changes between collaboration, sharing, and control conditions. Results showed that collaboration may improve the perceived quality of the written product more than sharing or control. In addition, less intrusive collaboration seems to enhance the sense of perceived learning. The relation between perceived ownership and perceived learning was mediated by perceived quality of the written product. We conclude that students may avoid collaboration partly because they do not want to lose a sense of personal ownership or to lessen peer ownership.

Keywords

Ownership Collaboration Perceived learning 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allen N., Atkinson D., Morgan M., Moore T., Snow C. (1987) What experienced collaborators say about collaborative writing. Journal of Business and Technical Communication 1: 70–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Astin A. W. (1993) What matters in college: Four critical years revisited. Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, CAGoogle Scholar
  3. Avey J. B., Avolio B. J., Crossley C. D., Luthans F. (2009) Psychological ownership: Theoretical extensions, measurement, and relation to work outcomes. Journal of Organizational Behavior 30: 173–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bafoutsou G., Mentzas G. (2002) Review and functional classification of collaborative systems. International Journal of Information Management 22: 281–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Biggs J. (1999) Teaching for quality learning at university. Open University Press, Buckingham, UKGoogle Scholar
  6. Blum, K. D. (1999). Gender differences in asynchronous learning in higher education: Learning styles, participation barriers and communication patterns. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 3(1).Google Scholar
  7. Caspi A., Blau I. (2008) Social presence in online discussion groups: Testing three conceptions and their relations to perceived learning. Social Psychology of Education 11: 323–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carr T., Cox L., Eden N., Hanslo M. (2004) From peripheral to full participation in a blended trade bargaining simulation. British Journal of Educational Technology 35: 197–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Conner N. (2008) Google apps: The missing manual. O’Reilly Media, SebastopolGoogle Scholar
  10. Coyle, J. E. Jr. (2007). Wikis in the college classroom: A comparative study of online and face-to-face group collaboration at a private liberal arts university. PhD Dissertation, Kent State University College and Graduate School of Education, Health, and Human Services. Retrieved August 5, 2009 from http://www.ohiolink.edu/etd/send-pdf.cgi/Coyle,%20James%20E.,%20Jr..pdf?acc_num=kent1175518380.
  11. Da Lio, E., Fraboni, L., & Leo, T. (2005). TWiki-based facilitation in a newly formed academic community of practice. In Proceedings of the 2005 international symposium on wikis (pp. 85–111). San Diego, CA: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  12. Dalke A., Cassidy K., Grobstein P., Blank D. (2007) Emergent pedagogy: Learning to enjoy the uncontrollable and make it productive. Journal of Educational Change 8: 111–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dillenbourg P. (1999) What do you mean by collaborative learning?. In: Dillenbourg P. (eds) Collaborative-learning: Cognitive and computational approaches. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 1–19Google Scholar
  14. Dillenbourg P., Baker M., Blaye A., O’Malley C. (1996) The evolution of research on collaborative learning. In: Spada E., Reiman P. (eds) Learning in humans and machine: Towards an interdisciplinary learning science. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 189–211Google Scholar
  15. Dillon A. (1993) How collaborative is collaborative writing? An analysis of the production of two technical reports. In: Sharples M. (eds) Computer supported collaborative writing. Springer, London, pp 69–86Google Scholar
  16. Dumont R. G., Troelstrup R. L. (1980) Exploring relationships between objective and subjective measures of instructional outcomes. Research in Higher Education 12: 37–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ede L., Lunsford A. A. (2001) Collaboration and concepts of authorship. PMLA 116: 354–369Google Scholar
  18. Etzioni A. (1991) The socio-economics of property. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality 6: 465–468Google Scholar
  19. Fubry L. (1978) Possession in humans: An exploratory study of its meaning and motivation. Social Behavior and Personality 6: 49–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gilligan C. (1982) In a different voice. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MassGoogle Scholar
  21. Gonyea R. M. (2005) Self-reported data in institutional research: Review and recommendations. New Directions for Institutional Research 127: 73–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gross P. A. (1997) Joint curriculum design: Facilitating learner ownership and active participation in secondary classrooms. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  23. Heyman J. E., Orhun Y., Ariely D. (2004) Auction fever: The effect of opponents and quasi-endowment on product valuations. Journal of Interactive Marketing 18: 7–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hollis A. (2001) Co-authorship and the output of academic economists. Labour Economics 8: 503–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ioannou, A., & Artino, A. (2008). Incorporating Wikis in an educational technology course: Ideas, reflections and lessons learned. In K. McFerrin, et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of society for information technology and teacher education international conference 2008 (pp. 3353–3358). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.Google Scholar
  26. Jacobsen, D. M., & Mueller, J. H. (1998). Creating a collaborative electronic community of education scholars. ERIC Document # ED426732.Google Scholar
  27. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1998). Cooperative learning returns to College: What evidence is there that it works? Change, July/August 27–35.Google Scholar
  28. Johnson D. W., Johnson R. T., Stanne M. B. (2000) Cooperative learning methods: A meta-analysis. University of Minnesota Cooperative Learning Center, MinneapolisGoogle Scholar
  29. Jonassen D. (1999) Designing constructivist learning environments. In: Reigeluth C. M. (eds) Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp 215–239Google Scholar
  30. Jones A., Issroff K. (2005) Learning technologies: Affective and social issues in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers & Education 44: 395–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Jones J. (2008) Patterns of revision in online writing: A study of Wikipedia’s featured articles. Written Communication 25: 262–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kirschner P., Strijbos J.-W., Kreijns K., Beers P. J. (2004) Designing electronic collaborative learning environments. Educational Technology Research & Development 52: 47–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lee S., Bozeman B. (2005) The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Social Studies of Science 35: 673–702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lund, A., & Smørdal, O. (2006). Is there a space for the teacher in a Wiki?. In Proceedings of the 2006 international symposium on Wikis –WikiSym’06 (pp. 37–46). Odense, Denmark: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  35. McCracken G. (1986) Culture and consumption: A theoretical account of the structure and movement of the cultural meaning of consumer goods. Journal of Consumer Research 13: 71–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Meishar-Tal H., Gorsky P. (2010) Wikis: What students do and don’t do when writing collaboratively. Open Learning: The Journal of Open and Distance Learning 25(1): 25–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Myers D. G. (2007) The powers and perils of intuition. Scientific American Mind 18: 24–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pierce J. L., Kostova T., Dirks K. T. (2001) Toward a theory of psychological ownership in organizations. Academy of Management Review 26: 298–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pierce J. L., Kostova T., Dirks K. T. (2003) The state of psychological ownership: Integrating and extending a century of research. Review of General Psychology 7: 84–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Prinsen F. R., Volman M. L. L., Terwel J. (2007) Gender-related differences in computer-mediated communication and computer-supported collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 23(5): 393–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Raban D. R., Rafaeli S. (2007) Investigating ownership and the willingness to share information online. Computers in Human Behavior 23: 2367–2382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ravid G., Kalman Y. M., Rafaeli S. (2008) Wikibooks in higher education: Empowerment through online distributed collaboration. Computers in Human Behavior 24: 1913–1928CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ruberg L., Taylor D., Moore D. (1996) Student participation and interaction on-line: A case study of two college classes—freshman writing and a plant science lab. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications 2: 69–92Google Scholar
  44. Saunders W. M. (1989) Collaborative writing tasks and peer interaction. International Journal of Educational Research 13: 101–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Szulanski G. (1996) Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal 17: 27–43Google Scholar
  46. Tynjälä P. (2001) Writing, learning and the development of expertise in higher education. In: Tynjälä P., Mason L., Lonka K. (eds) Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice. Kluwer Academic Publisher, Amsterdam, pp 37–56Google Scholar
  47. Van Dyne L., Pierce J. L. (2004) Psychological ownership and feelings of possession: Three field studies predicting employee attitudes and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Organizational Behavior 25: 439–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Webster J., Brown G., Zweig D., Connelly C. E., Brodt S., Sitkin S. (2008) Beyond knowledge sharing: Withholding knowledge at work. In: Martocchio J. J. (eds) Research in personnel and human resources management. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, West Yorkshire, pp 1–37Google Scholar
  49. Wheeler S., Yeomans P., Wheeler D. (2008) The good, the bad and the wiki: Evaluating student-generated content for collaborative learning. British Journal of Educational Technology 39: 987–995CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Psychology and EducationOpen University of IsraelRa’ananaIsrael

Personalised recommendations