Dealing with conflict in learning teams immersed in technology-rich environments: A mixed-methods study


Understanding the nature of conflict and the role that it plays in the dynamics of teamwork has the potential to improve group processes and make teams more successful. This research study investigates how learning teams deal with conflict in technology-rich environments using a mixed-method research approach. In regard to the study’s quantitative component, a correlational study was conducted. The participants were 28 graduate students enrolled in a team-based, graduate-level course at a large university in the Midwestern United States. The findings showed that perceptions of conflict evolve over time, moving from less favorable views to more constructive ones. Perceptions of successful teamwork progressed from focusing on the tasks at hand to investing on fulfilled working relationships. Teams used different modes of conflict management throughout the study. Generally, they evolved from less cooperative to more integrative forms of conflict management which supported collaborative learning. Students who were less proficient in the use of technology generally perceived conflict as having negative effects on the project’s outcomes. More proficient users, on the contrary, tended to perceive conflict as having a positive influence on their teamwork.

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

Access options

Buy single article

Instant unlimited access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Price includes VAT for USA

Subscribe to journal

Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.

US$ 99

This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2


  1. Andriessen, J. (2003). Working with groupware: Understanding and evaluating collaboration technology. New York: Springer.

  2. Bales, R. (1958). Task roles and social roles in problem-solving groups. In E. Maccoby, T. Newcomb, & E. Hartley (Eds.), Readings in social psychology (pp. 437–446). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

  3. Blasco-Arcas, L., Buil, I., Hernández-Ortega, B., & Sese, F. J. (2013). Using clickers in class. The role of interactivity, active collaborative learning and engagement in learning performance. Computers & Education, 62, 102–110.

  4. Chen, J., Wang, M., Kirschner, P. A., & Tsai, C.-C. (2018). The role of collaboration, computer use, learning environments, and supporting strategies in CSCL: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 88(6), 799–843.

  5. Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E. (1997). What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23(3), 239–290.

  6. Correia, A.-P. (2008). Team conflict in ICT-rich environments: Roles of technologies in conflict management. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(1), 18–35.

  7. Correia, A.-P., Karpova, E. & Baran, E. (2008). Trust building in virtual learning teams. In M. Simonson (Ed.), 31st Annual Proceedings of AECT Selected Papers on the Practice of Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 246–249). Bloomington, IN: Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT).

  8. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

  9. Deutsch, M. (1973). The resolution of conflict: Constructive and destructive processes. London: Yale University.

  10. Duque Reis, R. C., Isotani, S., Lopes Rodriguez, C., Takayama Lyra, K., Augustin Jaques, P., & Ibert Bittencourt, I. (2018). Affective states in computer-supported collaborative learning: Studying the past to drive the future. Computers & Education, 120, 29–50.

  11. Egger, E. (1996). Computer supported cooperative work: The bargaining aspect. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.

  12. Finegold, A., & Cooke, L. (2006). Exploring the attitudes and dynamics of interaction in online groups. The Internet and Higher Education, 9(3), 201–215.

  13. Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group dynamics (6th ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

  14. Hobman, E., Bordia, P., Irmer, B., & Chang, A. (2002). The expression of conflict in computer-mediated and face-to-face groups. Small Group Research, 33(4), 439–465.

  15. Hogarth, A. (2008). Introducing a collaborative technology strategy for higher education students: Recommendations and the way forward. Education and Information Technologies, 13(3), 259–273.

  16. Jehn, K. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(2), 256–282.

  17. Jehn, K. (1997). Affective and cognitive conflict in work groups: Increasing performance through value-based intragroup conflict. In C. De Dreu & E. Van De Vliert (Eds.), Using conflict in organizations (pp. 87–100). Thousands Oaks: Sage.

  18. Jeong, H., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2016). Seven affordances of computer-supported collaborative learning: How to support collaborative learning? How can technologies help? Educational Psychologist, 51(2), 247–265.

  19. Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (2003). Joining together: Group theory and group skills (8th ed.). Needham Heights: Allyn & Bacon.

  20. Johnson, D., Johnson, R., & Stanne, M. (2000). Cooperative learning methods: A meta-analysis. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.

  21. Levi, D. (2001). Group dynamics for teams. Thousands Oaks: Sage.

  22. Massey, A., & Montoya-Weiss, M. (2003). Perceptions of task-technology fit in global virtual teams. Working paper. Bloomington: Indiana University.

  23. McGrath, J., Arrow, H., & Berdahl, J. (2000). The study of groups: Past, present, and future. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4(1), 95–105.

  24. McMillan, J., & Schumacher, S. (2001). Research in education: A conceptual introduction (5th ed.). New York: Longman.

  25. Meyers, S. A. (2003). Strategies to prevent and reduce conflict in college classrooms. College Teaching, 51(3), 94–98.

  26. Murningham, J., & Conlon, D. (1991). The dynamics of intense work groups: A study of British string quartets. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(2), 165–186.

  27. Murray, M., & Lonne, B. (2006). An innovative use of the web to build graduate team skills. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(1), 63–77.

  28. Poole, M., Holmes, M., & Desanctis, G. (1991). Conflict Management in a Computer-Supported Meeting Environment. Management Science, 37(8), 926–953.

  29. Prapinpongsakom, S., Suwannatthachot, P., & Vicheanpanya, J. (2017). Building a learning community among faculty, librarians and students using computer-supported collaborative learning: An activity theory approach. 2017 IEEE 9th International Conference on Engineering Education (ICEED), Kanazawa, Japan, 9–10 Nov. 2017.

  30. Riopelle, K., Gluesing, J., Alcordo, T., Baba, M., Britt, D., McKether, W., Monplaisir, L., Ratner, H., & Wagner, K. (2003). Context, task and the evolution of technology use in global virtual teams. In C. B. Gibson & S. G. Cohen (Eds.), Virtual teams that work: Creating conditions for virtual team effectiveness (pp. 239–264). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

  31. Shapiro, E. J., & Dempsey, C. J. (2008). Conflict resolution in team teaching: A case study in interdisciplinary teaching. College Teaching, 56(3), 157–162.

  32. Siemon, D., Becker, F., Eckardt, L., & Robra-Bissantz, S. (2019). One for all and all for one - towards a framework for collaboration support systems. Education and Information Technologies, 24(2), 1837–1861.

  33. Smith, K., & Berg, D. (1987). Paradoxes of group life: Understanding conflict, paralysis, and movement in group dynamics. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

  34. Thomas, K. (1992). Conflict and negotiation processes in organizations. In M. Dunnette & L. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 651–717). Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press.

  35. Uline, C. L., Tschannen-Moran, M., & Perez, L. (2003). Constructive conflict: How controversy can contribute to school improvement. Teachers College Record, 105(5), 782–816.

  36. Longaretti, L., & Wilson, J. (2006). The impact of perceptions on conflict management. Educational Research Quarterly, 29(4), 3–15.

  37. Worchel, S., Coutant-Sassic, D., & Wong, F. (1993). Toward a more balanced view of conflict: There is a positive side. In S. Worchel & J. Simpson (Eds.), Conflict between people & groups: Causes, processes and resolutions (pp. 76–89). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.

  38. Yin, R. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Thousands Oaks: Sage.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Ana-Paula Correia.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Correia, A. Dealing with conflict in learning teams immersed in technology-rich environments: A mixed-methods study. Educ Inf Technol (2019) doi:10.1007/s10639-019-10038-w

Download citation


  • Conflict resolution
  • Collaborative learning
  • Teamwork: mixed-methods