Two empirical studies are presented that explore how and why e-mail communication (versus face-to-face communication) influences cooperation in mixed motive group contexts. Results indicate that, relative to those engaging in face-to-face interaction, those who interacted via e-mail were (1) less cooperative and (2) felt more justified in being noncooperative. Feelings of justification mediated the relationship between communication media and the decision to cooperate or not.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Although there are some studies that elucidate personality characteristics that affect one’s decision to cooperate or not (e.g., Hertel, Neuhof, Theuer, & Kerr, 2000; Kerr & Kaufman-Gilliland, 1997; Kramer, McClintock, & Messick, 1986) the bulk of research has addressed situations under which people are more likely to focus on either the individual or the collective needs in social dilemma situations, and we follow in the line of this situationally based research.
This case can be obtained from the Dispute Resolution Research Center at Northwestern University.
Aiken, M. W., & Riggs, M. (1993). Using a group decision to support system creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 27, 28–35.
Alsop, S. (2003, April). I’ve seen the real future of tech—and it is virtual. Fortune Magazine, 147, 390.
Baltes, B. B., Dickson, M. W., Sherman, M. P., Bauer, C. C., & LaGanke, J. S. (2002). Computer-mediated communication and group decision making: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 87, 156–179.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychology research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.
Barry, B., & Fulmer, I. S. (2004). The medium and the message: The adaptive use of communication media in dyadic influence. Academy of Management Review, 29, 272–292.
Barsness, Z., & Tenbrunsel, A. (1998). Technologically mediated communication and negotiation: Do relationships matter? Paper presented at the International Association for Conflict Management, College Park, MD.
Bochet, O., Page, T., & Putterman, L. (2006). Communication and punishment in voluntary contribution experiments. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 60, 11–26.
Bouas, K. S., & Komorita, S. S. (1996). Group discussion and cooperation in social dilemmas. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 1144–1150.
Carey, J. M., & Kacmar, C. J. (1997). The impact of communication mode and task complexity on small group performance and member satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 13, 23–49.
Carnevale, P. J., & Probst, T. M. (1997). Conflict on the Internet. In S. Kiesler (Ed.), Culture of the Internet (pp. 233–255). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Chen, X., & Komorita, S. S. (1994). The effects of communication and commitment in a public goods social dilemma. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 60, 367–368.
Croson, R. T. A. (1999). Look at me when you say that: An electronic negotiation simulation. Simulation & Gaming, 30, 23–37.
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32, 554–571.
Dawes, R. M., & Messick, D. M. (2000). Social dilemmas. International Journal of Psychology, 35, 111–116.
De Cremer, D., & Leonardelli, G. J. (2003). Cooperation in social dilemmas and the need to belong: The moderating effect of group size. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 7, 168–174.
De Cremer, D., & van Dijk, E. (2002). Reactions to group success and failure as a function of identification level: A test of the goal-transformation hypothesis in social dilemmas. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 435–442.
De Cremer, D., & van Knippenberg, D. (2002). How do leaders promote cooperation? The effects of charisma and procedural fairness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 858–866.
De Cremer, D., & van Vugt, M. (1999). Social identification effects in social dilemmas: A transformation of motives. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 871–893.
Dennis, A. R., Hilmer, K. M., & Taylor, N. J. (1997). Information exchange and use in Group Decision Support Systems and verbal group decision-making: Effects of minority influence. Journal of Management Information Systems, 14, 61–88.
Dennis, A. R., & Valacich, J. S. (1993). Computer brainstorm: More heads are better than one. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 531–537.
Deutsch, M. (2001). Cooperation and conflict resolution: Implications for consulting psychology. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 53, 76–81.
Diekmann, K. A., Samuels, S. M., Ross, L., & Bazerman, M. H. (1997). Self-interest and fairness in problems of resource allocation: Allocators versus recipients. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1061–1074.
Drolet, A. L., & Morris, M. W. (2000). Rapport in conflict resolution: Accounting for how face-to-face contact fosters mutual cooperation in mixed-motive conflicts. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 26–50.
Dubrovsky, V., Kiesler, S., & Sethna, B. (1991). The equalization phenomenon: Status effects in computer-mediated and face-to-face decision groups. Human Computer Interaction, 6, 119–146.
Friedman, T. L. (2005). The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century. New York: Farra, Straus, and Giroux.
Gallupe, R. B., & McKeen, J. D. (1990). Enhancing computer-mediated communication: An experimental investigation into the use of a group decision support system for face-to-face versus remote meeting. Information and Management, 18, 1–13.
Hackman, J. R., & Wageman, R. (2005). A theory of team coaching. Academy of Management Review, 30, 269–287.
Hertel, G., Neuhof, J., Theuer, T., & Kerr, N. L. (2000). Mood effects on cooperation in small groups: Does positive mood simply lead to more cooperation? Cognition and Emotion, 14, 441–472.
Hiltz, S. R., Johnson, K., & Turoff, M. (1986). Experiments in group decision making: Communication process and outcome in face-to-face versus computerized conferences. Human Communication Research, 13, 225–252.
Hollingshead, A. B. (1996a). Information suppression and status persistence in group decision-making: The effects of communication media. Human Communication Research, 23, 193–219.
Hollingshead, A. B. (1996b). The rank-order effect in group decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 68, 181–193.
Huang, W., Wei, K., & Tan, B. C. Y. (1999). Compensating effects of GSS on group performance. Information and Management, 35, 195–202.
Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 10, 791–815.
Jensen, C., Farnham, S. D., Drucker, S. M., & Kollack, P. (2000). The effect of communication modality on cooperation in online environments. Paper presented at the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Hague, Netherlands.
Katsh, E., & Rifkin, J. (2001). Online dispute resolution: Resolving conflicts in cyberspace. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (1993). The discipline of teams. Harvard Business Review, 71, 111–120.
Kelman, H. C., & Hamilton, V. L. (1989). Crimes of obedience. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Bolger, N. (1998). Data analysis in social psychology. In D. Gilbert, S. Fiske & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 233–265). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
Kerr, N. L., Gast, J., Lewandsowski, D. A., & Harris, S. E. (1997). That still small voice: Commitment to cooperate as an internalized versus a social norm. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1300–1311.
Kerr, N. L., & Kaufman-Gilliland, C. M. (1997). “And besides, i probably couldn’t have made a difference anyway”: Justification of social dilemma defection via perceived self-inefficacy. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 211–230.
Kiesler, S., & Sproull, L. (1992). Group decision making and communication technology. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 52, 96–123.
Kirkman, B. L., Rosen, B., Gibson, C. B., Tesluck, P. E., & McPherson, S. O. (2002). Five challenges to virtual team success: Lessons from Sabre, Inc. Academy of Management Executive, 16, 67–79.
Kirkman, B. L., Rosen, B., Tesluck, P. E., & Gibson, C. B. (2004). The impact of team empowerment on virtual team performance: The moderating role of face-to-face interaction. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 175–192.
Kirkman, B. L., Rosen, B., Tesluck, P. E., & Gibson, C. B. (2006). Enhancing the transfer of computer-assisted training proficiency in geographically distributed teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 706–716.
Kock, N. (2004). The psychobiological model: Towards a new theory of computer-mediated communication based on Darwinian evolution. Organization Science, 15, 327–348.
Komorita, S. S., & Parks, C. D. (1994). Social dilemmas. Debuque, IA: Brown & Benchmark.
Kramer, R. M., McClintock, C. G., & Messick, D. M. (1986). Social values and cooperative response to a simulated resource conservation crisis. Journal of Personality, 54, 576–592.
Kraut, R. E., Brynin, M., & Kiesler, S. (2006). Computers, phones, and the internet: Domesticating information technology. NY: Oxford University Press.
Kurtzberg, T. R., Belkin, L. Y., & Naquin, C. E. (2006). The effect of e-mail on attitude towards performance feedback. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 14, 4–21.
Kurtzberg, T. R., Naquin, C. E., & Belkin, L. (2005). Electronic performance appraisals: The effects of e-mail communication on peer ratings in actual and simulated environments. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 98, 216–226.
Liebrand, W. B. G., Messick, D. M., & Wilke, H. A. M. (1992). Social dilemmas: Theoretical issues and research findings. Oxford, England: Pergamon.
Martins, L. L., Gilson, L. L., & Maynard, M. T. (2004). Virtual teams: What do we know and where do we go from here? Journal of Management, 30, 805–835.
Maruping, L. M., & Agarwal, R. (2004). Managing team interpersonal processes through technology: A task-technology fit perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 975–990.
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709–734.
Maznevski, M. L., & Chudoba, K. M. (2000). Bridging space over time: Global virtual team dynamics and effectiveness. Organization Science, 11, 473–492.
McGuire, T. W., Kiesler, S., & Siegel, J. (1987). Group and computer mediated discussion effects in risk decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 917–930.
Messick, D. M. (1999). Alternative logics for decision making social situations. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 39, 11–28.
Messick, D. M., & Brewer, M. (1983). Solving social dilemmas: A review. In L. Wheeler & P. Shaver (Eds.), Review of personality and social psychology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Moore, D. A., Kurtzberg, T. R., Thompson, L. L., & Morris, M. W. (1999). Long and short routes to success in electronically mediated negotiation: Group affiliations and good vibrations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 77, 22–43.
Morris, M. W., Nadler, J., Kurtzberg, T. R., & Thompson, L. (2002). Schmooze or lose: Social friction and lubrication in e-mail negotiations. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6, 89–100.
Naquin, C. E., & Paulson, G. D. (2003). Online bargaining and interpersonal trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 113–120.
Ocker, R. J., & Yaverbaum, G. J. (1999). Asynchronous computer-mediated communication versus face-to-face collaboration: Results on student learning, quality and satisfaction. Group Decision and Negotiation, 8, 427–440.
Olarniran, B. A. (1994). Group performance in computer mediated communication and face-to-face meetings. Behavior and Information Technology, 15, 24–36.
Paulson, G., & Naquin, C. E. (2004). Establishing trust via technology: Long distance practices and pitfalls. International Negotiation, 9, 229–244.
Pillutla, M. M., & Chen, X. (1999). Social norms and cooperation in social dilemmas: The effects of context and feedback. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 78, 81–103.
Purdy, J. M., Nye, P., & Balakrishnan, P. V. (2000). The impact of communication media on negotiation outcomes. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 11, 162–187.
Rapoport, A. (1985). Provision of public goods and the MCS experimental paradigm. American Political Science Review, 79, 148–155.
Sally, D. F. (1995). Conversation and cooperation in social dilemmas: Experimental evidence from 1958 to 1992. Rationality and Society, 7, 58–92.
Siegel, J., Dubrovsky, V., Kiesler, S., & McGuire, T. W. (1986). Group processes in computer mediated communication. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 241–262.
Smith, C. A. P., & Hayne, S. E. (1997). Decision-making under time pressure: An investigation of decision speed and decision quality of computer-supported groups. Management Communication Quarterly, 11, 97–126.
Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32, 1492–1512.
Strauss, S. G. (1996). Getting a clue: The effects of communication media and information distribution on participation and performance in computer-mediated and face-to-face groups. Small Group Research, 27, 115–142.
Tenbrunsel, A. E., & Messick, D. M. (1999). Sanctioning systems, decision frames, and cooperation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 684–707.
Thompson, L. (2001). The mind and heart of the negotiator (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Thompson, L. (2004). Making the team: A guide for managers (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Wade-Benzoni, K. A., Brett, J. M., Tenbrunsel, A. E., Okumura, T., Moore, D. A., & Bazerman, M. H. (2002). Cognition and behavior in asymmetric social dilemmas: A comparison of two cultures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 87–95.
Wade-Benzoni, K. A., Tenbrunsel, A. E., & Bazerman, M. H. (1996a). Egocentric interpretations of fairness in asymmetric, environmental social dilemmas: Explaining harvesting behavior and the role of communication. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67, 111–126.
Wade-Benzoni, K. A., Tenbrunsel, A. E., & Bazerman, M. H. (1996b). Shark harvesting and resource conservation. In A. R. Beckenstein, F. J. Long, M. B. Arnold & T. N. Gladwin (Eds.), Stakeholder negotiations: Exercises in sustainable development. Chicago: Irwin.
Wilke, H. A. M., & Braspenning, J. (1989). Reciprocity: Choice shift in a social trap. European Journal of Social Psychology, 19, 317–326.
Wilson, J. M., Straus, S. G., & McEvily, B. (2006). All in due time: The development of trust in computer-mediated and face-to-face teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 99, 16–33.
We would like to thank the Rutgers Business School Research Resource Committee and the Rutgers Business School Technology Management Research Center for grants that supported this research. We also wish to express our appreciation to Sandra Cha, Jennifer Mueller, John Jost, and three anonymous reviewers for helpful comments and suggestions on this paper.
Appendix: Payoff Calculations for SHARC Roles
Appendix: Payoff Calculations for SHARC Roles
Current Harvest levels in metric tons by role prior to meeting
|1||Large commercial harvest =||1400|
|2||Small commercial harvest =||1300|
|3||Recreational competitive harvest =||1200|
|4||Recreational tours harvest =||1100|
Payoff Calculations by role after meeting
|1||Large commercial payoff =||$10,000 × (Harvest level* + .3(Future))|
|2||Small commercial payoff =||$10,000 × (Harvest level* + .4(Future))|
|3||Recreational competitive payoff =||$10,000 × (Harvest level* + .5(Future))|
|4||Recreational tours payoff =||$10,000 × (Harvest level* + .6(Future))|
|5||Future =||Smaller of 2500 or (5000 − total harvest level)|
|6||* Harvest level =||Harvest level for that particular role|
About this article
Cite this article
Naquin, C.E., Kurtzberg, T.R. & Belkin, L.Y. E-Mail Communication and Group Cooperation in Mixed Motive Contexts. Soc Just Res 21, 470–489 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-008-0084-x
- Group work
- Social dilemmas