Designing Sociable CSCL Environments

Applying Interaction Design Principles
  • Kreijns K. 
  • Kirschner P. A. 
Part of the Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Series book series (CULS, volume 3)


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alben, L. (1996). Quality of experience: Defining the criteria for effective interaction design. Interactions, 3(3), 11–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alben, L. (1997). At the heart of interaction design. Design Management Journal, 8(3), 9–26.Google Scholar
  3. Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  4. Bannan-Ritland, B., Bragg, W., & Collins, M. (in press). Linking theory, educational constructs, and instructional strategies. In P. Robinson & B. Bannan-Ritland (Eds.), Web-based computer conferencing. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing. Retrieved September 2, 2003, from
  5. Bednar, A. K., Cunningham, D., Duffy, T. M., & Perry, J. D. (1995). Theory into practice: How do we link? In G. J. Anglin (Ed.), Instructional Technology (2nd ed.) (pp. 100–112). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.Google Scholar
  6. Biggs, J. B. (1987). Student approaches to studying and learning. Hawthorne, Victoria: Australian Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar
  7. Biocca, F., Harms, C., & Burgoon, J. (in press). Criteria and scope conditions for a theory and measure of social presence. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments.Google Scholar
  8. Bion, W. (1961). Experiences in groups. London: Tavistock Publications.Google Scholar
  9. Bly, S. A., Harrison, S. R., & Irwin, S. (1993). Media spaces: Bringing people together in a video, audio, and computing environment. Communications of the ACM, 36(3), 28–47.Google Scholar
  10. Bolullo, R. (2001). Interaction design: More than the interface. Retrieved September 2, 2003, from
  11. Bradner, E., Kellogg, W., & Erickson, T. (1999). The adoption and use of “Babble”: A field study of chat in the workplace. In S. Bødker, M. Kyng & K. Schmidt (Eds.), Proceedings of the sixth European conference on computer supported cooperative work (pp. 139–158). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  12. Brandon, D. P., & Hollingshead, A. B. (1999). Collaborative learning and computer-supported groups. Communication Education, 18(2), 109–126.Google Scholar
  13. Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Discourse analysis. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Brown, S. A., Fuller, R. M., Vician, C. (2002). Who’s afraid of the virtual world? The role of anxiety in computer-mediated communication usage and satisfaction (Tech. Rep. No. 117-2). Bloomington, ID: Indiana University, Kelley School of Business. Retrieved September 2, 2003, from Scholar
  15. Burge, E. J. (1994). Learning in computer conferenced context: The learners’ perspective. Journal of Distance Education, 9(1), 19–43.Google Scholar
  16. Chen, G. (1994) Social desirability as a predictor of argumentativeness and communication apprehension. Journal of Psychology Interdisciplinary & Applied, 128(4), 433–439.Google Scholar
  17. Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991). Grounding in communication. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 127–149). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  18. Crook, C. (1994). Computers and the collaborative experience of learning. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Crook, C. (1998). Children as computer users: The case of collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 30, 237–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cutler, R. H. (1996). Technologies, relations, and selves. In L. Strate, R. Jacobson & S. B. Gibson (Eds.), Communication and cyberspace: Social interaction in an electronic environment (pp. 317–333). Cresshill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
  21. Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1984). Information richness: A new approach to managerial behavior and organizational design. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior: Vol 6 (pp. 191–233). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  22. Derks, D., Kreijns, K, & Bos, A. (2003). The effects of using e-language on social presence and uninhibited behaviour in CSCL environments for distance education: A theoretical framework. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  23. Dillenbourg, P. (2002). Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. In P. A. Kirschner (Ed.), Three worlds of CSCL: Can we support CSCL (pp. 61–91). Heerlen: Open University of the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  24. Dix, A. J., Finlay, J. E., Abowd, G. D., & Beale, R. (1998). Human-computer interaction (2nd ed.). London: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  25. Duffy, T. M., Dueber, B., & Hawley, C. L. (1998). Critical thinking in a distributed environment: A pedagogical base for the design of conferencing systems. In C. J. Bonk & K.S. King (Eds.), Electronic collaborators: Learner-centered technologies for literacy, apprenticeship, and discourse (pp. 51–78). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  26. Dykstra-Erickson, E., Mackay, W., & Arnowitz, J. (2001). Perspectives: Trialogue on design (of). Interactions, 8(2), 109–117.Google Scholar
  27. Ellis, C. A., Gibbs, S. J., & Rein, G. L. (1991). Groupware: Some issues and experiences. Communications of the ACM, 34(1), 38–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Festinger, L., Schachter, S. S., & Back, K. W. (1950). Social pressures in informal groups: A study of human factors in housing. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Flach, J. M., & Holden, J. G. (1998). The reality of experience: Gibson’s way. Presence: Teleoperators and virtual environments, 7, 90–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Forlizzi, J., & Ford, S. (2000). The building blocks of experience: An early framework for interaction designers. In D. Boyarski & W. A. Kellogg (Eds.), Conference proceedings on designing interactive systems: Processes, practice, methods, and techniques (pp. 419–423). New York, NY: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  31. Forsyth, D. R. (1999). Group dynamics (3rd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks & Cole.Google Scholar
  32. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical thinking in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 11(2), 1–14.Google Scholar
  33. Gaver, W. W. (1996). Situating action II: Affordances for interaction: The social is material for design. Ecological Psychology, 8(2), 111–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gay, G., & Lentini, M. (1995). Use of collaborative resources in a networked collaborative design environment. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 1(1). Retrieved September 2, 2003, from
  35. Gibson, J. J. (1986). The ecological approach to visual perception. Hillsdale, NJ: LawrenceErlbaum. (Original work published 1979).Google Scholar
  36. Gunawardena, C. N. (1995). Social presence theory and implications for interaction and collaborative learning in computer conferences. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 1(2&3), 147–166.Google Scholar
  37. Hallet, K., & Cummings, J. (1997). The virtual classroom as authentic experience: Collaborative, problem-based learning in a WWW environment. Proceedings of the annual conference on Distance teaching and learning: Competition-connection-collaboration (pp. 103–107). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison.Google Scholar
  38. Harasim, L. (1991). Teaching by computer conferencing. In A. J. Miller (Ed.), Applications of computer conferencing to teacher education and human resource development (pp. 23–33). Proceedings from an international symposium on computer conferencing at the Ohio State University. Columbus, OH. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 337705)Google Scholar
  39. Harasim, L. (1993). Global networks: Computers and international communication. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  40. Hewett, T. T., Baecker, R., Card, S., Carey, T., Gasen, J., Mantei, M., et al. (1996). ACM SIGCHI curricula for human-computer interaction. Retrieved September 2, 2003, from
  41. 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.Google Scholar
  42. Hobaugh, C. F. (1997). Interactive strategies for collaborative learning. Proceedings of the annual conference on distance teaching and learning: Competition-connection-collaboration (pp. 121–125). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison.Google Scholar
  43. Hooper, S., & Hannafin, M. J. (1991). The effects of group composition on achievement, interaction, and learning efficiency during computer-based cooperative instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(3), 27–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Isaacs, E. A., Tang, J. C., & Morris, T. (1996). Piazza: A desktop environment supporting impromptu and planned interactions. In M. S. Ackerman (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1996 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work (pp. 315–324). New York, NY: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  45. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1992). Positive interdependence: Key to effective cooperation. In R. Herz-Lazarowitz & N. Miller (Eds.), Interaction in cooperative groups: The theoretical anatomy of group learning (pp. 174–199). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1994). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning (4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  47. Jonassen, D. H. (1994). Toward a constructivist design model. Educational Technology, 34(4), 34–37.Google Scholar
  48. Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Computers in the classroom: Mindtools for critical thinking. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  49. Kearsley, G. (1995). The nature and value of interaction in distance learning. (ACSDE Research Monograph No. 12, pp. 83–92). University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University, American Center for the Study of Distance Education.Google Scholar
  50. Keegan, D. (1988). Problems in defining the field of distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 2(2), 4–11.Google Scholar
  51. Keen, K. (1992). Competence: What is it and how can it be developed? In J. Lowyck, P. De Potter & J. Elen (Eds.), Instructional design: Implementation issues (pp. 111–122). Brussels, Belgium: IBM EducationCenter.Google Scholar
  52. Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., & McGuire, T. W. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39, 1123–1134.Google Scholar
  53. Kirschner, P. (2002). Can we support CSCL? Educational, social and technological affordances for learning. In P. Kirschner (Ed.), Three worlds of CSCL: Can we support CSCL (pp. 7–47). Heerlen, The Netherlands: Open University of the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  54. Kraut, R. E., Egido, C., & Galegher, J. (1990). Patterns of contact and communication in scientific research collaboration. In J. Galegher & R. E. Kraut (Eds.). Intellectual teamwork: Social and technological foundations of group work (pp. 149–172). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  55. Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., & Jochems, W. (2002). The sociability of computer-supported collaborative learning environments. Journal of Education Technology & Society, 5(1), 8–22. Retrieved September 2, 2003, from Scholar
  56. Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., & Jochems, W. (2003). Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: A review of the research. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(3), 335–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., Jochems, W., & Van Buuren, H. (2003). Measuring perceived sociability of computer-supported collaborative learning environments. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  58. Krippendorff, K. (1989). On the essentialcontexts of artifacts or on the proposition that ‘design’ is making sense (of things). Design Issues, 5(2), 9–39.Google Scholar
  59. Lombart, M., & Ditton, T. (1997). At the heart of it all: The concept of presence. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(2). Retrieved September 2, 2003, from
  60. Löwgren, J. (2001). From HCI to interaction design. In Q. Chen (Ed.), Human computer interaction: Issues and challenges (pp. 29–43). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.Google Scholar
  61. Löwgren, J. (2002). Just how far beyond HCI is interaction design. Retrieved September 2, 2003, from
  62. Morrison, D., & Collins, A. (1996). Epistemic fluency and constructivist learning environments. In B. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments (pp. 107–119). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Press.Google Scholar
  63. Newman, D. R., Johnson, C., Webb, B., & Cochrane, C. (1997). Evaluating the quality in computer-supported co-operative learning. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48(6), 484–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Nielsen, J. (1994a). Usability engineering. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann PublishersGoogle Scholar
  65. Nielsen, J. (1994b). Heuristic evaluation. In J. Nielsen & R. L. Mack (Eds.), Usability inspection methods (p. 25–62). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  66. Nielsen, J. (1999). Designing web usability: The practice of simplicity. Indianapolis, IN: New Riders.Google Scholar
  67. Nielsen, J. (2001). Heuristics for user interface design. Retrieved September 2, 2003, from
  68. Norman, D. (1990). The design of everyday things. New York, NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  69. Norman, D. (2002). Emotion & design: Attractive things work better. Interactions, 9(4), 36–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Ohlsson, S. (1996). Learning to do and learning to understand: A lesson and a challenge for cognitive modeling. In P. Reimann & H. Spada (Eds.), Learning in humans and machines (pp. 37–62). Oxford, England: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  71. Palincsar, A. S. (1998). Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 345–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Paolucci, M., Suthers, D., & Weiner, A. (1995). Belvedere: Stimulating students’ critical discussion. In I. Katz, R. Mack & L. Marks (Eds.), Proceedings of the conference companion on human factors in computing systems (pp. 123–124). New York, NY: ACM PressGoogle Scholar
  73. Pederson, E. R., & Sokoler, T. (1997). AROMA: Abstract representation of presence supporting mutual awareness. In S. Pemberton (Ed.), Proceedings of the SlGCHl conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 51–58). New York, NY: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  74. Preece, J., Rogers, Y., & Sharp, H. (2002). Interaction design: Beyond human-computer interaction. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  75. Preece, J., Rogers, Y., Sharp, H., Benyon, D., Holland, S., & Carey, T. (1994). Human-computer interaction. Wokingham, UK: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  76. Reimann, R. (2001). So you want to be an interaction designer. Newsletter. 2001(6). Retrieved September 2, 2003, from
  77. Rice, R. E. (1993). Media appropriateness: Using social presence theory to compare traditional and new media. Human Communication Research, 19, 451–484.Google Scholar
  78. Rourke, L. (2000). Operationalizing social interaction in computer conferencing. Proceedings of the I6th annual conference of the Canadian Association for Distance Education. Quebec City, Canada. Retrieved February 28, 2003 from
  79. Rourke, L., & Anderson, T. (2002) Exploring social communication in asynchronous, text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 13(3), 259–275.Google Scholar
  80. Rovai, A. P. (2001). Classroom community at a distance: A comparative analysis of two ALN-based university programs. Internet and Higher Education, 4, 105–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1996). Adaptation and understanding: A case for new cultures of schooling. In S. Vosniadou, E. de Corte, R. Glaser & H. Mandl (Eds.), International perspectives on the design of technology-supported learning environments (pp. 149–163). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  82. Schuemie, M. J., Van der Straaten P., Krijn, M., & Van der Mast, C. A. P. G. (2001). Research on presence in VR: A survey. Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 4(2), 183–202.Google Scholar
  83. Shedroff, N. (2001). Experience design. Indianapolis, IN: New readers.Google Scholar
  84. Sheridan, T. B. (1992). Musing on telepresence and virtual presence. Presence, 1, 120–126.Google Scholar
  85. Shneiderman, B. (1998). Designing the user interface: Strategies for effective human-computer interaction (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  86. Short, E. C. (Ed.). (1984). Competences: Inquiries into its meaning and acquisition in educational settings. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.Google Scholar
  87. Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. London: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  88. Slavin, R. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  89. Soller, A. L. (1999). Supporting social interaction in an intelligent collaborative learning system. Unpublished master thesis.Google Scholar
  90. Soller, A. L, Lesgold, A., Linton, F., & Goodman, B. (1999). What makes peer interaction effective? Modeling effective communication in an intelligent CSCL, In S. E. Brennan, A. Giboin & D. Traum (Eds), Psychological models of communication in collaborative systems: Papers from the AIII Fall Symposium (Technical Report FS-99-03, pp. 116–123). Menlo Park, CA: The AAAI Press.Google Scholar
  91. Sproull, L., & Faraj, S. (1997). Atheism, sex, and databases: The net as a social technology. In S. Kiesler (Ed.), Culture of the internet (pp. 35–52). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  92. Steiner, I. D. (1972). Group process and productivity. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  93. Storck, J., & Sproull, L. (1995). Through a glass darkly: What do people learn in video conferences? Human Communication Research, 22(2), 197–219.Google Scholar
  94. Suchman, L. A. (1987). Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-machine communication. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  95. Suchman, L. A. (1997). From interactions to integrations: A reflection on the future of HCI. Keynote address at the sixth IFIP international conference on human-computer interaction (Interact 97). Retrieved September 2, 2003, from
  96. Suthers, D, & Weiner, A. (1995). Groupware for developing critical discussion. In J. Schnase & E. Cunnius (Eds.), Computer supported cooperative learning (pp. 341–348). Bloomington, IN: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  97. Tammelin, M. (1998). From telepresence to social presence: The role of presence in a network-based learning environment. In S. Tella (Eds.), Aspects of media education: Vol. 8. Strategic imperatives in the information age (pp. 219–231). Helsinki: University of Helsinki, Media Education Centre.Google Scholar
  98. Thackara, J. (2001, June) Why is interaction design so important? In the Bubble. Retrieved September 2, 2003, from
  99. Tu, C. H. (2000). On-line learning migration: From social learning theory to social presence theory in a CMC environment. Journal of Network and Computer Application, 23(1), 27–37.Google Scholar
  100. Tu, C. H., & McIsaac, M. (2002). An examination of social presence to increase interaction in online classes. American Journal of Distance Education, 16(3), 131–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Von Glaserfeld, E. (1995). A constructivist approach to teaching. In L. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in education (pp. 3–15). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  102. Walther, J. B. (1992). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A relational perspective. Communication Research, 19(1), 52–90.Google Scholar
  103. Walther, J. B. (1993). Impression development in computer-mediated interaction. Western-Journal of Communication, 57, 381–398.Google Scholar
  104. Wegerif, R. (1998). The social dimension of asynchronous learning networks. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 2(1), 34–49. Retrieved September 2, 2003, from Scholar
  105. Wellman, B. (1999). The social affordances of e-mail. SIGGROUP Bulletin, 20(2), 63.Google Scholar
  106. Whittaker, S., Frohlich, D., & Daly-Jones, O. (1994). Informal workplace communication: What is it like and how might we support it? In B. Adelson, S. Dumais & J. Ohlson (Eds.), Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: Celebrating interdependence (pp. 131–137). New York, NY: ACM Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kreijns K. 
  • Kirschner P. A. 

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations