Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Studying Invisibly: Media Naturalness and Learning

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Evolutionary Psychology and Information Systems Research

Part of the book series: Integrated Series in Information Systems ((ISIS,volume 24))

Abstract

This study examines differences between two learning environments : audio-written conferencing and traditional face-to-face instruction . We investigated whether medium richness [media richness theory ; Daft and Lengel (Research in organizational behavior. JAI, Greenwich, 1984)], medium naturalness [media naturalness theory ; Kock (IEEE Trans Prof Commun 48(2):117–130, 2005)], and invisibility influence students’ achievement, satisfaction , and behavior. In two research settings, a field study and a laboratory experiment, students were taught face-to-face and/or via an audio-written conferencing system; subject matter and teacher were constant. We found similar achievement in the two environments. Significant differences, in favor of face-to-face communication, were found regarding learner satisfaction. In addition, invisibility increased certain kinds of students’ behavior: participation, risk taking, immediacy feeling, and flaming. These findings were explained in terms of differences in media naturalness and as an effect of invisibility.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    We used a t-test that assumed heteroscedasticity. Note that the unit of analysis is the lesson observation, not the student.

References

  • Arbaugh JB, Godfrey MR, Johnson M, Pollack BL, Niendorf B, Wresch W (2009) Research in online and blended learning in the business disciplines: key findings and possible future directions. Int High Educ 12(2):71–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barak A (2007) Phantom emotions: psychological determinants of emotional experiences on the Internet. In: Joinson A, McKenna KYA, Postmes T, Reips UD (eds) Oxford handbook of Internet psychology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 303–329

    Google Scholar 

  • Bates AW (2005) Technology, e-learning and distance education, 2nd edn. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernard RM, Abrami PC, Lou Y, Borokhovski E, Wade A, Wozney L, Wallet PA, Fiset M, Huang B (2004) How does distance education compare with classroom instruction? A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Rev Educ Res 74(3):379–439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blais JJ, Craig WM, Pepler D, Connolly J (2008) Adolescents online: the importance of internet activity choices to salient relationships. J Youth Adolesc 37(5):522–536

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blau I, Barak A (2010) Synchronous online participation: the effects of participant’s personality and discussion topic on participation in face-to-face versus voice chat, and textual group discussions. Paper to be presented on the 11th annual conference of the Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR): Sustainability, participation, action. Gothenburg, Sweden: University of Gothenburg (October)

    Google Scholar 

  • Blau I, Caspi A (2008) Do media richness and visual anonymity influence learning? A comparative study using Skype™. In: Eshet-Alkalai Y, Caspi A, Geri N (eds) Learning in the technological era. Open University of Israel, Ra’anana, pp 18–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Böhlke O (2003) A comparison of student participation levels by group size and language stages during chatroom and face-to-face discussions in German. CALICO J 21(1):67–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryant JA, Sanders-Jackson A, Smallwood AMK (2006) IMing, text messaging, and adolescent social networks. J Comput Med Commun 11(2):577–592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson JR, Zmud RW (1999) Channel expansion theory and the experiential nature of media richness perceptions. Acad Manage J 42(2):153–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caspi A, Blau I (2008) Social presence in online discussion groups: testing three conceptions and their relations to perceived learning. Soc Psychol Educ 11(3):323–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caspi A, Gorsky P (2005) Instructional media choice: factors affecting the preferences of distance education coordinators. J Educ Multimed Hypermedia 14(2):169–198

    Google Scholar 

  • Caspi A, Chajut E, Saporta K, Beyth-Marom R (2006a) The influence of personality on social participation in learning environments. Learn Ind Differ 16(2):129–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caspi A, Chajut E, Saporta K, Schupak A (2006b) On the reasons for and against participation in class meetings and in online forums. In: Eshet Y, Caspi A, Yair Y (eds) Learning in technological era. Open University of Israel, Ra’anana, Hebrew, pp 91–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Caspi A. Chajut E, Saporta K (2008) Participation in class and in online discussions: gender differences. Comput Educ 50(3):718–724

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chanier T, Vetter A, Betbeder ML, Reffay C (2006) Retrouver le chemin de la parole en environnement audio-graphique synchrone. In: Dejean-Thircuir C, Mangenot F (Coord.) Les échanges en ligne dans l’apprentissage et la formation, pp 139–150, Available at: http://edutice.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/08/43/88/PDF/FDLM_chanier_060223.pdf

  • Chen CC, Wu J, Yang SC (2006) The efficacy of online cooperative learning systems: the perspective of task–technology fit. Campus Wide Inf Syst 23(3):112–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chester A, Gwynne G (1998) Online teaching: encouraging collaboration through anonymity. J Comput Media Commun 4(2). http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol4/issue2/chester.html, Retrieved 25 July 2009

  • Christopherson KM (2007) The positive and negative implications of anonymity in Internet social interactions: “On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog”. Comput Hum Behav 23(6): 3038–3056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clifford MM (1991) Risk taking: theoretical, empirical, and educational considerations. Educ Psychol 26(3–4):263–297

    Google Scholar 

  • Coghlan M (2000) An online learning community: the students’ perspective. http://www.chariot.net.au/~michaelc/TCC2000.htm, Retrieved 25 July 2009

  • Graetz KA, Boyle ES, Kimble CE, Thompson P, Garloch JL (1998) Information sharing in face-to-face, teleconferencing, and electronic chat groups. Small Group Res 29(6): 714–743

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daft RL, Lengel RH (1984) Information richness: a new approach to managerial behavior and organization design. In: Staw BM, Cummings LL (eds) Research in organizational behavior, vol 6. JAI, Greenwich, pp 191–233

    Google Scholar 

  • Daft RL, Lengel RH, Treviño LK (1987) Message equivocality, media selection, and manager performance: implications for information systems. MIS Q 11(3):355–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Ambra J, Rice RE, O’Connor M (1998) Computer-mediated communication and media preference: an investigation of the dimensionality of perceived task equivocality and media richness. Behav Inf Technol 17(3):164–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donabedian B (2006) Optimization and its alternative in media choice: a model of reliance on social-influence processes. Inf Soc 22(3):121–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dubrovsky VJ, Kiesler S, Sethna BN (1991) The equalization phenomenon: status effects in computer-mediated and face-to-face decision-making groups. Hum Comput Interact 6(2): 119–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunlosky J, Matvey G (2001) Empirical analysis of the intrinsic–extrinsic distinction of judgement of learning (JOLs): effects of relatedness and serial position on JOLs. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 27(5):1180–1191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eklund-Braconi P (2005) Reflections based on empirical experiences during a virtual course in Italian: how is the feeling of presence? How does interaction work? How do students learn? Paper presented at the University of Ulster Centre for Research in Applied Languages UCALL conference: developing a pedagogy for CALL, University of Ulster at Coleraine, Northern Ireland (June)

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman M, Bamford A (2004) Student choice of anonymity for learner identity in online learning discussion forums. Int J e-Learn 3(3):45–53

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman M, Blayney P, Ginns P (2006) Anonymity and in class learning: the case for electronic response systems. Aust J Educ Technol 22(4):568–580

    Google Scholar 

  • Fulk J, Steinfield CW, Schmitz J, Power JG (1987) A social information processing model of media use in organizations. Commun Res 14(5):529–552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fulk J, Schmitz J, Steinfeld CW (1990) A social influence model of technology use. In: Fulk J, Steinfield C (eds) Organizations and communication technology. Sage, Newbury Park, pp 117–140

    Google Scholar 

  • Garner R, Brown R, Sanders S, Menke D (1992) “Seductive details” and learning from text. In: Renninger KA, Hidi S, Krapp A (eds) The role of interest in learning and development. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp. 239–254

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison DR (1989) Understanding distance education: a framework for the future. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Guzley RM, Avanzino S, Bor A (2001) Simulated computer-mediated/video interactive distance learning: a test of motivation, interaction satisfaction, delivery, learning and perceived effectiveness. J Comput Mediat Commun 6(3). http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol6/issue3/guzley.html, Retrieved 25 July 2009

  • Hampel R (2006) Rethinking task design for the digital age: a framework for language teaching and learning in a synchronous online environment. ReCALL J 18(1):105–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hampel R, Baber E (2003) Using Internet-based audio-graphic and video conferencing for language teaching and learning. In: Felix U (ed) Language learning online: towards best practice. Swets & Zeitlinger, Lisse, pp 171–191

    Google Scholar 

  • Hampel R, Hauck M (2004) Towards an effective use of audio conferencing in distance language courses. Lang Learn Technol 8(1):66–82

    Google Scholar 

  • Harp SF, Mayer RE (1998) How seductive details do their damage: a theory of cognitive interest in science learning. J Educ Psychol 90(3):414–434

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilner PG, Hoadley CM (2005) Anonymity options and professional participation in an online community of practice. Proceedings of the 2005 conference on computer support for collaborative learning: learning 2005: The next 10 years! Taipei, Taiwan, pp 272–280

    Google Scholar 

  • Kock N (2001) Compensatory adaptation to a lean medium: an action research investigation of electronic communication in process improvement groups. IEEE Trans Prof Commun 44(4):267–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kock N (2005) Media richness or media naturalness? The evolution of our biological communication apparatus and its influence on our behavior toward e-communication tools. IEEE Trans Prof Commun 48(2):117–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kock N (2009) Information systems theorizing based on evolutionary psychology: an interdisciplinary review and theory integration framework. MIS Q 33(2):395–418

    Google Scholar 

  • Kock N, Verville J, Garza V (2007) Media naturalness and online learning: findings supporting both the significant- and no-significant-difference perspectives. Decis Sci J Innov Educ 5(2):333–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kock N, Hantula DA, Hayne SC, Saad G, Todd PM, Watson RT (2008) Introduction to Darwinian perspectives on electronic communication. IEEE Trans Prof Commun 51(2):133–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koriat A (1997) Monitoring one’s own knowledge during study: a cue-utilization approach to judgment of learning. J Exp Psychol Gen 126(4):349–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koriat A, Bjork RA (2006) Illusions of competence in monitoring one’s knowledge during study. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 31(3):187–194

    Google Scholar 

  • Kötter M, Shield L (2000) Talk to me! Real-time audio-conferencing and the changing roles of the teacher and the learner in a 24/7 environment. Paper presented on networked learning 2000: innovative approaches to lifelong learning and higher education through the internet, Lancaster, UK, January

    Google Scholar 

  • Lea M, Rogers P, Postmes T (2002) SIDE-VIEW: evaluation of a system to develop team players and improve productivity in Internet collaborative learning groups. Br J Educ Technol 33(1):53–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lobel M, Neubauer M, Swedburg R (2002) Elements of group interaction in a real-time synchronous online learning-by-doing classroom without f2f participation. USDLA J 16(4). http://www.usdla.org/html/journal/APR02_Issue/article01.html, Retrieved 25 July 2009

  • Marton F, Dall’Alba G, Beaty E (1993) Conceptions of learning. Int J Educ Res 19(3):277–300

    Google Scholar 

  • Marton F, Säljö R (1976a) On qualitative differences in learning. I – Outcome and process. Br J Educ Psychol 46(1):4–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marton F, Säljö R (1976b) On qualitative differences in learning. II – Outcome as a function of the learner’s perception of the task. Br J Educ Psychol 46(2):115–127

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer RE (2005) Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In: Mayer RE (ed) The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 31–48

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Olson JS, Olson GM, Meader DK (1997) Face-to-face group work compared to remote group work with and without video. In: Finn KE (ed) Video-mediated communication. Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 157–172

    Google Scholar 

  • Oren A, Mioduser D, Nachmias R (2002) The development of social climate in virtual learning discussion groups. Int Rev Res Open Dist Lear 3(1). http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/80/155, Retrieved 25 July 2009

  • Pan C-CS, Sullivan M (2005) Promoting synchronous interaction in an e-learning environment. THE J 33(2):27–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkins DN (1991) What constructivism demands of the learner. Educ Technol 31(10):19–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Quayle E, Taylor M (2003) Model of problematic Internet use in people with a sexual interest in children. CyberPsychol Behav 6(1):93–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rains SA, Scott CR (2007) To identify or not to identify: a theoretical model of receiver responses to anonymous communication. Commun Theory 17(1):61–91

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapanotti L, Blake CT, Griffiths R (2002) eTutorials with voice groupware: real-time conferencing to support computing students at a distance. Paper presented on the 7th annual conference on innovation and technology in computer science education – ITiCSE2002, University of Aarhus, Denmark, (June)

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinig BA, Briggs RO, Nunamaker JF Jr. (1997) Flaming in the electronic classroom. J Manage Inf Syst 14(3):45–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Robert LP, Dennis AR. (2005) Paradox of richness: a cognitive model of media choice. IEEE Trans Prof Commun 48(1):10–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosell-Aguilar F (2005) Task design for audiographic conferencing: promoting beginner oral interaction in distance language learning. Comput Assist Lang Lear 18(5):417–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosell-Aguilar F (2006) The face-to-face and the online learner: a comparative study of tutorial support for open and distance language learning and the learner experience with audio-graphic SCMC. Read Matrix 6(3):248–267

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell TL (1999) The no significant difference phenomenon. North Carolina State University, Raleigh

    Google Scholar 

  • Sallnäs EL (2002) Collaboration in multi-modal virtual worlds: comparing touch, text, voice and video. In: Schroeder R (ed) The social life of avatars: presence and interaction in shared virtual environments. Springer-Verlag, London, pp 172–187

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz RA (2003) The effectiveness of online synchronous discussion. Proceedings of the informing science and information technology joint education conference, Finland, pp 547–558. Available at http://proceedings.informingscience.org/IS2003Proceedings/docs/077Schul.pdf

  • Senju A, Johnson MH (2008) The eye contact effect: mechanisms and development. Trends Cogn Sci 13(3):127–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shachaf P, Hara N (2007) Behavioral complexity theory of media selection: a proposed theory for global virtual teams. J Inf Sci 33(1):63–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sia C, Tan B, Wei K (2002) Group polarization and computer-mediated communication: effects of communication cues, social presence, and anonymity. Inf Syst Res 13(1):70–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel J, Dubrovsky V, Kiesler S, McGuire TW (1986) Group processes in computer-mediated communication. Organ Behav Hum Decis Processes, 37(2):157–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suler J (2004) The online disinhibition effect. CyberPsychol Behav 7(3):321–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sweller J (1998) Cognitive load during problem solving: effects on learning. Cogn Sci 12(2):257–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tosunoglu C, Rapanotti L, Griffiths RM (2002) Voice groupware to support students at a distance. Paper presented on 4th international conference on new educational environments, Lugano, Switzerland, May. Available at http://iet-staff.open.ac.uk/c.tosunoglu/ICNEE02.pdf

  • Vetter A, Chanier T (2006) Supporting oral production for professional purposes in synchronous communication with heterogenous learners. ReCALL J 18(1):5–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Merriënboer JJG, Sweller J (2005) Cognitive load theory and complex learning: recent developments and future directions. Educ Psychol Rev 17(2):147–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warschauer M (1996) Comparing face-to-face and electronic discussion in the second language classroom. CALICO J 13(2):7–26

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Dr. Paul Gorsky for his helpful comments. An earlier, shorter version of this paper was presented at the Chais conference 2008, in Ra’anana, Israel, and included in Eshet-Alkalai Y, Caspi A, Geri N (eds) Proceedings of the Chais conference on instructional technologies research 2008: learning in the technological era. Open University of Israel, Ra’anana.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology and Education, Open University of Israel, 1 University Road, Ra’anana, Israel

    Ina Blau & Avner Caspi

Authors
  1. Ina Blau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Avner Caspi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Ina Blau or Avner Caspi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. of MIS and Decision Science, Texas A & M International University, University Boulevard 5201, Laredo, 78041, USA

    Ned Kock

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Blau, I., Caspi, A. (2010). Studying Invisibly: Media Naturalness and Learning. In: Kock, N. (eds) Evolutionary Psychology and Information Systems Research. Integrated Series in Information Systems, vol 24. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6139-6_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6139-6_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-6138-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-6139-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation