Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Process Method Approach to Study the Development of Virtual Research Environments: A Theoretical Framework

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Learning, Design, and Technology

  • 354 Accesses

Abstract

In recent years, there has been a wave of advanced cyberinfrastructure development to support distributed collaborative science. These cyberinfrastructures or “Virtual Research Environments” (VRE) are electronic spaces for inquiry and meeting places for interaction among scientists and scholars created by combining software tools and computer networking. VREs have been hailed as having the potential to enhance the quality of science, to speed up the conduct of scientific research, and to foster global scientific communities around key research and learning areas. Multiple approaches have been applied to investigate technological, organizational, managerial, and human factors that influence VREs for good or ill, and these have yielded insights, but there is not yet a “formula” for an effective VRE and therefore all VREs involve experimentation and trial-and-error learning. This chapter suggests a framework for understanding the processes by which VREs are developed over time and how these processes contribute to their effectiveness or lack thereof.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adelsberger, H. H., Collis, B., & Pawlowski, J. M. (Eds.). (2013). Handbook on information technologies for education and training. Berlin, Germany: Springer Science & Business Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahmed, I., & Poole, M. S. (2011). Exploring communication technology configurations in virtual research environments. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign: National Center for Supercomputing Applications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alliance for Cellular Signaling (AfCS) Web Portal. (2012). Retrieved from http://www.afcs.org/

  • Awre, C., & Ingram, C. (2005). CREE feasibility study on presenting communication and collaboration tools within different contexts. Retrieved from http://www.hull.ac.uk/cree/downloads/CREEcommsresults.pdf

  • Bos, N. D., Zimmerman, A., Olson, J., Yew, J., Yerkie, J., Dahl, E., & Olson, G. (2007). From shared databases to communities of practice: A taxonomy of collaboratories. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(2), 652–672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, J. A., & Monge, P. (2008). The evolution of the children’s television community, 1953–2003. International Journal of Communication [Online], 2, 160–192. Retrieved from http://ijoc.org./ojs/index.php/ijoc/article/view/27

    Google Scholar 

  • Carley, K., & Wendt, K. (1991). Electronic mail and scientific communication: A study of the soar extended research group. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 12(4), 406–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, I. Y., & Chen, N. S. (2009). Examining the factors influencing participants’ knowledge sharing behavior in virtual learning communities. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(1), 134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, K. (1985). The interaction of design hierarchies and market concepts in technological evolution. Research Policy, 14, 235–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillenbourg, P., Schneider, D., & Synteta, P. (2002). Virtual learning environments. In 3rd Hellenic conference “information & communication technologies in education” (pp. 3–18). Rhodes, Greece: Kastaniotis Editions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunbar, K. (1993). Concept discovery in a scientific domain. Cognitive Science, 17, 397–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fifth International Symposium on Process Organization Studies. (2013, June). The emergence of novelty in organizations. Minoa Palace Resort, Chania, Crete, Greece. Retrieved from http://www.process-symposium.com/

  • Gilman, A. G., Simon, M. I., Bourne, H. R., Harris, B. A., Long, R., Ross, E. M., … Sambrano, G. R. (2002). Participating investigators and scientists of the Alliance for Cellular Signaling. Nature, 420(6916), 703–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, R. M., & Clark, K. B. (1990). Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 9–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langley, A. (1999). Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24, 691–710.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langley, A., & Tsoukas, (2010). Chapter 1: Introducing perspectives on process organization studies. In A. Hernes, T., & H. Maitlis, S. (Eds.), Process, sensemaking and organizing. 1, 1–26. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, M. W. (2000). Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide. Academy of Management Review, 25, 260–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lievrouw, L. A., & Carley, K. (1990). Changing patterns of communication among scientists in an era of “Telescience”. Technology in Society, 12, 457–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luscher, L. S., & Lewis, M. W. (2008). Organizational change and managerial sensemaking: Working through paradox. Academy of Management Journal, 51, 221–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matos, S., & Lopes, E. (2013). Prince2 or PMBOK – A question of choice. Procedia Technology, 9, 787–794.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, A. D., & Goes, J. B. (1988). Organizational assimilation of innovations: A multilevel contextual analysis. Academy of management Journal, 31, 897–923.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohr, L. B. (1982). Explaining organizational behavior. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monge, P., Heiss, B. M., & Margolin, D. B. (2008). Communication network evolotion in organizational communities. Communication Theory, 18, 449–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okada, T., & Simon, H. A. (1997). Collaborative discovery in a scientific domain. Cognitive Science, 21(2), 109–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, G. M., Zimmerman, A., & Bos, N. (2008). Scientific collaboration on the internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, J. S., & Olson, G. M. (2013). Working together apart: Collaboration over the internet. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics, 6(5), 1–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paré, G., & Dubé, L. (1999, December 13–15). Virtual teams: An exploratory study of key challenges and strategies. Proceedings of the 20th international conference on information systems, ICIS (pp. 479–483). Charlotte, NC: ICIS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poole, M. S. (1981). Decision development in small groups I; A comparison of two models. Communication Monographs, 48(1), 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poole, M. S., & Roth, J. (1989). Decision development in small groups V: Test of a contingency model. Human Communication Research, 15(4), 549–589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poole, M. S., & Holmes, M. E. (1995). Decision development in computer-assisted group decision making. Human Communication Research, 22, 90–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poole, M. S., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1989). Using paradox to build management and organization theories. Academy of Management Review, 562–578.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poole, M. S., & Van de Ven, A. H. (2004). Theories of organizational change and innovation processes. In M. S. Poole & A. H. Van de Ven (Eds.), Handbook of organizational change and innovation (pp. 374–397). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poole, M. S., & Van de Ven, A. H. (2010). Empirical methods for research on organizational decision making processes. In P. C. Nutt & D. Wilson (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of decision making (pp. 543–580). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poole, M. S., Van de Ven, A. H., Dooley, K., & Holmes, M. (2000). Organizational innovation and change processes: Theory and methods for research. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poole, M. S., & Zhang, H. (2005). Virtual teams. In S. Wheelan (Ed.), The handbook of group research and practice (pp. 363–384). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Preece, J. (2000). Online communities: Designing, usability, supporting sociability. Chichester, UK: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice, R. E., & Gattiker, U. E. (2001). New media and organizational structuring. In F. M. Jablin & L. L. Putnam (Eds.), The new handbook of organizational communication (pp. 544–581). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, J. (2000). Communities of practice: A framework for fostering coherence in virtual learning communities. Educational Technology & Society, 3(3), 384–392.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunn, C. D., & Klahr, D. (1995). A 4-space model of scientific discovery. Proceedings of the 17th annual conference of the cognitive science society. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, J. (2000). Emerging patterns from the dynamic capabilities of internet intermediaries. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 5(3). Retrived from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2000.tb00344.x/full.

  • Simon, H. A., & Lea, G. (1974). Problem solving and rule induction: A unified view. In L. W. Gregg (Ed.), Knowledge and cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swan, K., & Shea, P. (2005). The development of virtual learning communities. In S. R. Hiltz & R. Goldman (Eds.), Learning together online: Research on asynchronous learning networks (pp. 239–260). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teo, H. H., Chan, H. C., Wei, K. K., & Zhang, Z. (2003). Evaluating information accessibility and community adaptivity features for sustaining virtual learning communities. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 59(5), 671–697.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven, A. H., Angle, H., & Poole, M. S. (Eds.). (2000). Research on the management of innovation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven, A. H., Polley, D., Garud, R., & Venkatraman, S. (1999). The innovation journey. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. (1995). Explaining development and change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 20, 510–540.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warr, A., Lloyd, S., Jirotka, M., de la Flor, G., Schroeder, R., & Rahman, M. (n.d.). Project management in e-science. A report from the “Embedding e-science applications: Designing and managing for usability” project. EPSRC grant no: EP/D049733/1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wideman, R. M. (2002). Comparing PRINCE2 with PMBoK. Published as part of m4success.com. AEW Services, Vancouver, BC.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the US National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Virtual Organization as Sociotechnical System (VOSS) Grant Award #1308176.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Communication Studies, University of North Texas, Denton, TX, 76203-5268, USA

    Iftekhar Ahmed

  2. Department of Communication, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, 3001 Lincoln Hall, MC 456, Urbana, IL, 61801, USA

    Marshall Scott Poole

Authors
  1. Iftekhar Ahmed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marshall Scott Poole
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Iftekhar Ahmed .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. College of Info, Ste G150, Univ of North Texas, Denton, Texas, USA

    Michael J Spector

  2. School of Education, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA

    Barbara B Lockee

  3. School of Education, Baker University, Overland Park, Kansas, USA

    Marcus D. Childress

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this entry

Cite this entry

Ahmed, I., Poole, M.S. (2017). A Process Method Approach to Study the Development of Virtual Research Environments: A Theoretical Framework. In: Spector, M., Lockee, B., Childress, M. (eds) Learning, Design, and Technology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17727-4_118-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17727-4_118-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-17727-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-17727-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference EducationReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Education

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation