Abstract
Previous studies with university students have shown that resource interdependence during cooperative dyadic work on texts produces two different dynamics in student interaction and learning. Working on complementary information produces positive interactions, but a good quality of information transmission is needed to foster student learning. Working on identical information produces a confrontation of viewpoints but also encourages a threatening social comparison of competence, which can be detrimental for learning. The aim of present study is to test the moderating role of a partner’s competence in two peer-learning methods by manipulating a partner’s competence through a confederate. Results indicate that a partner’s competence is beneficial when students work on complementary information while it is detrimental when students work on identical information.
Résumé
Des études antérieures avec des étudiants universitaires ont montré que l’interdépendance des ressources lors d’un travail coopératif en duos sur des textes entraîne deux dynamiques différentes en ce qui concerne les interactions et l’apprentissage. Travailler sur des informations complémentaires favorise des interactions positives; cependant une bonne qualité de la transmission des informations est nécessaire pour favoriser l’apprentissage des étudiants. Travailler sur des informations identiques stimule des confrontations de point de vue to ut en introduisant une comparaison sociale menaçante des compétences, qui peut réduire l’apprentissage. Le but de l’étude est de tester le rôle modérateur de la compétence du partenaire dans les deux situations d’apprentissage en manipulant la compétence du partenaire grâce à un compère. Les résultats indiquent que la compétence du partenaire est bénéfique losrque les étudiants travaillent sur des informations complémentaires alors qu’elle est néfaste lorsqu’ils travaillent sur des informations identiques.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aronson, E., Blaney, N., Stephan, C., Sikes, J., & Snapp, N. (1978).The jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
Buchs, C. (2008). La distribution des informations dans les dispositifs d’apprentissage entre pairs. In Y. Rouiller & K. Lehraus (Eds.),Vers des apprentissages en coopération: Rencontres et perspectives (pp. 57–80). Bruxelles: Peter Lang — Exploration.
Buchs, C., & Butera, F. (2001). Complementarity of information and quality of relationship in cooperative learning.Social Psychology of Education, 4, 335–357.
Buchs, C., & Butera, F. (2004). Socio-cognitive conflict and the role of student interaction in learning.New Review of Social Psychology, 3, 80–87.
Buchs, C., Butera, F., & Mugny, G. (2004). Resource interdependence, student interactions and performance in cooperative learning.Educational Psychology, 24(3), 291–314.
Buchs, C., Butera, F., Mugny, G., & Darnon, C. (2004). Conflict elaboration and cognitive outcomes.Theory Into Practice, 43(1), 23–30.
Buchs, C., Pulfrey, C., Gabarrot, F., & Butera, F. (in press). Competitive conflict regulation and informational dependence in peer learning. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Clarke, J. (1999). Pieces of the puzzle: The jigsaw method. In S. Sharan (Ed.),Handbook of cooperative learning methods (pp. 34–50). Westport, CT: Greenwood publishing group.
Darnon, C., Buchs, C., & Butera, F. (2002). Epistemic and relational conflicts in sharing identicalvs. complementary information during cooperative learning.Swiss Journal of Psychology, 61, 139–151.
Darnon, C., Butera, F., & Harackiewicz, J. (2007). Achievement goals in social interactions: Learning with masteryvs. performance goals.Motivation and Emotion, 31, 61–70.
Darnon, C., Doll, S., & Butera, F. (2007). Dealing with a disagreeing partner: Relational and epistemic conflict elaboration.European Journal of Psychology of Education, 22, 227–242.
Darnon, C., Harackiewicz, J., Butera, F., Mugny, G., & Quiamzade, A. (2007). Performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals: When uncertainty makes a difference.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 813–827.
Elliott, E.S., & Dweck, C.S. (1988). Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 5–12.
Gabriele, A.J. (2007). The influence of achievement goals on the constructive activity of low achievers during collaborative problem solving.British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(1), 121–141.
Gabriele, A.J., & Montecinos, C. (2001). Collaborating with a skilled peer: The influence of achievement goals on the participation and learning of low-achievement students.The Journal of Experimental Education, 69(2), 152–178.
Gillies, R.M. (2004). The effect of cooperative learning on junior high school students during small group learning.Learning and Instruction, 14(2), 197–213.
Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (2002). Social interdependence theory and university instruction: Theory into practice.Swiss Journal of Psychology, 61, 119–129.
Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (2005). New developments in social interdependence theory.Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 131, 285–358.
Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., & Johnson Holubec, E. (1998).Cooperation in the classroom (revised). Minneapolis: Interaction Book Company.
Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., & Smith, K. (2007). The state of cooperative learning in postsecondary and professional settings.Educational Psychology Review, 19, 15–29.
Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., & Stanne, M.B. (1989). Impact of goal and resource interdependence on problem-solving success.The Journal of Social Psychology, 129(5), 621–629.
Kutnick, P., Blatchford, P., & Baines, E. (2002). Pupil groupings in primary school classrooms: Sites for learning and social pedagogy?British Educational Research Journal, 28(2), 187–206.
Kutnick, P., Blatchford, P., Clark, H., MacIntyre, H., & Baines, E. (2005). Teachers’ understandings of the relationship between within-class (pupil) grouping and learning in secondary schools.Educational Research, 47(1), 1–24.
Lambiotte, J.G., Dansereau, D., O’Donnell, A., Young, M., Skaggs, L., Hall, R., et al. (1987). Manipulating cooperative scripts for teaching and learning.Journal of Educational Psychology 79(4), 424–430.
Lambiotte, J.G., Dansereau, D.F., O’Donnell, A.M., Young, M.D., Skaggs, L., & Hall, R. (1988). Effects of cooperative script manipulations on initial learning and transfer.Cognition and Instruction, 5(2), 103–121.
Marshall, H.H., & Weinstein, R.S. (1984). Classroom factors affecting students’ self-evaluations: An interactional model.Review of Educational Research, 54(3), 301–325.
O’Donnell, A.M. (1999). Structuring dyadic interaction through scripted cooperation. In A.M. O’Donnell & A. King (Eds.)Cognitive perspectives on peer learning. The Rutgers invitational symposium on education series (pp. 179–196). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ortiz, A.E., Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (1996). The effect of positive goal and resource interdependence on individual performance.The Journal of Social Psychology, 136(2), 243–249.
Rosenholtz, S.J., & Wilson, B. (1980). The effect of classroom structure on shared perceptions of ability.American Educational Research Journal, 17(1), 75–82.
Sharan, S. (Ed.). (1999).Handbook of cooperative learning methods. Westport, CT: Greenwood publishing group.
Spurlin, J.E., Dansereau, D.F., Larson, C.O., & Brooks, L.W. (1984). Cooperative learning strategies in processing descriptive text: Effects of role and activity level of the learner.Cognition and Instruction, 1(1), 451–463.
Stevens, R.J., & Slavin, R.E. (1995). The cooperative elementary school: Effects on students’ achievement, attitudes, and social relations.American Educational Research Journal, 32(2), 321–351.
Topping, K.J. (2005). Trends in peer learning.Educational Psychology, 25(6), 631–645.
Vazin, T., & Reile, P. (2006). Collaborative Learning: Maximizing Students’ Potential for Success. In W. Buskist & S.F. Davis (Eds.),Handbook of the teaching of psychology (pp. 65–69). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Blackwell Publishing.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was part of Céline Buchs’ doctoral work under the supervision of Fabrizio Butera and Gabriel Mugny, and was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Buchs, C., Butera, F. Is a partner’s competence threatening during dyadic cooperative work? It depends on resource interdependence. Eur J Psychol Educ 24, 145–154 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173007
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173007