By Fon Sundaravej

The Dynamic Effects of Group Support Systems on Group Meetings

By Bruce A. Reinig and Bongsik Shin

Prior research on group support system (GSS) mostly compares outcomes from

various levels of GSS without measuring and testing the influence that GSS has on group

interaction and the corresponding influence that group interaction has on meeting

outcomes. Most experiments are performed only one time with unplanned small group.

This research studies the validity of dynamic theories by examining the relationship

among GSS structures, group interaction processes, and meeting outcomes over time. To

do this, the adaptive structuration theory (AST), which is a general research model, is

employed to emphasize social interactions in determining how GSS ultimately affects

meeting outcomes. Four processes (production blocking, evaluation apprehension, free

riding, and sucker effect) and three outcomes (group cohesion, self-reported learning, and

affective reward) are selected in this context. A longitudinal experiment including eight

tasks is conducted for a face-to-face group and GSS group. The experiment has been

done over two consecutive academic semesters and data have been gathered in a form of

post-session surveys. Structural equation modeling (SEM) is conducted to validate the

integrity of the research model.

GSS is a technology that can promote social interactions and enhance meeting

performance with structures of anonymity and simultaneity. This technology augments

quantity and quality of participation, increases participants’ satisfaction, and reduces

process losses. GSS will be the most effective when it is used with a large-size group.

IS 7894: Theoretical Foundations of Information Systems Research 1

 By Fon Sundaravej

The social information processing (SIP) proposes that interpersonal notion will

take longer to develop in groups without any history and that personalized

communication takes longer to display in computer-mediated communication (CMC)

groups than it does in face-to-face groups. Hence, time is expected to have an impact on

both group interaction and meeting outcomes.

To examine the relationship between GSS structures and social interaction, four

process constructs are identified. Production blocking refers to the loss of ideas or failure

to generate or remember new ideas while waiting for a turn to speak during a meeting.

GSS reduces production blocking through the structure of group memory and

simultaneity. Evaluation apprehension is the fear of being negatively evaluated by other

group members and precludes participants from presenting their ideas to a group. GSS

decreases evaluation apprehension through the structure of anonymity. Free riding occurs

when individuals choose to diminish effort in a group setting resulted from social

comparison to match the level of other members. GSS lowers free riding through the

structure of simultaneity. The sucker effect happens when hardworking members feel

their efforts are being taken advantage of by other members. GSS lessens the sucker

effect through the structure of anonymity. Based on the preceding relationship, it is

believed that participants in GSS meetings will report less production blocking,

evaluation apprehension, free riding, and sucker effect than participants in face-to-face

meetings.

To examine the relationship between social interactions and meeting outcomes,

three outcome constructs are identified as group cohesion, self-reported learning, and

affective reward. Group cohesion represents the degree of mutual cooperation,

IS 7894: Theoretical Foundations of Information Systems Research 2

 By Fon Sundaravej

confidence, and trust that exists among group participants. It is presumed that production

blocking, evaluation apprehension, free riding, and sucker effect are negative predictors

of group cohesion.

Previous findings illustrate that active involvement is crucial to members in order

to become creative, critical, and productive learners. Therefore, it is conjectured that

group cohesion is a positive predictor of self-reported learning; and production blocking,

evaluation apprehension, free riding, and sucker effect are negative predictors of self-

reported learning.

Some theories suggest a relationship between group interaction and satisfaction.

Thus, it is supposed that group cohesion is a positive predictor of affective reward.

Production block, evaluation apprehension, free riding, and sucker effect are negative

predictors of affective reward.

Self-reported learning may also be viewed as an intermediate variable that may

influence affective reward. Self-reported learning, therefore, tends to be a positive

predictor of affective reward.

AST and SIP theories propose that group dynamics and outcomes change over

time. In AST theory, changes in group dynamic and outcomes are neither positive nor

negative. In SIP theory, it is stated that outcomes can be realized as interpersonal

development that can occur over multiple time periods. Basically, both social dynamic

and meeting outcomes are procedural in nature and subject to change over time.

Consequently, time will be expected to have a significant impact on group dynamic and

meeting outcomes.

IS 7894: Theoretical Foundations of Information Systems Research 3

 By Fon Sundaravej

A longitudinal experiment is conducted using two classes held in consecutive

semesters. One semester is face-to-face group and the other semester is GSS group.

Students from both classes debate eight ethical scenarios. Survey is conducted by the

students after each topic discussion. Items on the survey are tested with exploratory factor

analysis using Equamax rotation. All constructs except evaluation apprehension achieve

high validity. One affective reward item also shows low reliability. These items are

subsequently excluded from further analysis. SEM is later used to analyze and test the

hypotheses. Overall, it is concluded that the model is suitable and valid.

The result of the experiment is that GSS reduces every process construct, except

evaluation apprehension which is not adequately measured and subsequently discarded.

That is, GSS is still a tool to support group and meeting interaction. Only the sucker

effect is significant in reducing group cohesion. Group cohesion is a positive predictor of

self-reported learning. Free riding is a negative predictor of self-reported learning. Both

findings support the cooperative learning theory that students learn through working in

groups and playing an active role in the learning process. The sucker effect turns out to

be a positive predictor of self-reported learning. In order for students to benefit from

other students, they have to be engaged in the learning process and such engagement

leads to self-reported learning. Free riding has a negative impact on affective reward,

while group cohesion and self-reported learning positively influence affective reward.

Time period is a negative predictor of self-reported learning and affective reward, but a

positive predictor of the sucker effect. In summary, SEM supports the procedural

methodology to examine effects of group interaction of GSS on process losses and the

corresponding effect those process losses have on meeting outcomes.

IS 7894: Theoretical Foundations of Information Systems Research 4