Top

Social Justice Research

Published in:

01-12-2008

E-Mail Communication and Group Cooperation in Mixed Motive Contexts

Authors: Charles E. Naquin, Terri R. Kurtzberg, Liuba Y. Belkin

Published in: Social Justice Research | Issue 4/2008

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

Two empirical studies are presented that explore how and why e-mail communication (versus face-to-face communication) influences cooperation in mixed motive group contexts. Results indicate that, relative to those engaging in face-to-face interaction, those who interacted via e-mail were (1) less cooperative and (2) felt more justified in being noncooperative. Feelings of justification mediated the relationship between communication media and the decision to cooperate or not.

previous article Is a Refrigerator Good or Evil? The Moral Evaluation of Everyday Objects

next article Implicit Outgroup Favoritism and Intergroup Judgment: The Moderating Role of Stereotypic Context

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Available only for authorised users

Although there are some studies that elucidate personality characteristics that affect one’s decision to cooperate or not (e.g., Hertel, Neuhof, Theuer, & Kerr, 2000; Kerr & Kaufman-Gilliland, 1997; Kramer, McClintock, & Messick, 1986) the bulk of research has addressed situations under which people are more likely to focus on either the individual or the collective needs in social dilemma situations, and we follow in the line of this situationally based research.

This case can be obtained from the Dispute Resolution Research Center at Northwestern University.

Aiken, M. W., & Riggs, M. (1993). Using a group decision to support system creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 27, 28–35.

Alsop, S. (2003, April). I’ve seen the real future of tech—and it is virtual. Fortune Magazine, 147, 390.

Baltes, B. B., Dickson, M. W., Sherman, M. P., Bauer, C. C., & LaGanke, J. S. (2002). Computer-mediated communication and group decision making: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 87, 156–179.CrossRef

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychology research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.PubMedCrossRef

Barry, B., & Fulmer, I. S. (2004). The medium and the message: The adaptive use of communication media in dyadic influence. Academy of Management Review, 29, 272–292.

Barsness, Z., & Tenbrunsel, A. (1998). Technologically mediated communication and negotiation: Do relationships matter? Paper presented at the International Association for Conflict Management, College Park, MD.

Bochet, O., Page, T., & Putterman, L. (2006). Communication and punishment in voluntary contribution experiments. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 60, 11–26.

Bouas, K. S., & Komorita, S. S. (1996). Group discussion and cooperation in social dilemmas. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 1144–1150.CrossRef

Carey, J. M., & Kacmar, C. J. (1997). The impact of communication mode and task complexity on small group performance and member satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 13, 23–49.CrossRef

Carnevale, P. J., & Probst, T. M. (1997). Conflict on the Internet. In S. Kiesler (Ed.), Culture of the Internet (pp. 233–255). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Chen, X., & Komorita, S. S. (1994). The effects of communication and commitment in a public goods social dilemma. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 60, 367–368.CrossRef

Croson, R. T. A. (1999). Look at me when you say that: An electronic negotiation simulation. Simulation & Gaming, 30, 23–37.CrossRef

Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32, 554–571.

Dawes, R. M., & Messick, D. M. (2000). Social dilemmas. International Journal of Psychology, 35, 111–116.CrossRef

De Cremer, D., & Leonardelli, G. J. (2003). Cooperation in social dilemmas and the need to belong: The moderating effect of group size. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 7, 168–174.CrossRef

De Cremer, D., & van Dijk, E. (2002). Reactions to group success and failure as a function of identification level: A test of the goal-transformation hypothesis in social dilemmas. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 435–442.CrossRef

De Cremer, D., & van Knippenberg, D. (2002). How do leaders promote cooperation? The effects of charisma and procedural fairness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 858–866.PubMedCrossRef

De Cremer, D., & van Vugt, M. (1999). Social identification effects in social dilemmas: A transformation of motives. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 871–893.CrossRef

Dennis, A. R., Hilmer, K. M., & Taylor, N. J. (1997). Information exchange and use in Group Decision Support Systems and verbal group decision-making: Effects of minority influence. Journal of Management Information Systems, 14, 61–88.CrossRef

Dennis, A. R., & Valacich, J. S. (1993). Computer brainstorm: More heads are better than one. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 531–537.CrossRef

Deutsch, M. (2001). Cooperation and conflict resolution: Implications for consulting psychology. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 53, 76–81.CrossRef

Diekmann, K. A., Samuels, S. M., Ross, L., & Bazerman, M. H. (1997). Self-interest and fairness in problems of resource allocation: Allocators versus recipients. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1061–1074.PubMedCrossRef

Drolet, A. L., & Morris, M. W. (2000). Rapport in conflict resolution: Accounting for how face-to-face contact fosters mutual cooperation in mixed-motive conflicts. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 26–50.CrossRef

Dubrovsky, V., Kiesler, S., & Sethna, B. (1991). The equalization phenomenon: Status effects in computer-mediated and face-to-face decision groups. Human Computer Interaction, 6, 119–146.CrossRef

Friedman, T. L. (2005). The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century. New York: Farra, Straus, and Giroux.

Gallupe, R. B., & McKeen, J. D. (1990). Enhancing computer-mediated communication: An experimental investigation into the use of a group decision support system for face-to-face versus remote meeting. Information and Management, 18, 1–13.CrossRef

Hackman, J. R., & Wageman, R. (2005). A theory of team coaching. Academy of Management Review, 30, 269–287.

Hertel, G., Neuhof, J., Theuer, T., & Kerr, N. L. (2000). Mood effects on cooperation in small groups: Does positive mood simply lead to more cooperation? Cognition and Emotion, 14, 441–472.CrossRef

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.CrossRef

Hollingshead, A. B. (1996a). Information suppression and status persistence in group decision-making: The effects of communication media. Human Communication Research, 23, 193–219.CrossRef

Hollingshead, A. B. (1996b). The rank-order effect in group decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 68, 181–193.CrossRef

Huang, W., Wei, K., & Tan, B. C. Y. (1999). Compensating effects of GSS on group performance. Information and Management, 35, 195–202.CrossRef

Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 10, 791–815.

Jensen, C., Farnham, S. D., Drucker, S. M., & Kollack, P. (2000). The effect of communication modality on cooperation in online environments. Paper presented at the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Hague, Netherlands.

Katsh, E., & Rifkin, J. (2001). Online dispute resolution: Resolving conflicts in cyberspace. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (1993). The discipline of teams. Harvard Business Review, 71, 111–120.PubMed

Kelman, H. C., & Hamilton, V. L. (1989). Crimes of obedience. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Bolger, N. (1998). Data analysis in social psychology. In D. Gilbert, S. Fiske & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 233–265). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.

Kerr, N. L., Gast, J., Lewandsowski, D. A., & Harris, S. E. (1997). That still small voice: Commitment to cooperate as an internalized versus a social norm. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1300–1311.CrossRef

Kerr, N. L., & Kaufman-Gilliland, C. M. (1997). “And besides, i probably couldn’t have made a difference anyway”: Justification of social dilemma defection via perceived self-inefficacy. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 211–230.CrossRef

Kiesler, S., & Sproull, L. (1992). Group decision making and communication technology. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 52, 96–123.CrossRef

Kirkman, B. L., Rosen, B., Gibson, C. B., Tesluck, P. E., & McPherson, S. O. (2002). Five challenges to virtual team success: Lessons from Sabre, Inc. Academy of Management Executive, 16, 67–79.

Kirkman, B. L., Rosen, B., Tesluck, P. E., & Gibson, C. B. (2004). The impact of team empowerment on virtual team performance: The moderating role of face-to-face interaction. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 175–192.CrossRef

Kirkman, B. L., Rosen, B., Tesluck, P. E., & Gibson, C. B. (2006). Enhancing the transfer of computer-assisted training proficiency in geographically distributed teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 706–716.PubMedCrossRef

Kock, N. (2004). The psychobiological model: Towards a new theory of computer-mediated communication based on Darwinian evolution. Organization Science, 15, 327–348.CrossRef

Komorita, S. S., & Parks, C. D. (1994). Social dilemmas. Debuque, IA: Brown & Benchmark.

Kramer, R. M., McClintock, C. G., & Messick, D. M. (1986). Social values and cooperative response to a simulated resource conservation crisis. Journal of Personality, 54, 576–592.CrossRef

Kraut, R. E., Brynin, M., & Kiesler, S. (2006). Computers, phones, and the internet: Domesticating information technology. NY: Oxford University Press.

Kurtzberg, T. R., Belkin, L. Y., & Naquin, C. E. (2006). The effect of e-mail on attitude towards performance feedback. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 14, 4–21.CrossRef

Kurtzberg, T. R., Naquin, C. E., & Belkin, L. (2005). Electronic performance appraisals: The effects of e-mail communication on peer ratings in actual and simulated environments. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 98, 216–226.CrossRef

Liebrand, W. B. G., Messick, D. M., & Wilke, H. A. M. (1992). Social dilemmas: Theoretical issues and research findings. Oxford, England: Pergamon.

Martins, L. L., Gilson, L. L., & Maynard, M. T. (2004). Virtual teams: What do we know and where do we go from here? Journal of Management, 30, 805–835.

Maruping, L. M., & Agarwal, R. (2004). Managing team interpersonal processes through technology: A task-technology fit perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 975–990.PubMedCrossRef

Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709–734.CrossRef

Maznevski, M. L., & Chudoba, K. M. (2000). Bridging space over time: Global virtual team dynamics and effectiveness. Organization Science, 11, 473–492.CrossRef

McGuire, T. W., Kiesler, S., & Siegel, J. (1987). Group and computer mediated discussion effects in risk decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 917–930.CrossRef

Messick, D. M. (1999). Alternative logics for decision making social situations. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 39, 11–28.CrossRef

Messick, D. M., & Brewer, M. (1983). Solving social dilemmas: A review. In L. Wheeler & P. Shaver (Eds.), Review of personality and social psychology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Moore, D. A., Kurtzberg, T. R., Thompson, L. L., & Morris, M. W. (1999). Long and short routes to success in electronically mediated negotiation: Group affiliations and good vibrations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 77, 22–43.PubMedCrossRef

Morris, M. W., Nadler, J., Kurtzberg, T. R., & Thompson, L. (2002). Schmooze or lose: Social friction and lubrication in e-mail negotiations. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6, 89–100.CrossRef

Naquin, C. E., & Paulson, G. D. (2003). Online bargaining and interpersonal trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 113–120.PubMedCrossRef

Ocker, R. J., & Yaverbaum, G. J. (1999). Asynchronous computer-mediated communication versus face-to-face collaboration: Results on student learning, quality and satisfaction. Group Decision and Negotiation, 8, 427–440.CrossRef

Olarniran, B. A. (1994). Group performance in computer mediated communication and face-to-face meetings. Behavior and Information Technology, 15, 24–36.CrossRef

Paulson, G., & Naquin, C. E. (2004). Establishing trust via technology: Long distance practices and pitfalls. International Negotiation, 9, 229–244.CrossRef

Pillutla, M. M., & Chen, X. (1999). Social norms and cooperation in social dilemmas: The effects of context and feedback. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 78, 81–103.PubMedCrossRef

Purdy, J. M., Nye, P., & Balakrishnan, P. V. (2000). The impact of communication media on negotiation outcomes. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 11, 162–187.CrossRef

Rapoport, A. (1985). Provision of public goods and the MCS experimental paradigm. American Political Science Review, 79, 148–155.CrossRef

Sally, D. F. (1995). Conversation and cooperation in social dilemmas: Experimental evidence from 1958 to 1992. Rationality and Society, 7, 58–92.CrossRef

Siegel, J., Dubrovsky, V., Kiesler, S., & McGuire, T. W. (1986). Group processes in computer mediated communication. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 241–262.CrossRef

Smith, C. A. P., & Hayne, S. E. (1997). Decision-making under time pressure: An investigation of decision speed and decision quality of computer-supported groups. Management Communication Quarterly, 11, 97–126.CrossRef

Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32, 1492–1512.CrossRef

Strauss, S. G. (1996). Getting a clue: The effects of communication media and information distribution on participation and performance in computer-mediated and face-to-face groups. Small Group Research, 27, 115–142.CrossRef

Tenbrunsel, A. E., & Messick, D. M. (1999). Sanctioning systems, decision frames, and cooperation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 684–707.CrossRef

Thompson, L. (2001). The mind and heart of the negotiator (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Thompson, L. (2004). Making the team: A guide for managers (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Wade-Benzoni, K. A., Brett, J. M., Tenbrunsel, A. E., Okumura, T., Moore, D. A., & Bazerman, M. H. (2002). Cognition and behavior in asymmetric social dilemmas: A comparison of two cultures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 87–95.PubMedCrossRef

Wade-Benzoni, K. A., Tenbrunsel, A. E., & Bazerman, M. H. (1996a). Egocentric interpretations of fairness in asymmetric, environmental social dilemmas: Explaining harvesting behavior and the role of communication. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67, 111–126.CrossRef

Wade-Benzoni, K. A., Tenbrunsel, A. E., & Bazerman, M. H. (1996b). Shark harvesting and resource conservation. In A. R. Beckenstein, F. J. Long, M. B. Arnold & T. N. Gladwin (Eds.), Stakeholder negotiations: Exercises in sustainable development. Chicago: Irwin.

Wilke, H. A. M., & Braspenning, J. (1989). Reciprocity: Choice shift in a social trap. European Journal of Social Psychology, 19, 317–326.CrossRef

Wilson, J. M., Straus, S. G., & McEvily, B. (2006). All in due time: The development of trust in computer-mediated and face-to-face teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 99, 16–33.CrossRef

Title: E-Mail Communication and Group Cooperation in Mixed Motive Contexts
Authors: Charles E. Naquin
Terri R. Kurtzberg
Liuba Y. Belkin
Publication date: 01-12-2008
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Social Justice Research / Issue 4/2008
Print ISSN: 0885-7466
Electronic ISSN: 1573-6725
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-008-0084-x

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Other articles of this Issue 4/2008

Is a Refrigerator Good or Evil? The Moral Evaluation of Everyday Objects

A Cross-Cultural View of Adults’ Perceptions of Children’s Rights

Profiles in Social Justice Research—Elaine Hatfield

Social Justice in Love Relationships: Recent Developments

Does Moral Conviction Really Override Concerns About Procedural Justice? A Reexamination of the Value Protection Model

Moral Convictions Often Override Concerns About Procedural Fairness: A Reply to Napier and Tyler