Argument and Decision Making in Computer-Mediated Groups

Abstract

Following Gouran (1994), the authors proposed four hypotheses that predict the probability of computer-mediated groups (CMGs) endorsing proposals based on (a) the number of reasons offered for them, (b) the number of members advancing these reasons, (c) the net number of positive reactions to the reasons advanced, and (d) the development of support for the reasons. Results from 11 groups that had long collaborated exclusively through computer-mediated means indicated that members in support of a proposal relative to those in opposition as well as the development of their arguments were significant predictors of decision outcomes. Moreover, the number of responses for/against a proposal and the difference in the positive and negative reactions to decision proposals were good independent predictors of decision outcomes.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 54 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.