IS

Jessup, Leonard M.

Topic Weight Topic Terms
0.619 group gss support groups systems brainstorming research process electronic members results paper effects individual ebs
0.407 group support groups meeting gdss decision systems meetings technology study electronic ems task process communication
0.299 case study studies paper use research analysis interpretive identify qualitative approach understanding critical development managerial
0.160 information types different type sources analysis develop used behavior specific conditions consider improve using alternative
0.152 systems information research theory implications practice discussed findings field paper practitioners role general important key
0.125 analysis techniques structured categories protocol used evolution support methods protocols verbal improve object-oriented difficulties analyses

Focal Researcher     Coauthors of Focal Researcher (1st degree)     Coauthors of Coauthors (2nd degree)

Note: click on a node to go to a researcher's profile page. Drag a node to reallocate. Number on the edge is the number of co-authorships.

Connolly, Terry 1 Galegher, Jolene 1 Trauth, Eileen M. 1
anonymity 2 computer-mediated communication 1 ethnography 1 group process and outcome 1
Group support systems 1 gender 1 grop decision making 1 group decision support system 1
hermeneutics 1 idea generation and evaluation 1 information richness 1 interpretive methods 1
IS research methodologies 1 positivist methods 1 virtual group 1

Articles (2)

UNDERSTANDING COMPUTER-MEDIATED DISCUSSIONS: POSITIVIST AND INTERPRETIVE ANALYSES OF GROUP SUPPORT SYSTEM USE. (MIS Quarterly, 2000)
Authors: Abstract:
    This research considers whether interpretive techniques can be used to enhance our understanding of computer-mediated discussions. The case study considered in this research is the use of a group support system (GSS) to support employee discussions about gender equity in a university. Transcripts of the four discussions were analyzed using two analysis techniques: a positivist approach, which was focused on the GSS sessions themselves, and an interpretive approach, which broadened the scope to include contextual considerations as well. What emerged from the positivist analysis was the conclusion of effective group behavior directed toward consensus around alternative solution scenarios. What emerged from the interpretive analysis was evidence of multiple, rich types of information at three levels: cognitive, affective, and behavioral. The interpretive analysis also uncovered the absence of shared consciousness about the issue and imbalanced participation in the sessions. Comparison of the results of both approaches showed that, while the positivist analysis provided useful information, the interpretive analysis provided a different understanding of the same evidence and new information not found in the positivist analysis of the group discussions. This research adds to the body of knowledge concerning the effects of virtual group meetings on the type of information that is shared and the value of a combination of positivist and interpretive analyses of GSS data. INSET: Further Demographics on Session Participants.
The Effects of Anonymity on GDSS Group Process With an Idea-Generating Task. (MIS Quarterly, 1990)
Authors: Abstract:
    This study examines the influence of anonymity on group process in groups using a group decision support system (GDSS) with an idea-generating task. Group members whose contributions were anonymous generated more comments, were more critical and probing, and were more likely to embellish ideas proposed by others than were those whose contributions were identified by name. Implications for group support research are discussed.