Transcript slides - Courses

Computer-Mediated
Communication
Media Richness
Coye Cheshire & Andrew Fiore
// April 7, 2016
“ yields impressions that are above
Because hyperpersonal CMC
average and because the physical
appearance of most normal people
is, by definition, average, receivers’
impressions may be dampened if
physical reality intrudes.
”
— Walther et al. 2001
4/7/2016
Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore
1
Farnham & Riegelsberger 2004
Photo profiles
Count
Text profiles
Gaming partner preference
(1 = Do not want to play)
4/7/2016
Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore
2
“ proposes that media differ
Media richness theory
in the ability to facilitate
changes in understanding
”
among communicators.
— Kahai & Cooper 2003
4/7/2016
Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore
3
“
Richer media, the theory claimed,
enabled users to … better understand
ambiguous or equivocal messages and
… would lead to better performance on
equivocal tasks. In contrast, leaner
media were better for low equivocality
tasks because rich media provided
communicators with too much
information.
— Dennis & Kinney 1998
”
4/7/2016
Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore
4
— Clark & Brennan (1991), courtesy of Adam
4/7/2016
Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore
5
Comparing media richness studies
Kahai & Cooper
 94 undergrads
(71% M, 29% F)
 31 groups of 3 or 4
 4 media conditions:




FTF
FTF + software
CMC 1: bulletin board
CMC 2: email
 2 negotiation tasks:
 Similar equivocality
4/7/2016
Dennis & Kinney
 132 undergrads
(62% M, 38% F)
 66 dyads (pairs)
 4 media conditions:




AV-immediate
AV-delayed
CMC-immediate
CMC-delayed
 2 tasks:
 {Low, high} equivocality
Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore
6
Dennis & Kinney hypotheses
 H1a: Performance improves as
multiplicity of cues increases …
 H1b: … more for more equivocal tasks.
 H2a: Performance improves as
immediacy of feedback increases …
 H2b: … more for more equivocal tasks.
4/7/2016
Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore
7
Dennis & Kinney’s findings
 Decision time
 Decreased with greater multiplicity of cues
 Decreased with greater immediacy of feedback
 Increased with CMC (vs. AV) more for low
equivocality task than for high equivocality task
 Consensus change
 More change with high equivocality task than low
4/7/2016
Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore
8
Kahai & Cooper outcomes
Intermediate outcomes:
 Socio-emotional communication (+/–) [1]
 Communication clarity [2]
 Perceived ability to identify deception [2]
 Perceived ability to identify expertise [2]
 Task-oriented communication [1]
Final outcome: Decision quality [3]
[1] Researchers coded
[2] Participants reported
4/7/2016 [3] Experts
Computer-Mediated
Communication — Cheshire & Fiore
evaluated
9
Path models
A
B
D
C
Latent variables
E1
A
E
B
D
F
C
4/7/2016
E2
F
F
1
2
Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire
& Fiore
10
Path models
 More info (than you probably want):
http://www2.chass.ncsu.edu/garson/pa765/path.htm
4/7/2016
Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore
11
Kahai & Cooper 2003
4/7/2016
Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore
12
Kahai & Cooper 2003
4/7/2016
Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore
13
Comparing media richness studies
 What are these studies actually measuring?
 Which one is more convincing? Why?
 What are the strengths and weaknesses of
Dennis & Kinney? Of Kahai & Cooper?
 How would you design a study to determine
how media richness affects communication?
Decision-making?
4/7/2016
Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore
14
“
As implied by the vast array of mixed
empirical findings in the media
richness literature, our findings
suggest that the simple answer to this
question is that there is no simple
answer. One cannot make such
global statements, but rather should
at least take into account the
confluence of task and participants.
”
— Kahai & Cooper 2003
4/7/2016
Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore
15
Interim reports
and
final projects
4/7/2016
Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore
16
Interim report and project draft
 Re-specify your research or design problem
and its justification based on our comments.
 Tell us the scope of your project.
 Describe what you plan to do and how you will
do it.
 Be as specific as possible.
 Try to make your assumptions explicit.
 Don’t worry — we don’t expect you to have
everything “figured out” yet!
4/7/2016
Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore
17
Interim report details
 What to include: Relevant literature, sketch
of argument, initial design ideas, etc.
 Around 5 pages, double-spaced, 12-point
 No maximum if you want to tell us more
 If you’re working in a group, write one
report together.
 DUE: 3 pm Friday Oct. 19, two copies
in Coye’s mailbox (102 South Hall)
4/7/2016
Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore
18
Final project
 Track I: Research paper
 Minimum 20 pages of body text,
plus abstract and references section
 Single author
 Track II: Designing for CMC
 Highly detailed design sketches and/or prototypes
 Minimum 5-page paper describing problem and how
your design addresses it
 Main focus for both:
Defining, analyzing, addressing your problem!
4/7/2016
Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore
19