TY - GEN
T1 - WILL DISTRIBUTED GSS GROUPS MAKE MORE EXTREME DECISIONS? AN EMPIRICAL STUDY
AU - Sia, Choon-Ling
AU - Tan, Bernard C. Y.
AU - Wei, Kwok-Kee
N1 - Publication details (e.g. title, author(s), publication statuses and dates) are captured on an “AS IS” and “AS AVAILABLE” basis at the time of record harvesting from the data source. Suggestions for further amendments or supplementary information can be sent to [email protected].
PY - 1996
Y1 - 1996
N2 - This study examines the impact of proximity, anonymity, and information exposure on group polarization in a GSS context. Proximity was studied at two levels: proximate and distributed. Anonymity was examined at two levels: identified and anonymous. Information exposure was also varied at two levels: exposure to positions without arguments and exposure to positions with arguments. The dependent variables were choice shift and preference change. Distributed groups had greater choice shift than proximate groups. When exposed to positions without arguments, distributed meetings resulted in higher preference change than proximate meetings. But when exposed to positions with arguments, proximity interacted with anonymity to alter preference change. These findings indicate that a distributed GSS setting encourages group polarization. However, group polarization can also be raised in a proximate GSS setting if the anonymity capability is used by group members to exchange mutual positions and arguments.
AB - This study examines the impact of proximity, anonymity, and information exposure on group polarization in a GSS context. Proximity was studied at two levels: proximate and distributed. Anonymity was examined at two levels: identified and anonymous. Information exposure was also varied at two levels: exposure to positions without arguments and exposure to positions with arguments. The dependent variables were choice shift and preference change. Distributed groups had greater choice shift than proximate groups. When exposed to positions without arguments, distributed meetings resulted in higher preference change than proximate meetings. But when exposed to positions with arguments, proximity interacted with anonymity to alter preference change. These findings indicate that a distributed GSS setting encourages group polarization. However, group polarization can also be raised in a proximate GSS setting if the anonymity capability is used by group members to exchange mutual positions and arguments.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0007152305&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - https://www.scopus.com/record/pubmetrics.uri?eid=2-s2.0-0007152305&origin=recordpage
M3 - RGC 32 - Refereed conference paper (with host publication)
T3 - Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Information Systems, ICIS 1996
SP - 326
EP - 338
BT - Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Information Systems, ICIS 1996
PB - Association for Information Systems
T2 - 17th International Conference on Information Systems, ICIS 1996
Y2 - 16 December 1996 through 18 December 1996
ER -