The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Microlevel Structuration in Computer-Supported Group Decision Making
Abstract
The theory of Structuration focuses on how actions by members of social collectives create the structures that enable and constrain future action. Most previous research on Structuration in groups and organizations used qualitative case studies because Structuration is quite complex. This study introduces a method for the study of Structuration in larger samples of groups or organizations. A category system for the identification of structuring moves is described, along with several methods for characterizing short- and long-term trends in Structuration processes. The method is used to study how groups incorporate a computerized group decision support system (GDSS) into their decision processes. GDSSs are part of a class of new computer and communication technologies designed to help groups improve their meetings and make better decisions. Because GDSSs must be used by a group rather than an individual, social processes are critical in determining their effects on group outcomes. GDSSs influence groups by structuring their activities, and structurational processes are critical mediators of the impacts of GDSSs on group decision making. The study focused on the effects of restrictiveness of GDSS technology on Structuration processes and, in turn, on the relation of Structuration to a key group outcome, consensus change. The results suggest that two major types of structuring processes occur in computer-supported groups and that the nature of structuration is related to degree of consensus change.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in Organizations
Orlikowski, W. J. (1992) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.3.3.398 · Cited by 4,957
Barley, S. R. (1986) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392767 · Cited by 2,315
Cited by
Orlikowski, W. J. (2000) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.11.4.404.14600 · Cited by 4,760
Capturing the Complexity in Advanced Technology Use: Adaptive Structuration Theory
DeSanctis, G., & Poole, M. S. (1994) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.5.2.121 · Cited by 3,879
Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams
Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1999) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.10.6.791 · Cited by 2,903
Leonardi, P. M. (2011) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/23043493 · Cited by 1,889
Leonardi, P. M., & Barley, S. R. (2010) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416521003654160 · Cited by 733
Leonardi, P. M. (2013) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2013/37.3.04 · Cited by 444
Burgoon, J. K., Bonito, J. A., Ramirez, A., Dunbar, N. E., Kam, K., & Fischer, J. (2002) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02567.x · Cited by 400
An analysis of communication mode in group support systems research
Fjermestad, J. (2004) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/s0167-9236(03)00021-6 · Cited by 193
Manipulating user resistance to large-scale information systems through influence tactics
Ilie, V., & Turel, O. (2020) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2019.103178 · Cited by 52
Revising the “science of the organisation”: Theorising AI agency and actorhood
van Rijmenam, M., & Logue, D. (2021) · Innovation · doi:10.1080/14479338.2020.1816833 · Cited by 30
Metadata
- Authors
- SCOTT, M., & DeSANCTIS, P. G.
- Venue
- Human Communication Research
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1992-09
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 5-49
- ISSN
- 0360-3989 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2958
- OpenAlex
- W2122317637
- Cited by
- 299
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 37.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.