The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Effects of Group, Task,Context, and Technology Variables on the Usefulness of Group Support Systems: A Meta-Analysis of Experimental Studies
Abstract
Using meta-analytic procedures, this article quantitatively integrated the results of 31 experimental studies on the effects of Group Support System (GSS) use. A total of eight dependent variables representing performance, satisfaction, consensus, and equality of participation were investigated. The use of GSSs was found to have positive main effects on decision quality, number of alternatives generated, and equality of participation, but negative main effects in terms of time to reach decision, consensus, and satisfaction. Further analysis showed the effects to be moderated by task, group, context, and technology variables. For example, larger groups achieved betterperformance and greater satisfaction from the use of GSS than smaller groups. Groups with a formal hierarchy using GSS did worse in terms of both performance and satisfaction compared to groups without formal hierarchy. Also, the level of GSS support emerged as influential on almost all dependent variables. Findings are discussed in terms of their implications for organizational use of GSS, design issues of GSS, andfuture research directions.
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
Organizational Information Requirements, Media Richness and Structural Design
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.32.5.554 · Cited by 9,868
Distribution Theory for Glass's Estimator of Effect Size and Related Estimators
Hedges, L. V. (1981) · Journal of Educational Statistics · doi:10.2307/1164588 · Cited by 5,695
A Fail-Safe N for Effect Size in Meta-Analysis
Orwin, R. G. (1983) · Journal of Educational Statistics · doi:10.2307/1164923 · Cited by 2,064
Cited by
Ba, S., Stallaert, J., & Whinston, A. B. (2001) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.12.3.225.9712 · Cited by 326
Rains, S. A. (2005) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/0093650204273763 · Cited by 74
The use of meta-analysis in MIS research: promises and problems
Hwang, M. I. (1996) · ACM SIGMIS Database: the DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems · doi:10.1145/264417.264433 · Cited by 56
Structuring group decision making in a web-based environment by using the nominal group technique
Lago, P. P., Beruvides, M. G., Jian, J.-Y., Canto, A. M., Sandoval, A., & Taraban, R. (2007) · Computers & Industrial Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.cie.2006.11.003 · Cited by 46
McNamara, K., Dennis, A. R., & Carte, T. A. (2008) · Information Systems Management · doi:10.1080/10580530701777123 · Cited by 31
Metadata
- Authors
- Benbasat, I., & Lim, L.-H.
- Venue
- Small Group Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1993-11
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 430-462
- ISSN
- 1046-4964 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-8278
- OpenAlex
- W2053167290
- Cited by
- 324
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 19.43
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Effects of Group, Task,Context, and Technology Variables on the Usefulness of Group Support Systems: A Meta-Analysis of Experimental Studies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1046496493244002
- The paper
- Benbasat, I., & Lim, L.-H. (1993). The Effects of Group, Task,Context, and Technology Variables on the Usefulness of Group Support Systems: A Meta-Analysis of Experimental Studies. Small Group Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496493244002
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.