The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Analysis of a Global Online Debate and the Development of an Interaction Analysis Model for Examining Social Construction of Knowledge in Computer Conferencing
Abstract
This study attempts to find appropriate interaction analysis/content analysis techniques that assist in examining the negotiation of meaning and co-construction of knowledge in collaborative learning environments facilitated by computer conferencing. The authors review strengths and shortcomings of existing interaction analysis techniques and propose a new model based on grounded theory building for analyzing the quality of CMC interactions and learning experiences. This new Interaction Analysis Model for Examining Social Construction of Knowledge in Computer Conferencing was developed after proposing a new definition of “interaction” for the CMC context and after analyzing interactions that occurred in a Global Online Debate. The application of the new model for analysis of collaborative construction of knowledge in the online debate and in a subsequent computer conference are discussed and future research suggested.
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
A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
Festinger, L. (1957) · doi:10.1515/9781503620766 · Cited by 24,241 · cited 1×
“Another possible manifestation of learning, as described according to a constructivist paradigm, might be the modeling of cognitive or metacognitive strategies by some participants and the adoption of those strategies by others; the conference may function as an exercise in cognitive apprenticeship [22].”
BackgroundSituated Cognition and the Culture of Learning
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x018001032 · Cited by 13,645
Computer Conferencing and Content Analysis
Henri, F. (1992) · Collaborative Learning Through Computer Conferencing · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-77684-7_8 · Cited by 769
Cited by
Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher Education
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/s1096-7516(00)00016-6 · Cited by 6,619
Self-citationCritical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001) · American Journal of Distance Education · doi:10.1080/08923640109527071 · Cited by 3,044
Self-citationResearching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions
Garrison, D. R., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2007) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.04.001 · Cited by 1,653
Kuo, Y.-C., Walker, A. E., Schroder, K. E. E., & Belland, B. R. (2014) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.10.001 · Cited by 1,082
Swan, K. (2001) · Distance Education · doi:10.1080/0158791010220208 · Cited by 1,016
Akyol, Z., & Garrison, D. R. (2011) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01029.x · Cited by 588
(1998) · Cited by 530
High-level co-regulation in collaborative learning: How does it emerge and how is it sustained?
Volet, S., Summers, M., & Thurman, J. (2009) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.03.001 · Cited by 466
How to structure online discussions for meaningful discourse: a case study
Gilbert, P. K., & Dabbagh, N. (2005) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00434.x · Cited by 366
Interaction and cognitive engagement: An analysis of four asynchronous online discussions
Zhu, E. (2006) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-006-0004-0 · Cited by 363
“Interaction is another area of research in CMC that explores differences of online and face-to-face interaction (Gunawardena et al., 1997; Heckman & Annabi, 2004) and examines patterns and quality of online interaction (Fahy et al., 2001; Zhang & Carr-Chellman, 2001).”
BackgroundZhu, L., Li, H., Wang, F.-K., He, W., & Tian, Z. (2020) · Aslib Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1108/ajim-11-2019-0308 · Cited by 369
Yang, Y.-T. C., Newby, T. J., & Bill, R. L. (2005) · American Journal of Distance Education · doi:10.1207/s15389286ajde1903_4 · Cited by 296
Online Learning: Patterns of Engagement and Interaction among In-service Teachers
Pawan, F., Paulus, T. M., Yalcin, S., & Chang, C.-F. (2003) · Language Learning & Technology · doi:10.64152/10125/25217 · Cited by 289
Patterns of Interaction in a Computer Conference Transcript
Fahy, P. J., Crawford, G., & Ally, M. (2001) · The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v2i1.36 · Cited by 174
ONLINE COMMUNITY OF INQUIRY REVIEW: SOCIAL, COGNITIVE, AND TEACHING PRESENCE ISSUES
Garrison, D. R. (2007) · Online Learning · doi:10.24059/olj.v11i1.1737 · Cited by 152
Analyzing temporal patterns of knowledge construction in a role-based online discussion
Wise, A. F., & Chiu, M. M. (2011) · International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning · doi:10.1007/s11412-011-9120-1 · Cited by 142
Time for Change: Why Learning Analytics Needs Temporal Analysis
Knight, S., Friend Wise, A., & Chen, B. (2017) · Journal of Learning Analytics · doi:10.18608/jla.2017.43.2 · Cited by 135
The effect of social interaction on learning engagement in a social networking environment
Lu, J., & Churchill, D. (2014) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2012.680966 · Cited by 117
Huang, C., Han, Z., Li, M., Wang, X., & Zhao, W. (2021) · Australasian Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.14742/ajet.6749 · Cited by 111
A purposive approach to content analysis: Designing analytical frameworks
Gerbic, P., & Stacey, E. (2005) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.12.003 · Cited by 84
Cognitive Presence in Online Learning: A Systematic Review of Empirical Research from 2000 to 2019
Sadaf, A., Wu, T., & Martin, F. (2021) · Computers and Education Open · doi:10.1016/j.caeo.2021.100050 · Cited by 73
Using online discussion forums to support learning of paraphrasing
Tan, K. (2017) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.12491 · Cited by 47
Chieu, V. M., Herbst, P., & Weiss, M. (2011) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1080/10508406.2011.528324 · Cited by 46
Interaction, critical thinking, and social network analysis (SNA) in online courses
Thormann, J., Gable, S., Fidalgo, P. S., & Blakeslee, G. (2013) · The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v14i3.1306 · Cited by 45
Liu, S., Kang, L., Liu, Z., Fang, J., Yang, Z., Sun, J., Wang, M., & Hu, M. (2023) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2021.1927115 · Cited by 42
Dyad Composition Effects on Cognitive Elaboration and Student Achievement
Denessen, E., Veenman, S., Dobbelsteen, J., & Van Schilt, J. (2008) · The Journal of Experimental Education · doi:10.3200/jexe.76.4.363-386 · Cited by 37
(2008) · Cited by 36
A Case Study Investigating the Utilization of ChatGPT in Online Discussions
Lin, X., Luterbach, K., Gregory, K. H., & Sconyers, S. E. (2024) · Online Learning · doi:10.24059/olj.v28i2.4407 · Cited by 35
“Cheung and Hew (2005) discovered that students mainly expressed their opinions in response to their peers’ queries, aligning with Gunawardena et al.’s (1997) Phase I level of knowledge construction, which emphasizes information sharing and results in basic question-and-answer sessions with limited…”
BackgroundCultural ways of constructing knowledge: the role of identities in online group discussions
Öztok, M. (2016) · International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning · doi:10.1007/s11412-016-9233-7 · Cited by 32
Ching, Y.-H., & Hsu, Y.-C. (2016) · The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v17i2.2221 · Cited by 16
Design and application of automatic feedback scaffolding in forums to promote learning
Wang, Q., Rose, C. P., Ma, N., Jiang, S., Bao, H., & Li, Y. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies · doi:10.1109/tlt.2022.3156914 · Cited by 15
Kimmerle, J., Moskaliuk, J., Brendle, D., & Cress, U. (2017) · International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning · doi:10.1007/s11412-017-9258-6 · Cited by 12
Metadata
- Authors
- Gunawardena, C. N., Lowe, C. A., & Anderson, T.
- Venue
- Journal of Educational Computing Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1997-12
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 397-431
- ISSN
- 0735-6331 (ISSN-L)
- 1541-4140
- OpenAlex
- W1974776846
- Cited by
- 1,646
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 34.05
- 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.
