The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Study of Influence in Computer-Mediated Group Decision Making
Abstract
An emerging body of research in group decision support systems (GDSS) provides evidence that computer technology can and does impact the quality of decision making in groups. Most GDSS research is oriented toward examining the effects of a computer system on group outcomes, typically decision quality or group consensus, with the process itself often treated as a "black box." The research reported in this article addresses the need for a closer, microlevel examination of group process. An important group variable, namely influence behavior, was isolated and examined at various levels and by multiple methods. A model of specific GDSS effects on influence behavior was developed, based on an information exchange view of decision making and on the impact of a GDSS as a communication channel. Based on the research questions of interest in the study, several propositions and hypotheses were advanced and empirically tested on a specific implementation of a GDSS. Results were analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively. The major empirical findings of the study showed no significant difference between the overall amount of influence behavior attempted in computer-supported versus unsupported groups, although significant differences were found in the pattern of influence behaviors, i.e., the different types of behaviors used. In addition, the distribution of influence behavior was more even in GDSS groups than in unsupported groups on one of two measures used. Empirical findings partially supported the research model, with indications that decisionmaking groups need more active guidance in understanding how to adapt computer support technology to their view of decision-making processes.
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
Effects of Size and Task Type on Group Performance and Member Reactions
Hackman, J. R., & Vidmar, N. (1970) · Sociometry · doi:10.2307/2786271 · Cited by 251
Cited by
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
Self-citationVirtual Teams: What Do We Know and Where Do We Go From Here?
Martins, L. L., Gilson, L. L., & Maynard, M. T. (2004) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1016/j.jm.2004.05.002 · Cited by 1,314
The Spatial, Temporal, and Configurational Characteristics of Geographic Dispersion in Teams1
O’Leary, M. B., & Cummings, J. N. (2007) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/25148802 · Cited by 497
A meta-analytic investigation of virtuality and information sharing in teams
Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., DeChurch, L. A., Jimenez-Rodriguez, M., Wildman, J., & Shuffler, M. (2011) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.03.002 · Cited by 234
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
Metadata
- Authors
- Zigurs, I., Poole, Μ. S., & DeSanctis, G. L.
- Venue
- MIS Quarterly
- Publisher
- MIS Quarterly
- Published
- 1988-12-01
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 625-644
- ISSN
- 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-9730
- OpenAlex
- W1549595874
- Cited by
- 337
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 15.22
- 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: A Study of Influence in Computer-Mediated Group Decision Making. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/249136
- The paper
- Zigurs, I., Poole, Μ. S., & DeSanctis, G. L. (1988). A Study of Influence in Computer-Mediated Group Decision Making. MIS Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/249136
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.