The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Computer-Mediated Collaborative Learning: An Empirical Evaluation
Abstract
National commissions and scholarly reports on the status of contemporary higher education have frequently been critical of the college experience; the emphasis on transmitting fixed bodies of information and a failure to develop problem solving and critical thinking skills have been cited as serious weaknesses in higher education systems. Colleges and universities have additional reasons to redevelop central pedagogies for students. Individuals need to learn at higher rates of effectiveness and efficiency than ever before because of rapidly growing bodies of relevant information and the escalation of knowledge and skill requirements for most jobs. Recent developments in computer hardware, software, and communication technologies create exciting new opportunities for the educational use of these technologies. The objective of this study is to go beyond the traditional classroom instructional modes (e.g., lectures and class discussions) to develop and evaluate computer-supported pedagogical approaches. More specifically, this study investigates whether the use of a group decision support system (GDSS) in a collaborative learning process enhances student learning and evaluation of classroom experiences. The findings of a study involving 127 MBA students indicate that GDSS-supported collaborative learning leads to higher levels of perceived skill development, self-reported learning, and evaluation of classroom experience in comparison with non-GDSS supported collaborative learning. Furthermore, the final test grades of the group of students who were exposed to GDSS-supported collaborative learning were significantly higher than those of the other group of students who participated in the experiment.
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
Johnson, D. W., Maruyama, G., Johnson, R., Nelson, D., & Skon, L. (1981) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.89.1.47 · Cited by 1,588
Cited by
Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3250961 · Cited by 10,176
Self-citationSun, P.-C., Tsai, R. J., Finger, G., Chen, Y.-Y., & Yeh, D. (2008) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2006.11.007 · Cited by 2,726
Piccoli, G., Ahmad, R., & Ives, B. (2001) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3250989 · Cited by 1,587
Technologies for foreign language learning: a review of technology types and their effectiveness
Golonka, E. M., Bowles, A. R., Frank, V. M., Richardson, D. L., & Freynik, S. (2014) · Computer Assisted Language Learning · doi:10.1080/09588221.2012.700315 · Cited by 1,144
Motivation in online learning: testing a model of self-determination theory
Chen, K.-C., & Jang, S.-J. (2010) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.01.011 · Cited by 955
Metadata
- Authors
- Alavi, M.
- Venue
- MIS Quarterly
- Publisher
- MIS Quarterly
- Published
- 1994-06-01
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 159-174
- ISSN
- 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-9730
- OpenAlex
- W1505789767
- Cited by
- 1,148
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 41.62
- 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: Computer-Mediated Collaborative Learning: An Empirical Evaluation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/249763
- The paper
- Alavi, M. (1994). Computer-Mediated Collaborative Learning: An Empirical Evaluation. MIS Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/249763
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.