Do internal factors of cooperation influence computer-mediated distance activity?

On the one hand, researchers have studied factors that influence collaboration and on the other, researchers have proposed models of collaborative problem solving. However, we have not found research on the relation between these factors and the dimensions used in order to describe the collaborative activity within the models. This article’s goal is to propose such relations for a situation of collaborative design, mediated by computer and carried out at a distance. We will show two main relations that emerged from our corpus. Firstly, dialogue utterances between partners that have a dominant social aspect are positively related to the symmetry of the entire dyadic interaction in terms of partners’ contributions. Secondly, dialogue utterances that predominantly deal with expressing what partners are doing is negatively related to the extent to which partners are aligned. This research also extends the field of applicability of the cooperative activity model proposed in Baker (2002). Introduction The models of cooperation elaborated in domains dealing with problem resolution aided by computers focus on a variety of phenomena. For example, they address spatial aspects of virtual worlds (Benford, Bullock, Cook, Harvey, Ingram & Lee (1993), decision processes carried out through a distributed information system (Gachet & Haettenschwiler, 2003) or forms of cooperation as reflected by dyadic interactions (Baker, 2002). This last model of cooperation — the only full-fledged model amongst those cited above — is interesting in that it distinguishes different forms of cooperation within a dyad. Making these forms explicit helps us to understand how participants organize themselves when they solve a problem together. This organization is a function of the dimensions of activity that make up the model. From the moment that these forms are defined, it becomes possible to evaluate which of them characterize those interactions that are favorable for learning (Jakobsson, 2002; Burton, Brna & Treasure-Jones, 1996; Baker, 2002). Alternatively, it becomes possible to study which forms of cooperation would produce a final product of greater quality, for example in the case of design. But on which basis should we choose the dimensions of activity that are used to elaborate the forms of cooperation? And what factors can be related to these dimensions and in consequence, influence the forms of cooperation? A model of cooperative activity and factors influencing cooperation In the conceptual model of cooperative activity during problem resolution described by Baker, (2002), three principal phenomena appear upon observing people that work together: 1) different responsibilities and contributions, 2) the way in which people carry out their work together (e.g. each person’s speed, mutual understanding), and finally 3) the presence or absence of agreement. The objective of Baker’s model is to establish a link between cooperative activity and learning through the combination of three fundamental dimensions: role symmetry, alignment and agreement. (cf. Table 1). Table 1. The fundamental dimensions of Baker’s (2002) model of forms of cooperation Dimension Definition Degree of symmetry For a given continuous sequence of interaction, the similarity or difference in the responsibilities of participants in regards to the accomplishment of sub-tasks, such as is manifested in verbal or non-verbal communication, linked to material resources. Degree of The difference in propositional attitudes (belief, non-belief, acceptance, non-acceptance) that are agreement manifested publicly, in relation to the different aspects of cooperative activity of problem solving (solutions, goals, methods, actions). Degree of alignment The extent to which partners are “in phase”, in relation to aspects of their cooperative problem solving (phases, degree of mutual comprehension, conceptualization of problem). In the case where the values of the dimensions are binary (e.g. symmetrical / non-symmetrical, etc.), the three dimensional space corresponds to eight specific forms of cooperation (cf. Figure 1). Figure 1. The eight basic forms of cooperation in the cooperative activity of problem resolution, redrawn from Baker (2002). A study of the literature revealed factors that contribute in diverse ways to collaboration. However, they are not put into relation with a model that describes the forms of collaborative activity through precise dimensions, such as those in Baker’s model (see above). This is the objective of our article. We organized the factors we found in the literature into two types: internal and external. Each type of factor contains examples of different granularity. In regards to internal factors, a factor can be internal to the individual or internal to the interaction between individuals. The factors that are internal to the individual are for example, self-efficacy (Bandura, 1994), adherence to the working principle, altruism or favorable opinion of collaboration as an approach to problem solving (Suangsuwan, Wiratchai, & Wongwanich, 2006). There are also numerous factors internal to the interaction between individuals. For example, the structuring of communication at a distance (Baker & Lund, 1997), the socioinstitutional roles of participants (Lund, 2003), the exchanges of a social nature at the beginning of an interaction (van Amelsvoort & Andriessen 2003), and finally the extent to which participants take into account non-verbal body language (Gregori & Brassac, 2001) are all correlated with diverse ways of describing how collaboration occurs. The external factors of a technological, cultural, organizational, physiological and economical type can also influence the ways actions are carried out in collaborative and distributed communities (Strauss (1993), cited by Fjuk & Dirckinck-Homfeld, 1997). Concerning finer grained external factors, the availability of material resources can influence the way in which collaboration evolves: (Scott, Mandryk & Inkpen, 2002). In addition, the control of a resource (e.g. the manipulation of a video) can be determined by the seat one chooses (Krafft & Dausendschön-Gay, 1999). The first type of factor (internal) and more specifically, the factors that are internal to the interaction between individuals will retain our attention for the research presented here. In what follows, we apply Baker’s model (2002) to two new corpora, gathered in two design situations (a pilot study and a principal experiment), both mediated by computer and at a distance. The dimensions that constitute the forms of cooperative activity (symmetry, accord & alignment) are distinguished according to a methodology adapted to our corpora and from this, we deduce a subset of possible forms of cooperative activity. An analysis of the first corpus identified three factors internal to the interaction between individuals that were correlated with different forms of cooperation in Baker’s model. These Symmetry