Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
158 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
45 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Greater than the sum of its parts: The role of minority and majority status in collaborative problem-solving communication (2403.04671v1)

Published 7 Mar 2024 in cs.CL

Abstract: Collaborative problem-solving (CPS) is a vital skill used both in the workplace and in educational environments. CPS is useful in tackling increasingly complex global, economic, and political issues and is considered a central 21st century skill. The increasingly connected global community presents a fruitful opportunity for creative and collaborative problem-solving interactions and solutions that involve diverse perspectives. Unfortunately, women and underrepresented minorities (URMs) often face obstacles during collaborative interactions that hinder their key participation in these problem-solving conversations. Here, we explored the communication patterns of minority and non-minority individuals working together in a CPS task. Group Communication Analysis (GCA), a temporally-sensitive computational linguistic tool, was used to examine how URM status impacts individuals' sociocognitive linguistic patterns. Results show differences across racial/ethnic groups in key sociocognitive features that indicate fruitful collaborative interactions. We also investigated how the groups' racial/ethnic composition impacts both individual and group communication patterns. In general, individuals in more demographically diverse groups displayed more productive communication behaviors than individuals who were in majority-dominated groups. We discuss the implications of individual and group diversity on communication patterns that emerge during CPS and how these patterns can impact collaborative outcomes.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (64)
  1. OECD. Pisa 2015 collaborative problem solving framework, 2013.
  2. PISA. Pisa 2015 assessment and analytical framework: Science, reading, mathematic, financial literacy and collaborative problem solving, 2017.
  3. Identifying the most important 21st century workforce competencies: An analysis of the occupational information network (o* net). ETS Research Report Series, 2013(2):i–55, 2013.
  4. Collaborative problem-solving education for the twenty-first-century workforce. Nature human behaviour, 2(6):367–369, 2018.
  5. A question of belonging: race, social fit, and achievement. Journal of personality and social psychology, 92(1):82, 2007.
  6. Female peers in small work groups enhance women’s motivation, verbal participation, and career aspirations in engineering. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(16):4988–4993, 2015.
  7. Solidarity in stem: How gender composition affects women’s experience in work teams. Sex Roles, 82(3):142–154, 2020.
  8. Peer-led team learning helps minority students succeed. PLoS biology, 14(3):e1002398, 2016.
  9. A computer’s understanding of literature. Scientific Study of Literature, 1(1):24–33, 2011.
  10. Modeling student socioaffective responses to group interactions in a collaborative online chat environment. In Educational Data Mining 2014, 2014.
  11. The role of efficacy and identity in science career commitment among underrepresented minority students. Journal of Social Issues, 67(3):469–491, 2011.
  12. Girls and women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics: Steming the tide and broadening participation in stem careers. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1(1):21–29, 2014.
  13. Confronting the socialization barrier: cross-ethnic differences in undergraduate women’s preference for it education. In J. Cohoon and W Aspray, editors, Women and Information Technology: Research on Underrepresentation, pages 301–323. MIT Press, Cambridge,MA, 2006.
  14. Maria Ong. Body projects of young women of color in physics: Intersections of gender, race, and science. Social problems, 52(4):593–617, 2005.
  15. Online collaborative learning activities: The perspectives of african american female students. Computers & Education, 82:152–161, 2015.
  16. Bridging the diversity divide–globalization and reciprocal empowerment in higher education. ASHE Higher Education Report, 35(1):1–144, 2009.
  17. Using social network analysis to study the social structures of inclusion. In ASEE annual conference & exposition, 2018.
  18. Exploring underrepresented student motivation and perceptions of collaborative learning-enhanced cs undergraduate introductory courses. In 2019 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), pages 1–6. IEEE, 2019.
  19. Online collaborative learning activities: The perspectives of minority graduate students. Online Learning Journal, 21(4), 2017.
  20. Toward an understanding of macrocognition in teams: Predicting processes in complex collaborative contexts. Human Factors, 52(2):203–224, 2010.
  21. Challenges of assessing collaborative problem solving. In Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills, pages 75–91. Springer, 2018a.
  22. The psychological meaning of words: Liwc and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of language and social psychology, 29(1):24–54, 2010.
  23. Collaboration analytics—current state and potential futures. Journal of Learning Analytics, 8(1):1–12, 2021.
  24. Modeling gender dynamics in intra and interpersonal interactions during online collaborative learning. In Proceedings of the 9th international conference on learning analytics & knowledge, pages 431–435, 2019.
  25. Group communication analysis: A computational linguistics approach for detecting sociocognitive roles in multiparty interactions. Behavior research methods, 51(3):1007–1041, 2019a.
  26. Liwcs the same, not the same: Gendered linguistic signals of performance and experience in online stem courses. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, pages 333–345. Springer, 2020.
  27. Cross-cultural comparisons of online collaboration. Journal of computer-mediated communication, 8(1):JCMC814, 2002.
  28. The impact of individualism—collectivism, social presence, and group diversity on group decision making under majority influence. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23(4):53–80, 2007.
  29. Inducing socio-cognitive conflict in finnish and german groups of online learners by cscl script. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 8:333–349, 2013.
  30. Differences are different: Examining the effects of communication media on the impacts of racial and gender diversity in decision-making teams. Information Systems Research, 29(3):525–545, 2018.
  31. Ismael Peña-López et al. Pisa 2015 results (volume v). collaborative problem solving. 2017.
  32. Employability skills for 21st-century stem students: the employers’ perspective. Higher education, skills and work-based learning, 2020.
  33. Graduate employability: Views of recent science graduates and employers. International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 24(3), 2016.
  34. Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills: Methods and approach. Springer, 2015.
  35. Teamwork in engineering undergraduate classes: What problems do students experience? In 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, 2016.
  36. Beyond grades: improving college students’ social-cognitive outcomes in stem through a collaborative learning environment. Learning Environments Research, 24(1):123–136, 2021.
  37. OECD. Pisa 2015 technical report, 2017.
  38. When racial/ethnic minorities emerge as leaders: The role of learning orientation and team minority composition. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 23(3-4):195, 2019.
  39. The effects of proportional representation on intragroup behavior in mixed-race decision-making groups. Small Group Research, 30(3):259–279, 1999.
  40. The impact of demographic heterogeneity and team leader-team member demographic fit on team empowerment and effectiveness. Group & Organization Management, 29(3):334–368, 2004.
  41. Unraveling the effects of cultural diversity in teams: A meta-analysis of research on multicultural work groups. Journal of international business studies, 41(4):690–709, 2010.
  42. Diversity’s harvest: Interactions of diversity sources and communication technology on creative group performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 111(2):116–126, 2010.
  43. National Science Foundation. Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering : Introduction. https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2017/nsf17310/digest/introduction/, 2014. Accessed: 2022-03-31.
  44. National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering, 2019.
  45. Rendered invisible: Are asian americans a model or a marginalized minority? American Psychologist, 76(4):575, 2021.
  46. Trends in clinical research including asian american, native hawaiian, and pacific islander participants funded by the us national institutes of health, 1992 to 2018. JAMA Network Open, 2(7):e197432–e197432, 2019.
  47. Moving beyond the model minority. Asian American Journal of Psychology, 8(1):1, 2017.
  48. Jean Yonemura Wing. Beyond black and white: The model minority myth and the invisibility of asian american students. The Urban Review, 39(4):455–487, 2007.
  49. Advancing the science of collaborative problem solving. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 19(2):59–92, 2018b.
  50. Promoting inclusivity through time-dynamic discourse analysis in digitally-mediated collaborative learning. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, pages 207–219. Springer, 2019b.
  51. Exploring the relationship between emergent sociocognitive roles, collaborative problem-solving skills, and outcomes: A group communication analysis. Journal of Learning Analytics, 7(1):38–57, 2020.
  52. Scip: Combining group communication and interpersonal positioning to identify emergent roles in scaled digital environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 119:106709, 2021.
  53. Gender-related differences in computer-mediated communication and computer-supported collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(5):393–409, 2007.
  54. Exploring the role of ‘gendered’discourse styles in online science discussions. International Journal of Science Education, 37(3):484–504, 2015.
  55. It’s not that you said it, it’s how you said it: Exploring the linguistic mechanisms underlying values affirmation interventions at scale. AERA Open, 7:23328584211011611, 2021.
  56. Linguistic characteristics of reflective states in video annotations under different instructional conditions. Computers in Human Behavior, 96:211–222, 2019.
  57. Exploring development of social capital in a cmooc through language and discourse. The Internet and Higher Education, 36:54–64, 2018.
  58. The development and psychometric properties of liwc2015. Technical report, 2015.
  59. A framework for measuring undergraduate learning and growth. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 53(6):51–59, 2021.
  60. Carol KK Chan. Co-regulation of learning in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: A discussion. Metacognition and learning, 7:63–73, 2012.
  61. Can students collaboratively use hypermedia to learn science? the dynamics of self-and other-regulatory processes in an ecology classroom. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 31(3):215–245, 2004.
  62. Talking about group (but not individual) process aids group performance. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 15:179–192, 2020.
  63. Quantitative approach to collaborative learning: Performance prediction, individual assessment, and group composition. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 11:187–225, 2016.
  64. Team creativity/innovation in culturally diverse teams: A meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40(6):693–708, 2019.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now