Abstract:

This paper investigates the effects of generic versus information feedback on levels of perceived and objective consensus and argumentation style of participants high and low in dispositional trust, in the context of an Interactive Management session. Interactive Management (IM) is a computer-supported collaborative thinking methodology designed to enhance group problem-solving and systems thinking. There are a series of steps in the IM process. First, students are asked to generate a set of ‘raw’ ideas about what might potentially have a bearing on a problem situation. Group discussion and voting helps the group to clarify the sub-set of ideas that bear upon the most critical problem issues. Next, using IM software, each of the critical issues are compared systematically in pairs and the same question is asked of each in turn: “Does A influence B?” Unless there is majority consensus that one issue impacts upon another, the relation does not appear in the final analysis. After all the critical issues have been compared in this way, IM software generates a problem structure (or problematique) showing how the issues are interrelated. The problematique can then be viewed and printed for discussion.

In the current study, four groups of undergraduate psychology students (N = 77) came together to discuss the negative consequences of online social media usage. Levels of perceived consensus, objective consensus, and perceived efficacy of the collaborative learning methodology were measured. After screening for trust scores, participants high and low on dispositional trust were randomly assigned to either a generic or information feedback condition. Participants in the generic feedback group received basic, simple feedback and instructions in relation to the task at hand, whereas the information feedback group received more specific, and directed, task-level and process-level feedback.

Results indicate that those in the information feedback groups scored significantly higher on perceived consensus, objective consensus and perceived efficacy of the IM methodology itself. Analysis of the dialogue using the Conversational Argument Coding Scheme also revealed significant differences in the style of argumentation between the conditions, with those in the information feedback groups exhibiting a greater range of reasoning activities. Finally, analysis of the problematiques generated by the groups revealed that, in line with a broader range of reasoning activities, the information feedback groups produced more complex problematiques in relation to the problem. Results are discussed in light of theory and research on feedback and collaborative learning.

Keywords:

Feedback, collaborative learning, computer-supported collaborative learning, consensus, interactive management.