Observation versus Perception in the Conceptualization and Measurement of Participation Equality in Computer‐Mediated Communication

Abstract

Participation equality, a prominent construct that has received much attention in group decision‐making research, has been studied with both perceptual and objective measures. Yet, research findings regarding participation equality have been inconsistent and equivocal. We argue that one reason for this inconsistency is how participation equality has been conceptualized and measured. In some studies, researchers have theorized and measured participation equality using observed behavior. In other studies, researchers have theorized and measured participation equality using perceptual measures. We conducted an experiment to investigate the similarities and differences between these two measures. Our results indicate that (1) perceived participation equality (PPE) and observed participation equality (OPE) are theoretically separate and distinct constructs that (2) affect and are affected by other constructs in different ways within their nomological network. OPE and PPE were more different than they were similar, sharing only 10.8% of their variance. In other words, perceptions of participation equality were predominantly influenced by factors other than observed behaviors related to participation equality. We believe that these results call for more theory and research regarding the differences between observed behavior and perceptions of behavior in group decision making. As we move into new computer‐mediated communication technologies such as Web Conferencing, Virtual Reality, and Enterprise Social Media that enable new forms of participation, we need to consider what constitutes participation and how new forms of participation should be measured and evaluated. In the large group environments of Enterprise Social Media, the differences between OPE and PPE are likely to become more pronounced.

CFDSD: a Communication Framework for Distributed Software Development

“…In a set of interactions, different interpretations can exist between the stakeholders, that is, the inherent divergence and ambiguity of communication can lead to different and sometimes conflicting knowledge. Several authors approach the subject, such as [51]. A symbol set (item 19 in Table 1), derived from [25], is the set of symbol types used in interactions.…”

Improving participation equity in dialogic collaborative problem solving: A participatory visual learning analytical approach

“…However, it is important to note that the majority of these existing endeavours concentrate solely on promoting equal participation among individuals or demographic groups, typically measured through the distribution of participation units, such as the number of turns, spoken words, or online posts (e.g., Janssen et al, 2007; Ollesch et al, 2021; Strauß & Rummel, 2023; Sukumar et al, 2020). Unfortunately, these approaches tend to overlook other crucial dimensions of equitable peer interaction, such as participation opportunities, active listening, and demonstrating respect and involvement (Boaler, 2008; Engle et al, 2014; Hu & Chen, 2022; Mejias et al, 2018; Shah & Lewis, 2019). Consequently, a comprehensive consideration of these additional factors is imperative to foster a truly inclusive and equitable dialogue environment.…”