Leibniz Institute For Wissensmedien

fur, Germany

Leibniz Institute For Wissensmedien

fur, Germany

Time filter

Source Type

Kozlov M.D.,Leibniz Institute For Wissensmedien | Grosse C.S.,University of Bremen
Computers in Human Behavior | Year: 2016

Research on collaborative learning traditionally assumes a certain degree of symmetry between the learning partners in terms of both their learning-relevant traits and their individual learning outcomes. However, if one collaborative partner is clearly more able, skilled, or knowledgeable than the other partner, then it remains unclear who profits more from the collaboration. The present study aimed to explore this issue by manipulating symmetry in prior knowledge within small groups of online learners (dyads) and measuring their problem-solving efficiency and incidental learning gain on an individual and dyad level. Awareness of this symmetry/asymmetry was manipulated, too, to discern it as a potential moderator. Dyads with symmetrical and asymmetrical prior knowledge performed equally well on most measures. Moreover, on average, the more and the less knowledgeable partners in the asymmetrical conditions had equal learning gains. However, while in dyads with symmetrical knowledge learning gains were correlated between the partners, in the asymmetrical dyads they were not. Awareness of symmetry/asymmetry did not act as a moderator, but, overall, dyads with awareness of each other's knowledge learned more from each other than dyads without such awareness. The benefit of awareness was, however, specific to the learning content exposed via awareness. We conclude that researchers and practitioners should be careful when choosing or assigning collaborative partners to each other, as only for partners with symmetrical prior knowledge can a symmetrical increase in knowledge be expected. We further discuss the implications of these findings for research on knowledge awareness and collaboration. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd

Buttliere B.,Leibniz Institute For Wissensmedien | Buder J.,Leibniz Institute For Wissensmedien
Scientometrics | Year: 2017

Despite their important position in the research environment, there is a growing theoretical uncertainty concerning what research metrics indicate (e.g., quality, impact, attention). Here we utilize the same tools used to study latent traits like Intelligence and Personality to get a quantitative understanding of what over 20 common research metrics indicate about the papers they represent. The sample is all of the 32,962 papers PLoS published in 2014, with results suggesting that there are at least two important underlying factors, which could generally be described as Scientific Attention/Discussion (citations), General Attention/Discussion (views, tweets), and potentially Media Attention/Discussion (media mentions). The General Attention metric is correlated about .50 with both the Academic and Media factors, though the Academic and Media attention are only correlated with each other below .05. The overall best indicator of the dataset was the total lifetime views on the paper, which is also probably the easiest to game. The results indicate the need for funding bodies to decide what they value and how to measure it (e.g., types of attention, quality). © 2017 Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary

Cress U.,Leibniz Institute For Wissensmedien | Rose C.P.,Carnegie Mellon University
Proceedings of International Conference of the Learning Sciences, ICLS | Year: 2016

The CSCL community is at a crossroads - at the brink of new paradigms in theories, methods, and forms of support, as new opportunities for impact in the expanding Web 2.0 space present themselves. As a community, we must find a strategic footing within the changing landscape. We need to advance and integrate new theories, methods, and supportive technologies. To that end, one goal of the workshop is to identify cross-cutting themes in CSCL research related to alternative Web 2.0 platforms. Another goal is to identify a strategic positioning for research in CSCL in synergy with the HCI/CSCW literature. © ISLS.

Lin R.,Leibniz Institute For Wissensmedien | Utz S.,Leibniz Institute For Wissensmedien
Computers in Human Behavior | Year: 2015

Abstract On Facebook, users are exposed to posts from both strong and weak ties. Even though several studies have examined the emotional consequences of using Facebook, less attention has been paid to the role of tie strength. This paper aims to explore the emotional outcomes of reading a post on Facebook and examine the role of tie strength in predicting happiness and envy. Two studies - one correlational, based on a sample of 207 American participants and the other experimental, based on a sample of 194 German participants - were conducted in 2014. In Study 2, envy was further distinguished into benign and malicious envy. Based on a multi-method approach, the results showed that positive emotions are more prevalent than negative emotions while browsing Facebook. Moreover, tie strength is positively associated with the feeling of happiness and benign envy, whereas malicious envy is independent of tie strength after reading a (positive) post on Facebook. © 2015 The Authors.

Kolodziej R.,Leibniz Institute For Wissensmedien | Hesse F.W.,Leibniz Institute For Wissensmedien | Engelmann T.,Practice for Giftedness and High Achievement Potential
Computers in Human Behavior | Year: 2016

Negotiations seldom lead to optimal results for the negotiators. The missing knowledge about the priorities of the negotiating parties is one known reason for this. This experimental study examines the effects of priority awareness on different measures of negotiation outcomes. Priority awareness is the awareness of one negotiator about the priorities of the other negotiator. One hundred thirty-two participants were randomly assigned to negotiation pairs in an experimental condition with priority awareness-created implicitly through the usage of an ordinary bar chart-or a control condition without priority awareness. They took over the roles of a car seller or buyer and negotiated within an experimental negotiation support system. They were neither explicitly instructed to use the bar chart in the negotiation or about its benefits, nor were they restricted in sharing any kind of information. The experimental condition showed not only a significantly higher negotiation performance in the form of joint outcome and pareto efficiency than the control condition, but also a higher impasse rate. Creating awareness about each other's priorities in a negotiation has a positive effect on the negotiation performance without noticeable negative effects on satisfaction with, or fairness and duration of, the negotiation. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. Ltd. All rights reserved.

Levordashka A.,Leibniz Institute For Wissensmedien | Utz S.,Leibniz Institute For Wissensmedien | Utz S.,University of Tübingen
Computers in Human Behavior | Year: 2016

Ambient awareness refers to the awareness social media users develop of their online network in result of being constantly exposed to social information, such as microblogging updates. Although each individual bit of information can seem like random noise, their incessant reception can amass to a coherent representation of social others. Despite its growing popularity and important implications for social media research, ambient awareness on public social media has not been studied empirically. We provide evidence for the occurrence of ambient awareness and examine key questions related to its content and functions. A diverse sample of participants reported experiencing awareness, both as a general feeling towards their network as a whole, and as knowledge of individual members of the network, whom they had not met in real life. Our results indicate that ambient awareness can develop peripherally, from fragmented information and in the relative absence of extensive one-to-one communication. We report the effects of demographics, media use, and network variables and discuss the implications of ambient awareness for relational and informational processes online. © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Wessel D.,Leibniz Institute For Wissensmedien
International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies | Year: 2015

Direct behavior observation, i.e., without first creating a video recording, is a challenging, one-shot task. The behavior has to be coded accurately during the situation itself. Mobile devices can assist direct observation, and there already are applications available for these purposes. However, the mobile revolution has led to new developments in devices, infrastructure, and market penetration that have opened up new, yet untapped, possibilities. In this article, expanded activity theory is used to highlight the unused potential of computer assisted direct observation (CADO) apps. If this potential is realized, it can provide observation with the same advantages online questionnaires and sites like Mechanical Turk have provided for surveys and Internet experiments.

Oeberst A.,Leibniz Institute For Wissensmedien | Moskaliuk J.,University of Tübingen
Educational Technology and Society | Year: 2016

This paper examines whether conversational norms that have been observed for face-to-face communication also hold in the context of a specific type of computer-mediated communication: collaboration (such as in Wikipedia). Specifically, we tested adherence to Grice's (1975) maxim of relation-the implicit demand to contribute information that is relevant (only) for the purpose of the communication. In two experiments about a historical event, we manipulated the relevance of information provided as well as the context of the collaboration (i.e., encyclopedia article vs. contemporary witness compendium). In line with Grice's maxim, participants indeed reliably preferred information that was relevant for the specific context (e.g., information of general relevance to a broader audience in the encyclopedia context).

Oeberst A.,Leibniz Institute For Wissensmedien
Berichte zur Deutschen Landeskunde | Year: 2012

What do we know? And how do we know? Unlike most scientific inquiries the contribution of Steinbrink et al. focuses on the scientific System itself - or a subsection of it. The present comment focuses on two main points: On the one hand it discusses various aspects that limit the range of conclusions that may be drawn from the network analyses presented by Steinbrink et al. (e.g., non-normativity of the analysis; limitation to successful scientists). On the other hand it elaborates on theoretically derived conditions that are beneficial for the common goal of knowledge construction (e.g., diversity among scientists; public debate) and contrasts them with current practice (e.g., conservatism in the peer review process).

Huber S.,Leibniz Institute For Wissensmedien | Huber S.,University of Tübingen | Klein E.,Leibniz Institute For Wissensmedien | Klein E.,RWTH Aachen | And 3 more authors.
Cortex | Year: 2015

In neuropsychological research, single-cases are often compared with a small control sample. Crawford and colleagues developed inferential methods (i.e., the modified t-test) for such a research design. In the present article, we suggest an extension of the methods of Crawford and colleagues employing linear mixed models (LMM). We first show that a t-test for the significance of a dummy coded predictor variable in a linear regression is equivalent to the modified t-test of Crawford and colleagues. As an extension to this idea, we then generalized the modified t-test to repeated measures data by using LMMs to compare the performance difference in two conditions observed in a single participant to that of a small control group. The performance of LMMs regarding Type I error rates and statistical power were tested based on Monte-Carlo simulations. We found that starting with about 15-20 participants in the control sample Type I error rates were close to the nominal Type I error rate using the Satterthwaite approximation for the degrees of freedom. Moreover, statistical power was acceptable. Therefore, we conclude that LMMs can be applied successfully to statistically evaluate performance differences between a single-case and a control sample. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd.

Loading Leibniz Institute For Wissensmedien collaborators
Loading Leibniz Institute For Wissensmedien collaborators