协同搜索团队学习效果研究:基于任务类型、组织规模与沟通质量

doi:10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2021.18.008

图书情报工作 ›› 2021, Vol. 65 ›› Issue (18): 71-82.DOI: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2021.18.008

协同搜索团队学习效果研究:基于任务类型、组织规模与沟通质量

李华锋¹, 孙丰秋¹, 孙晓宁¹, 袁勤俭²

1. 山西财经大学信息学院太原 030006;
2. 南京大学信息管理学院南京 210023

收稿日期:2021-04-01 修回日期:2021-06-06 出版日期:2021-09-20 发布日期:2021-09-26
作者简介:李华锋(ORCID:0000-0002-3412-8999),副教授,博士,E-mail:lihuafeng305@126.com;孙丰秋(ORCID:0000-0002-9503-7425),硕士研究生;孙晓宁(ORCID:0000-0003-1759-2543),副教授,博士;袁勤俭(ORCID:0000-0002-9684-9943),教授,博士,博士生导师。
基金资助:
本文系国家社会科学基金青年项目"面向过程的信息搜索用户学习机理研究与游戏化学习框架设计"（项目编号：19CTQ022）研究成果之一。

Learning Effect of Collaborative Search Team: from the Perspective of Task Type, Group Size and Communication Quality

Li Huafeng¹, Sun Fengqiu¹, Sun Xiaoning¹, Yuan Qinjian²

1. School of Information, Shanxi University of Finance and Economics, Taiyuan 030006;
2. School of Information Management, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210023

Received:2021-04-01 Revised:2021-06-06 Online:2021-09-20 Published:2021-09-26

摘要/Abstract

摘要： [目的/意义]与独立搜索相比，协同搜索更有助于解决复杂的信息需求。针对学界尚未厘清的协同搜索团队学习效果问题进行研究，有助于探明协同搜索团队学习效果的前因及其作用机制，并对提升团队信息搜索能力及合作学习能力有所启示。[方法/过程]基于合作学习理论，采用信息搜索实验方法来验证不同组规模、组内沟通质量及任务类型水平下，协同搜索团队学习效果的差异性。[结果/结论]在决策型任务情景下，2人组、4人组、6人组的协同搜索团队学习效果存在显著差异，4人组的团队学习效果最佳；组内沟通质量对协同搜索团队学习效果存在显著影响；在决策型任务情景下，组规模和团队沟通质量会对团队学习效果产生交互作用。

关键词: 协同搜索, 学习效果, 任务类型, 组规模, 沟通质量, 搜索即学习

Abstract: [Purpose/significance] Compared with single person search, collaborative search is helpful to solve the tasks of complex information needs. Further research on the learning effect of collaborative search team, which has not been clarified in academic circles, will help to explore the antecedents and mechanism of the learning effect, and provide some enlightenment for improving the team's information search ability and cooperative learning ability.[Method/process] Based on the theory of cooperative learning, this study adopted the method of information search experiment to verify the difference of learning effect of collaborative search team under different group size, communication quality and task type level.[Result/conclusion] In the decision-making task scenario, there are significant differences in the team learning effect among 2-person group, 4-person group and 6-person group, and the team learning effect of 4-person group is the best; the quality of intra group communication has a significant impact on the learning effect of collaborative search team; in the context of decision-making task, group size and team communication quality have an interactive effect on team learning.

Key words: collaborative search, learning effect, task type, group size, communication quality, search as learning

中图分类号:

G250

李华锋, 孙丰秋, 孙晓宁, 袁勤俭. 协同搜索团队学习效果研究:基于任务类型、组织规模与沟通质量[J]. 图书情报工作, 2021, 65(18): 71-82.

Li Huafeng, Sun Fengqiu, Sun Xiaoning, Yuan Qinjian. Learning Effect of Collaborative Search Team: from the Perspective of Task Type, Group Size and Communication Quality[J]. Library and Information Service, 2021, 65(18): 71-82.

参考文献

[1] AVULA S, CHADWICK G, ARGUELLO J, et al. Searchbots:user engagement with chatbots during collaborative search[C]//Proceedings of the 2018 conference on human information interaction & retrieval. New Brunswick:CHⅡR, 2018:52-61.
[2] BYSTRÖM K. Searching as a learning activity in real life workplaces[J/OL].[2020-12-15]. http://www.diigubc.ca/ⅢXSAL/Papers/Bystrom.pdf.
[3] WU D, LIANG S, YU W. Collaborative information searching as learning in academic group work[J]. Aslib journal of information management, 2018, 70(1):2-27
[4] 孙晓宁, 姚青.信息搜索用户学习行为投入影响研究:基于认知风格与自我效能[J]. 情报理论与实践, 2020, 43(10):99-107.
[5] POLTROCK S, GRUDIN J, DUMAIS S, et al. Information seeking and sharing in design teams[C]//Proceedings of the 2003 international ACM SIGGROUP conference on supporting group work. Sanibel Island:ACM SIGGROUP, 2003:239-247.
[6] GOLOVCHINSKY G, PICKENS J, BACK M. A taxonomy of collaboration in online information seeking[J]. Information processing & management, 2008, 44(3):957-962.
[7] WU D, LIANG S, DONG J, et al. Impact of task types on collaborative information seeking behavior[J]. Libri, 2018, 68(3):231-245.
[8] PALMQUIST R A, KIM K S. Cognitive style and on-line database search experience as predictors of Web search performance[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 2000, 51(6):558-566.
[9] TAMINE L, SOULIER L. Understanding the impact of the role factor in collaborative information retrieval[C]//Proceedings of the CIKM 2015 conference on information and knowledge management. Melbourne:CIKM, 2015:43-52.
[10] EVANS B M, KAIRAM S, PIROLLI P. Do your friends make you smarter?:an analysis of social strategies in online information seeking[J]. Information processing & management, 2010, 46(6):679-692.
[11] SHAH C, GONZÁLEZ-IBÁÑEZ R. Exploring information seeking processes in collaborative search tasks[J]. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2010, 47(1):1-7.
[12] 吴丹, 邱瑾.协同信息检索行为中的认知研究[J]. 情报学报, 2013, 32(2):125-137.
[13] 袁红, 赵宇珺.协同搜索行为中的用户任务感知及情绪状态研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2015, 59(17):89-98.
[14] TAO Y, TOMBROS A. An exploratory study of sensemaking in collaborative information seeking[C]//Proceedings of advances in information retrieval-35th european conference on IR research. Moscow:ECIR, 2013:26-37.
[15] HTUN N N, HALVEY M, BAILLIE L. How can we better support users with non-uniform information access in collaborative information retrieval?[C]//Proceedings of the 2017 conference on conference human information interaction and retrieval. Oslo:CHⅡR, 2017:235-244.
[16] DU J T, ARIF A S M, HANSEN P. Collaborative query reformulation in tourism information search[J]. Online information review, 2019, 43(7):1115-1135.
[17] 邱瑾, 吴丹.协同信息检索行为中的情感研究[J]. 图书与情报, 2013(2):105-110.
[18] MORAES F, GRASHOFF K, HAUFF C. On the impact of group size on collaborative search effectiveness[J]. Information retrieval journal, 2019, 22(5):476-498.
[19] MORRIS M R. A survey of collaborative web search practices[C]//Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. Florence:CHI, 2008:1657-1660.
[20] MORRIS M R. Collaborative search revisited[C]//Proceedings of the 2013 conference on computer supported cooperative work. San Antonio:CCSCW, 2013:1181-1192.
[21] 王坦.合作学习:原理与策略[M]. 北京:学苑出版社, 2001:32.
[22] ROSETH C J, JOHNSON D W, JOHNSON R T. Promoting early adolescents' achievement and peer relationships:the effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures[J]. Psychological bulletin, 2008, 134(2):223-246.
[23] KRAUSE U M, STARK R, MANDL H. The effects of cooperative learning and feedback on e-learning in statistics[J]. Learning and instruction, 2009, 19(2):158-170.
[24] HATANO G, INAGAKI K. Sharing cognition through collective comprehension activity[C]//RESNICK L, LEVIN J, TEASLEY S D. Perspectives on socially shared cognition. Washington, DC:American Psychology Association, 1991:331-348.
[25] ZAMANI M. Cooperative learning:homogeneous and heterogeneous grouping of Iranian EFL learners in a writing context[J]. Cogent education, 2016, 3(1):1-11.
[26] MURPHY P K, GREENE J A, FIRETTO C M, et al. Exploring the influence of homogeneous versus heterogeneous grouping on students' text-based discussions and comprehension[J]. Contemporary educational psychology, 2017, 51:336-355.
[27] CHIOU C C. The effect of concept mapping on students' learning achievements and interests[J]. Innovations in education and teaching international, 2008, 45(4):375-387.
[28] HAO J X, KWOK R C W, LAU R Y K, et al. Predicting problem-solving performance with concept maps:an information-theoretic approach[J]. Decision support systems, 2010, 48(4):613-621.
[29] SAITO H, EGUSA Y, TAKAKU M, et al. Using concept map to evaluate learning by searching[C]//Proceedings of the annual meeting of the cognitive science society. Sapporo:COGSCI, 2012, 953-958.
[30] EGUSA Y, SAITO H, TAKAKU M, et al. Using a concept map to evaluate exploratory search[C]//Proceedings of the third symposium on information interaction in context. New Brunswick:ⅡiX, 2010:175-184.
[31] EGUSA Y, TAKAKU M, SAITO H. How concept maps change if a user does search or not?[C]//Proceedings of the 5th information interaction in context symposium. Regensburg:ⅡiX, 2014:68-75.
[32] 李月琳, 章小童.数据驱动的信息行为研究的回顾与展望[J]. 信息资源管理学报, 2018, 8(2):13-27.
[33] SAITO H, EGUSA Y, TERAI H, et al. Changes in users' knowledge structures before and after web search on a topic:analysis using the concept map[J]. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2011, 48(1):1-4.
[34] 夏立新, 周鼎, 叶光辉, 等.情感负荷视角下探索式搜索学习效果的影响因素[J]. 图书情报知识, 2020(4), 133-141.
[35] CARVALHO M R, HEWETT R, CAÑAS A J. Enhancing web searches from concept map-based knowledge models[C]//Proceedings of SCI 2001:fifth multiconference on systems, cybernetics and informatics. Orlando:SCI, 2001:69-73.
[36] TERGAN S O, ENGELMANN T, HESSE F W. Digital concept maps as powerful interfaces for enhancing information search:an experimental study on the effects of semantic cueing[C]//Proceedings of the third international conference on concept mapping-2008. Tallinn & Helsinki:ICCM. 2008:1-8.
[37] VAN EIJL P J, PILOT A, DE VOOGD P. Effects of collaborative and individual learning in a blended learning environment[J]. Education and information technologies, 2005, 10(1/2):51-65.
[38] MEI L, HAI-LIN L. Strategic learning, capability and the performance of diversification strategy:evidence from chinese small and medium size enterprise groups[C]//International conference on management science and engineering. Lille:ICMSE, 2006:1399-1405.
[39] LOU Y, ABRAMI P C, SPENCE J C, et al. Within-class grouping:a meta-analysis[J]. Review of educational research, 1996, 66(4):423-458.
[40] JOHO H, HANNAH D, JOSE J M. Revisiting IR techniques for collaborative search strategies[C]//European conference on information retrieval. Berlin:Springer-Verlag, 2009:66-77.
[41] MORAES F, GRASHOFF K, HAUFF C. On the impact of group size on collaborative search effectiveness[J]. Information retrieval journal, 2019, 22(5):476-498.
[42] ROBERTS T L, LOWRY P B, CHENEY P H, et al. Improving group communication outcomes with collaborative software:the impact of group size, media richness, and social presence[C]//Proceedings of the 39th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences. Kauia:HICSS, 2006:19c-19c.
[43] KRENZ H L, BURTSCHER M J. Investigating voice in action teams:a critical review[J]. Cognition, technology & work, 2020:1-20.
[44] 吴志明, 武欣. MBA学生团队学习效果及影响因素研究[J]. 管理学报, 2006, 3(1):55-59.
[45] DE VRIES R E, VAN DEN HOOFF B, DE RIDDER J A. Explaining knowledge sharing:the role of team communication styles, job satisfaction, and performance beliefs[J]. Communication research, 2006, 33(2):115-135.
[46] 李树祥, 梁巧转, 杨柳青.团队认知多样性和团队沟通对团队创造力的影响研究[J]. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2012, 33(12):153-159.
[47] 孙敏, 栗琳.论情报研究团队的过程损失问题[J]. 情报理论与实践, 2017, 40(2):42-47.
[48] 毕鹏程, 席酉民.群体决策过程中的群体思维研究[J]. 管理科学学报, 2002(1):25-34.
[49] LOWRY P B, ROBERTS T L, ROMANO JR N C, et al. The impact of group size and social presence on small-group communication:does computer-mediated communication make a difference?[J]. Small group research, 2006, 37(6):631-661.
[50] CAMPBELL D J. Task complexity:a review and analysis[J]. Academy of management review, 1988, 13(1):40-52.
[51] TOMS E G, O'BRIEN H, MACKENZIE T, et al. Task effects on interactive search:the query factor[C]//International workshop of the initiative for the evaluation of XML retrieval. Berlin:Springer-Verlag, 2007:359-372.
[52] 王菲妍, 柯青, 韩正彪.任务驱动下的学术数据库新手心智模型演进及学习模式研究[J]. 图书情报知识, 2021(1):113-124.
[53] EVANS C, HAY D, KINCHIN I.Using concept mapping to measure learning quality[J]. Education+training, 2008, 50(2):167-182.
[54] WATSON MK, PELKEY J, NOYES C, et al. Assessing impacts of a learning-cycle-based module on students'conceptual sustainability knowledge using concept maps and surveys[J]. Journal of cleaner production, 2016(133):544-556.
[55] 李月琳, 张秀, 王姗姗.社交媒体健康信息质量研究:基于真伪健康信息特征的分析[J]. 情报学报, 2018, 37(3):294-304.
[56] SARKAR S. Social capital:the role of group size and heterogeneity[J]. International journal of multidisciplinary, 2020, 5(8):22-32.
[57] DAIM T U, HA A, REUTIMAN S, et al. Exploring the communication breakdown in global virtual teams[J]. International journal of project management, 2012, 30(2):199-212.
[58] JANSSEN J, ERKENS G, KIRSCHNER P A, et al. Influence of group member familiarity on online collaborative learning[J]. Computers in human behavior, 2009, 25(1):161-170.
[59] SARKAR S. Social Capital:the role of group size and heterogeneity[J]. International journal of multidisciplinary, 2020, 5(8):22-32. 作者贡献说明:李华锋:提出研究思路, 收集文献, 撰写论文并修改; 孙丰秋:搜集整理实验数据; 孙晓宁:修改论文; 袁勤俭:修改论文。

协同搜索团队学习效果研究:基于任务类型、组织规模与沟通质量

Learning Effect of Collaborative Search Team: from the Perspective of Task Type, Group Size and Communication Quality

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 6

编辑推荐

Metrics

[1]	孟高慧, 宋筱璇, 张潇月, 刘畅. 学习型搜索中的笔记记录行为与学习产出的关联探究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2022, 66(8): 42-54.
[2]	方舟, 洪采菲, 秦姝言, 刘畅. 自我调节学习情境下任务类型和学习认知策略对视频类搜索行为的影响[J]. 图书情报工作, 2021, 65(21): 84-96.
[3]	宋筱璇, 刘畅, 陈建龙. 搜索即学习主题的相关研究综述[J]. 图书情报工作, 2021, 65(10): 113-126.
[4]	宋筱璇, 刘畅. 搜索前后用户知识水平的评估及其变化情况分析[J]. 图书情报工作, 2018, 62(2): 108-116.
[5]	袁红, 赵宇珺. 协同搜索行为中的用户任务感知及情绪状态研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2015, 59(17): 89-98.
[6]	孙丽, 曹锦丹. 信息搜寻行为研究中任务概念框架的构建[J]. 图书情报工作, 2014, 58(02): 47-52.