Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Videoconferencing in Peer Review: Exploring Differences in Efficiency and Outcomes|
|Authors:||Pier, Elizabeth L.|
Ford, Cecilia E.
Nathan, Mitchell J.
|Publisher:||Philadelphia, PA: International Society of the Learning Sciences.|
|Citation:||Pier, E. L., Raclaw, J., Ford, C. E., Kaatz, A., Carnes, M., & Nathan, M. J. (2017). Videoconferencing in Peer Review: Exploring Differences in Efficiency and Outcomes In Smith, B. K., Borge, M., Mercier, E., and Lim, K. Y. (Eds.). (2017). Making a Difference: Prioritizing Equity and Access in CSCL, 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) 2017, Volume 2. Philadelphia, PA: International Society of the Learning Sciences.|
|Abstract:||Technology-mediated communication, such as teleconference and videoconference, has been found to affect group decision-making processes compared to face-to-face settings. Scientific peer review panels offer a site of authentic, collaborative decision making among expert scientists, yet no research has examined the impact of videoconferencing on such decision-making practices. We assigned real, de-identified grant applications submitted to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to four panels of experienced NIH reviewers, one of which met via videoconference. The videoconference panel was slightly more efficient than the face- to-face panels, but the outcomes of their decision making (i.e., the scores assigned to grant applications) did not differ. However, preliminary analyses suggest there are differences in the nature of the collaborative discussion among reviewers between the two meeting formats. We discuss implications for research into technology-mediated collaborative decision making, as well as for the scientific grant peer review process broadly.|
|Appears in Collections:||CSCL 2017|
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.