Advertisement

Evaluation of Adaptive Teamwork System Based upon Individual Differences in Culture Dimension (Individualism - Collectivism)

  • Wesam ShishahEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 739)

Abstract

Although there are various personalised and adaptive eLearning systems developed, a culture factor has been not sufficiently considered in adaptive and personalised learning environments. This paper presents a personalised and adaptive system based on individual differences in cultural backgrounds (individualism and collectivism). A culturally adaptive teamwork system called IdeasRoom is used to implement cultural additions. The IdeasRoom system has adaptations to its interface to include two different versions of design: individualist version (IND) and collectivist version (COL). The paper summarises an initial evaluation of the proposed system. This evaluation of the proposed IdeasRoom system relates to the responses of the participants of the study that involved 52 postgraduate students, so that the version that was not personalised to participants’ cultural backgrounds is compared with the version that was personalised to participants’ cultural backgrounds in terms of their perceptions of usability their preferences of design. The findings show that the participants had perceptions of usability that are shown to be at a higher level when teamwork learning systems are personalised to participants’ cultural backgrounds, which suggests that these results based on identifying users’ cultural backgrounds are of significant importance. Also, this evaluation concludes that participants’ preferences for experiencing a system are matched to their cultural inclinations.

Keywords

Culture Group work Teamwork Higher education Design HCI CSCW Personalisation Adaptation 

References

  1. 1.
    Alshammari, M., Anane, R., Hendley, R.J.: Adaptivity in E-learning systems. In: Proceedings - 2014 8th International Conference on Complex, Intelligent and Software Intensive Systems, CISIS 2014, pp. 79–86 (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ardito, C., et al.: An approach to usability evaluation of e-learning applications. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 4(3), 270–283 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bangor, A., Kortum, P.T., Miller, J.T.: An empirical evaluation of the system usability scale. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 24, 574–594 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bishop, J.W., Chen, X., Scott, K.D.: What drives Chinese toward teamwork? A study of US-invested companies in China (1999)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boticario, J., Santos, O., Van Rosmalen, P.: Issues in developing standard-based adaptive learning management systems (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brooke, J.: SUS - a quick and dirty usability scale. In: Usability Evaluation in Industry, vol. 189(194), pp. 4–7 (1996)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brusilovsky, P.: Adaptive hypermedia for education and training. In: Durlach, P.J., Lesgold, A.M. (eds.) Adaptive Technologies for Training and Education, p. 46. Cambridge University Press, New York (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cárdenas, J.C., Mantilla, C.: Between-group competition, intra-group cooperation and relative performance. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 9 (2015)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chirkov, V.I., Lynch, M., Niwa, S.: Application of the scenario questionnaire of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism to the assessment of cultural distance and cultural fit. Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 29(4), 469–490 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cox, T.H., Lobel, S.A., McLeod, P.L.: Effects of ethnic group cultural differences on cooperative and competitive behavior on a group task. Acad. Manag. J. 34(4), 827–847 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Drury, H., Kay, J., Losberg, W.: Student satisfaction with groupwork in undergraduate computer science: do things get better? In: Proceedings of the Fifth Australasian Conference on Computing Education, vol. 20, pp. 77–85. Australian Computer Society, Inc. (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Erez, M., Earley, P.C.: Culture, self-identity, and work (1993)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Essalmi, F., et al.: Generalized metrics for the analysis of E-learning personalization strategies. Comput. Hum. Behav. 48, 310–322 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fadil, P.A., Williamson, S., Knudstrup, M.: A theoretical perspective of the cultural influences of individualism/collectivism, group membership, and performance variation on allocation behaviors of supervisors. Compet. Rev. Int. Bus. J. 19(2), 134–150 (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Galanes, G.J., Adams, K.H., Brilhart, J.K.: Effective Group Discussion: Theory and Practice. McGraw-Hill Humanities Social, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gelfand, M.J., Erez, M., Aycan, Z.: Cross-cultural organizational behavior. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 58, 479–514 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gibbs, G.: The assessment of group work: lessons from the literature. Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange (2009)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hauger, D., Köck, M.: State of the art of adaptivity in e-learning platforms. In: LWA, pp. 355–360 (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G.J., Minkov, M.: Cultures and Organizations, Software of the mind. Intercultural Cooperation and Its Importance for survival (2010)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hofstede, G.H.: Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations Across Nations. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2001)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hofstede, G.H.: Cultures and Organizations, Software of the Mind: Intercultural Cooperation and its Importance for Survival (1996)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Khaled, R.: Culturally-relevant persuasive technology. Pt Design, p. 256 (2008)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kim, K.-S., Moore, J.L.: Web-based learning: factors affecting students’ satisfaction and learning experience. First Monday 10(11), 115–131 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kitayama, S.: Culture and basic psychological processes–toward a system view of culture: comment on Oyserman et al. (2002). Psychol. Bull. 128(1), 89–96 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lazar, J., Feng, J.H.J., Hochheiser, H.: Research Methods in Human-Computer Interaction. Wiley, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Leibbrandt, A., Gneezy, U., List, J.A.: Rise and fall of competitiveness in individualistic and collectivistic societies. In: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 110(23), pp. 9305–9308 (2013)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mann, L., Radford, M., Kanagawa, C.: Cross-cultural differences in children’s use of decision rules: a comparison between Japan and Australia. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 49(6), 1557–1564 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Markus, H.R., Kitayama, S.: Culture and the self: implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychol. Rev. 98(2), 224–253 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    McSweeney, B.: Hofstede’s model of national cultural differences and their consequences: a triumph of faith - a failure of analysis. Hum. Relat. 55(1), 89–118 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Merkin, R., Ramadan, R.: Facework in Syria and the United States: a cross-cultural comparison. Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 34(6), 661–669 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Myers, S.A., et al.: Taking a trait approach to understanding college students’ perceptions of group work. Coll. Stud. J. 43(3), 822 (2009)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Park, O., Lee, J.: Adaptive instructional systems. In: Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology, (1911), pp. 651–684 (2003)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Plueddemann, J.E.: Leading Across Cultures: Effective Ministry and Mission in the Global Church. InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove (2012)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Powell, A., Piccoli, G., Ives, B.: Virtual teams: a review of current literature and directions for future research. ACM SIGMIS Database 35(1), 6–36 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Reinecke, K.: Culturally adaptive user interfaces (2010)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sagie, A., Aycan, Z.: A cross-cultural analysis of participative decision-making in organizations. Hum. Relat. 56(4), 453–473 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Shishah, W.: Culturally personalised approach in the teamwork design system. IJCIT Int. J. Comput. Inf. Technol. (IJCIT) 5(4), 383–388 (2016)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Shishah, W., FitzGerald, E.: Incorporating cultural factors into the design of technology to support teamwork in higher education. In: CSEDU 2016, Rome, Italy (2016)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Shulruf, B., Hattie, J., Dixon, R.: Development of a new measurement tool for individualism and collectivism. J. Psychoeduc. Assess. 25(4), 385–401 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Smith, C., Bath, D.: The role of the learning community in the development of discipline knowledge and generic graduate outcomes. High. Educ. 51(2), 259–286 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Smith, G.G., et al.: Overcoming student resistance to group work: online versus face-to-face. Internet High. Educ. 14(2), 121–128 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Stewart, C.: A cultural education model: design and implementation of adaptive multimedia interfaces in eLearning (2012)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Tielman, K., et al.: Collaborative learning in multicultural classrooms: a case study of Dutch senior secondary vocational education. J. Vocat. Educ. Train. 64(1), 103–118 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Triandis, H.C.: Culture and Social Behavior. Mcgraw-Hill Book Company, New York (1994)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Triandis, H.C.: Individualism & Collectivism. Westview Press, Boulder (1995)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Triandis, H.C.: Individualism-collectivism and personality. J. Pers. 69(6), 907–924 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Tullis, T.S., Stetson, J.N.: A comparison of questionnaires for assessing website usability ABSTRACT: introduction. In: Usability Professional Association Conference, pp. 1–12 (2004)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Tutty, J.I., Klein, J.D.: Computer-mediated instruction: a comparison of online and face-to-face collaboration. Educ. Tech. Res. Dev. 56(2), 101–124 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Zaharias, P., Poylymenakou, A.: Developing a usability evaluation method for e-learning applications: beyond functional usability. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 25(1), 75–98 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Computer ScienceUniversity of NottinghamNottinghamUK

Personalised recommendations