All four A3C interaction types can contribute individually to learning and may exist in parallel during mass collaboration¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Jeong et al. emphasize that all four A3C interaction types (attendance, coordination, cooperation, collaboration) can individually contribute to learning processes and outcomes, and their coexistence in parallel shows how complex mass collaboration is. → Ludvigsen 2017

Evidence¶

Ludvigsen 2017¶

Ludvigsen, S., Law, N., Rosé, C. P., & Stahl, G. (2017). Frameworks for mass collaboration, adaptable scripts, complex systems theory, and collaborative writing. Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn, 12, 127–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-017-9257-7

q2 · i? · review · r2

The editorial reports, attributing this to Jeong et al.'s framework paper in the same issue, that all four interaction types contribute individually to learning and exist in parallel. This is an editorial characterization of the included framework paper, not an independently reported empirical test.

"Jeong et al. emphasize that all four types of interactions can contribute individually to learning processes and outcomes. That these exist in parallel illustrates how complex mass collaboration is."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Interaction in danmaku and discussion boards spanned A3C levels from attendance through cooperation, with collaboration rare and limited to knowledge discussions — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• In a synchronous online environment, self-organization can be seen as a continuum, and there is strong interdependence between processes and content
• Mass participation formats in online communities depend on the tools used (Danmaku versus discussion board) — a narrower finding that bears on this claim