PhD students and Information Technology researchers were selected less often as new collaboration partners, and group awareness support balanced the disciplinary difference, per the editorial's report of Eberle et al.¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r? · q2
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? PhD students were less often chosen as new potential collaboration partners, and researchers with an Information Technology background selected fewer new potential collaboration partners. → Sanna Järvelä · Carolyn Rosé 2021 q2 i? Group awareness support balanced the disciplinary difference in partner selection. → Sanna Järvelä · Carolyn Rosé 2021 (2)

Evidence¶

Sanna Järvelä · Carolyn Rosé 2021¶

Sanna Järvelä · Carolyn Rosé. (2021). Forms of collaboration matters: CSCL across the contexts. Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn (2021) 16:145–149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-021-09348-4

q2 · i? · causal · r?

The editorial reports the Eberle et al. RFID and questionnaire study at two CSCL scientific events, "5736 relations between 287 research- ers" as printed. This selection-pattern result is reported descriptively with no printed effect size.

"PhD students were less often chosen as new potential collaboration partners and researchers with a background in Information Technology selected fewer new potential collaboration partners."

Sanna Järvelä · Carolyn Rosé 2021 (2)¶

Sanna Järvelä · Carolyn Rosé. (2021). Forms of collaboration matters: CSCL across the contexts. Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn (2021) 16:145–149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-021-09348-4

q2 · i? · review · r1

The editorial reports that in the Eberle et al. study "a group awareness intervention was experimentally varied" and that "group awareness support balanced this disciplinary differ- ence". No effect size is printed.

"However, group awareness support balanced this disciplinary difference."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Transitivity, reciprocity and contact duration are relevant for researchers' identification of new potential collaboration partners at face-to-face events, as the editorial reports of Eberle et al.
• Longer face-to-face contact during a scientific event increases the likelihood that a researcher selects the other as a new potential collaboration partner — related
• Transitivity predicts the initiation of new potential collaborations at scientific events — related
• Reciprocity predicts the initiation of new potential collaborations at scientific events — related