Communication and cooperation in networked environments: an experimental analysis.

Interpersonal communication and cooperation do not happen exclusively face to face. In work contexts, as in private life, there are more and more situations of mediated communication and cooperation in which new online tools are used. However, understanding how to use the Internet to support collaborative interaction presents a substantial challenge for the designers and users of this emerging technology. First, collaborative Internet environments are designed to serve a purpose, so must be designed with intended users' tasks and goals explicitly considered. Second, in cooperative activities the key content of communication is the interpretation of the situations in which actors are involved. So, the most effective way of clarifying the meaning of messages is to connect them to a shared context of meaning. However, this is more difficult in the Internet than in other computer-based activities. This paper tries to understand the characteristics of cooperative activities in networked environments--shared 3D virtual worlds--through two different studies. The first used the analysis of conversations to explore the characteristics of the interaction during the cooperative task; the second analyzed whether and how the level of immersion in the networked environments influenced the performance and the interactional process. The results are analyzed to identify the psychosocial roots used to support cooperation in a digital interactive communication.

Metacognitive knowledge about problem-solving methods.

BACKGROUND: The effective application of a problem-solving method requires the knowledge of what task is relevant, what the abilities involved are and how much effort is needed. However, as yet too little is known about these metacognitive representations. AIM: This study was aimed at describing beliefs about problem-solving methods and at assessing whether they vary according to the kind of method and of problem and are modified by psychological courses attended. SAMPLE: Forty-six Italian undergraduates in psychology and 37 in non-psychological disciplines. METHODS: Participants had to rate how frequently each of five problem-solving methods (free production, analogy, step-by-step analysis, visualisation and combining) is employed and how effective and easy each one is to apply. Ratings were requested for interpersonal, practical and study problems. Participants were also asked to identify which abilities they thought would be involved in each method. RESULTS: According to students' ratings, the most frequently used problem-solving method was analogy, which was also considered the easiest method to apply, whereas step-by-step analysis and combining were considered the most difficult. Problem-solving techniques were perceived as being relevant above all for practical problems, whereas they were conceived as less suitable for interpersonal problems. For study problems the most relevant strategy was step-by-step analysis. Students were aware of the abilities relevant to each problem-solving method. CONCLUSIONS: Undergraduates both in psychology and non-psychological disciplines can identify some critical features in the methods used to solve problems, even though some misconceptions emerged. Since metacognition plays a causal role in problem-solving, trainers should take into account trainees' folk representations of problem-solving strategies.