Online learners and instructors are more diverse in their social and cultural backgrounds than their counterparts in face-to-face classrooms. The diversified social and cultural backgrounds of online learners and instructors complicate the conceptualization of online social presence and pose challenges to instructors in course design. This study conducted a multiple-group confirmatory factor analysis of the scores from the Computer-Mediated Communication Questionnaire (CMCQ), using Structural Equation Modeling, to assess the equality of the underlying factor structure across the low-context culture (LCC) and the high-context culture (HCC) groups. The results suggested that cultural groups perceived online social presence in a slightly different manner. Perception differences were observed in three of the four dimensions of online social presence.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AltheideD. L. (1995). An ecology of communication: Cultural formats of control.New York: Aldine De Gruyter.
2.
AnakweU. P. (1999). Distance learning and cultural diversity: Potential users' perspective. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 7(3), 224–244.
3.
ArbuckleJ. L. (2003). Amos 5.0 [Computer Software]. Chicago: SmallWaters.
BeamerL., & VarnerI. (2001). Intercultural communication in the global workplace.New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
6.
BollenK. A., & LongJ. S. (1993). Introduction. In BollenK. A. & LongJ. S. (Eds.), Testing structural equation modeling (pp. 1–9). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
7.
BrecklerS. J. (1990). Applications of covariance structure modeling in psychology: Cause for concern?Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 260–273.
8.
BurgoonJ. K.BullerD. B., & WoodallW. G. (1989). Nonverbal communication: The unspoken dialogue.New York: HarperCollins/Greyden Press.
9.
ByrneB. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10.
ComreyA. L., & LeeH. B. (1992) A first course in factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
11.
CorneliusC., & BoosM. (2003). Enhancing mutual understanding in synchronous computer-mediated communication by training. Communication Research, 30(2), 147–177.
12.
de BruynL. L. (2004). Monitoring online communication: Can the development of convergence and social presence indicate an interactive learning environment?Distance Education, 25(1), 67–81.
13.
DelfinoM., & MancaS. (2007). The expression of social presence through the use of figurative language in a web-based learning environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 2190–2211.
14.
DycG., & MilliganC. (2000). Native American visual vocabulary: Ways of thinking and living. In National Association of African American Studies & National Association of Hispanic and Latino Studies: 2000 Literature Monograph Series. Proceedings of National Association of Native American Studies Section. Houston, TX.
15.
FreireM. M. (1994). A socio-cultural/semiotic interpretation of intercommunication mediated by computers. Paper presented at the International Conference L. S. Vygotsky and the Contemporary Human Sciences, Moscow, Russia.
16.
GarrisonD. R.AndersonT., & ArcherW. (1999). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105.
17.
GunawardenaC. N., & McIsaacM. S. (2003). Distance education. In JonassenD. (Ed.), Handbook for research on educational communications and technology (pp. 355–396). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
18.
GunawardenaC. N.NollaA. C.WilsonP. L.Lopez-IslasJ. R.Ramirez-AngelN., & Megchun-AlpizarR. M. (2001). A cross-cultural study of group process and development in online conferences. Distance Education, 22(1), 85–121.
19.
GunawardenaC. N., & ZittleF. J. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer-mediated conferencing environment. American Journal of Distance Education, 11(3), 8–26.
20.
HallE. T. (1976). Beyond culture.Garden City, NY: Anchor.
21.
HallE. T. (1984). Dance of life: The other dimension of time.Garden City, NY: Anchor Press.
22.
HarasimL. (2006). A history of e-learning: Shift happened. In WeissJ.NolanJ.HunsingerJ., & TrifonasP. (Eds.), The international handbook of virtual learning environments (pp. 59–94). The Netherlands: Springer.
23.
HofstedeG. (1997). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind.New York: McGraw-Hill.
24.
HofstedeG. H. (1984). Cultural dimensions in management and planning. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 1(2), 81–99.
25.
HofstedeG. H., & BondM. (1984). Confucius & economic growth: New trends in culture's consequences. Organizational Dynamics, 16(4), 4–21.
26.
JohnsonD.W., & JohnsonR. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research.Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
27.
John-SteinerV., & MahnH. (1996). Sociocultural approaches to learning and development. Educational Psychologist, 31(3/4), 191–206.
28.
KlineR. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.
29.
LowM.ClarenceW., & WilliamK. (2002). Assessing early reading: Change, culture, and community in a Pacific Island school. PREL Briefing Paper. Pacific Resources for Education and Learning (PREL).
30.
MarcusA., & GouldE. W. (2000). Cultural dimensions and global Web user-interface design: What? So what? Now what? In the Proceedings of the 6th Conference on Human Factors and the Web (Vol. 19). Austin, TX.
31.
MehrabianA. (1967). Orientation behaviors and nonverbal attitude communication. Journal of Communication, 17, 324–332.
32.
PiccianoA. G. (2002). Beyond student perceptions: Issues of interaction, presence, and performance in an online course. Journal of Asynchronous Learning, 6(1), 21–40.
33.
PolhemusL.ShihL. F., & SwanK. (2001). Virtual interactivity: The representation of social presence in an online discussion. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of American Educational Research Association.
34.
RichardsonJ. C., & SwanK. (2003). Examining social presence in online courses in relation to students' perceived learning and satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(1), 68–88.
35.
Robinson-StaveleyK., & CooperJ. (1990). Mere presence, gender and reactions to computers: Studying human computers interaction in the social context. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26, 168–183.
36.
RogersP., & LeaM. (2005). Social presence in distributed group environments: The role of social identity. Behaviour and Information Technology, 24(2), 151–158.
37.
RussoT. C., & BensonS. (2005). Learning with invisible others: Online presence and its relationship to cognitive and affective learning. Educational Technology & Society, 8(1), 54–62.
38.
ShortJ. A.WilliamsE., & ChristieB. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications.London: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
39.
SueD. W., & SueD. (1999). Counseling the culturally different: Theory and practice (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
40.
TuC. (2001). How Chinese perceive social presence: An examination of interaction in online learning environment. Educational Media International, 38(1), 45–60.
41.
TuC. (2002). The measurement of social presence in an online learning. International Journal on E-Learning, 1(2), 34–45.
42.
TuC. H. (2004). Online collaborative learning communities: Twenty-one designs to building an online collaborative learning community.Westport, CT: Library Unlimited.
43.
TuC. (2005). Explore Chinese students' online social presence. In LeeF.-L. & YangH. (Eds.), Primer of educational technology and research (pp. 76–95). Bejing: Jiaotong University Press.
44.
TuC., & McIsaacM. (2002). An examination of social presence to increase interaction in online classes. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(3), 131–150.
45.
TuC., & YenC. (2007). Online socio-cultural learning. International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Life-Long Learning, 17(2/3), 99–120.
46.
VrasidasC., & MichalinosZ. (2003). The nature of technology-mediated instruction in globalized distance education. International Journal of Training and Development, 7(4), 271–286.
47.
WaltherJ. B. (1992). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction. Communication Research, 19(1), 52–90.
48.
WaltherJ. B. (1995). Relational aspects of computer-mediated communication: Experimental observations over time. Organization Science, 6(2), 186–203.
WertschJ. V., & TulvisteP. (1992). L. S. Vygotsky and contemporary developmental psychology. Developmental Psychology, 28(4), 1–10.
51.
WienerM., & MehrabianA. (1968). Language within language: Immediacy, a channel in verbal communication.New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
52.
YenC.-J., & TuC.-H. (2004, April). Revisit the measurement of online social presence. Paper presented at Annual Meeting of American Educational Research Association (AERA), San Diego, CA.
53.
YenC.-J., & TuC.-H. (2008). Online social presence: A study of score validity of the Computer-Mediated Communication Questionnaire (CMCQ). Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9(3), 297–310.
54.
YildizS. (2009). Social presence in the web-based classroom: Implications for inter-cultural communication. Journal of Studies in International Education, 13(1), 46–65.
55.
ZhangD.LowryP. B.ZhouL., & FuX. (2007). The impact of Individualism-Collectivism, social presence, and group diversity on group decision making under majority influence. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23(4), 53–80.
