| Chapter 2: | Chatrooms and Small Group Learning |
|
|
Although he found evidence confirming Cohen’s hypothesis about the importance of on-topic interaction, Chizhik also suggests that social status differentials can inhibit interaction. In other words, he found that group members with higher social status tend to dominate the discussion. Since the research described above on chatrooms suggests that this medium seems to have a direct impact on levels of inhibition and social status, it makes sense to examine, in a more detailed way, how social status affects classroom interaction.
2.3.1.1 Social Status and Inhibition
Whether based on race (e.g., Chizhik, 1999, 2001; Nye, Hedges, & Konstantopoulos, 2004), gender (e.g., Hsi & Hoadley, 1997; Mistler-Jackson & Songer, 2000; Sussman & Tyson, 2000), physical attractiveness (e.g., Webster & Driskell, 1983; Anderson, John, Keltner, & Kring, 2001; Kanazawa & Kovar, 2004), popularity (e.g., Wright, Giammarino, & Parad, 1986; E. G. Cohen, Lotan, Scarloss, & Arellano, 1999; Lease, Musgrove, & Axelrod, 2002), explicit power relationships (e.g., Dubrovsky, Kiesler, & Sethna, 1991; France, Anderson, & Gardner, 2001), or academic ability (e.g., Dembo & McAuliffe, 1987; Lloyd & Cohen, 1999), differences in social status within small groups can often affect the equity of interaction3 (Levine & Moreland, 1998). Group members with higher social status tend to talk more than those with lower social status. Moreover, group members generally accept this as the way that things should be.