Networked Flow in Creative Collaboration: A Mixed Method Study

References

• Agresti, A., & Kateri, M. (2011). Categorical data analysis international encyclopedia of statistical science (pp. 206–208). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
   Google Scholar
• Amabile, T. M. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(5), 997. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.43.5.997
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Armstrong, A. C. (2008). The fragility of group flow: The experiences of two small groups in a middle school mathematics classroom. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 27(2008), 101–115. doi:10.1016/j.jmathb.2008.08.001
   Google Scholar
• Aviv, R., Erlich, Z., Ravid, G., & Geva, A. (2003). Network analysis of knowledge construction in asynchronous learning networks. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(3), 1–23.
   Google Scholar
• Bell, J., Sawaya, S., & Cain, W. (2014). Synchromodal classes: Designing for shared learning experiences between face-to-face and online students. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 5(1). doi:10.14434/ijdl.v5i1.12657
   Google Scholar
• Biasutti, M. (2015). Creativity in virtual spaces: Communication modes employed during collaborative online music composition. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 17, 117–129. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2015.06.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biocca, F., & Harms, C. (2003). Guide to the networked minds social presence inventory v. 1.2: Measures of co-presence, social presence, subjective symmetry, and intersubjective symmetry. East Lansing,BI: Michigan State University.
   Google Scholar
• Biocca, F., & Harms, C. (2011). Networked minds social presence inventory (scales only version 1.2): Tech. rep. Michigan, USA: MIND Labs, Michigan State University. (2002). Retrieved from http://cogprints.org/6742/
   Google Scholar
• Brass, D. J. (1984). Being in the right place: A structural analysis of individual influence in an organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 518–539. doi:10.2307/2392937
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burton, J., & Carroll, M. (2001). Journal writing as an aid to self-awareness. autonomy, and collaborative learning. (Doctoral dissertation, TESOL)
   Google Scholar
• Chiu, M. M. (2008). Effects of argumentation on group micro-creativity: Statistical discourse analyses of algebra students’ collaborative problem solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(3), 382–402. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2008.05.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiu, M. M., & Khoo, L. (2003). Rudeness and status effects during group problem solving: Do they bias evaluations and reduce the likelihood of correct solutions? Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(3), 506–523. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.3.506
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). Society, culture, and person: A systems view of creativity. The Systems Model of Creativity. Springer, Dordrecht.
   Google Scholar
• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). Society, culture, and person: A systems view of creativity. In The systems model of creativity (pp. 47–61). Springer, Dordrecht.
   Google Scholar
• De Dreu, C. K. W., & West, M. A. (2001). Minority dissent and team innovation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(6), 1191–1201. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.6.1191
   Google Scholar
• Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Csikzentmihaly, M. (1991). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience (Vol. 41). New York: HarperPerennial..
   Google Scholar
• De Laat, M., Lally, V., Lipponen, L., & Simons, R.-J. (2007). Investigating patterns of interaction in networked learning and computer-supported collaborative learning: A role for social network analysis. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(1), 87–103. doi:10.1007/s11412-007-9006-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisler, R., Donnelly, G., & Montuori, A. (2016). Creativity, society, and gender: Contextualizing and redefining creativity. Interdisciplinary Journal of Partnership, 3, 2. doi:10.24926/ijps.v3i2.130
   Google Scholar
• Freeman, L. C. (1978). Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1(3), 215–239. doi:10.1016/0378-8733(78)90021-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedkin, N. E. (1993). Structural bases of interpersonal influence in groups: A longitudinal case study. American Sociological Review, 58, 861–872. doi:10.2307/2095955
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaggioli, A., Chirico, A., Mazzoni, E., Milani, L., & Riva, G. (2017). Networked Flow in musical bands. Psychology of Music, 45(2), 283–297. doi:10.1177/0305735616665003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaggioli, A., Mazzoni, E., Milani, L., & Riva, G. (2015). The creative link: Investigating the relationship between social network indices, creative performance and flow in blended teams. Computers in Human Behavior, 42, 157–166. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.12.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaggioli, A., Riva, G., Milani, L., & Mazzoni, E. (2012). Networked flow: Towards an understanding of creative networks. Netherlands: Springer Science & Business Media.
   Google Scholar
• Gaggioli, A., Riva, G., Milani, L., & Mazzoni, E. (2013). Networked flow: Towards an understanding of creative networks. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Gajda, A., Beghetto, R. A., & Karwowski, M. (2017). Exploring creative learning in the classroom: A multi-method approach. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 24, 250–267. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2017.04.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galimberti, C., Chirico, A., Brivio, E., Gatti, F., Mazzoni, E., Riva, G., … Gaggioli, A. (2016). Networked flow in blended learning settings: A longitudinal mixed-method study. Annual Review of Cybertherapy and Telemedicine 2016, 39.
   Google Scholar
• Galimberti, C., Chirico, A., Brivio, E., Mazzoni, E., Riva, G., Milani, L., & Gaggioli, A. (2015). Bridging minds: A mixed methodology to assess networked flow. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 219, 33–36.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Glăveanu, V. P. (2010). Paradigms in the study of creativity: Introducing the perspective of cultural psychology. New Ideas in Psychology, 28(1), 79–93. doi:10.1016/j.newideapsych.2009.07.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glăveanu, V. P. (2015). Creativity as a sociocultural act. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 49(3), 165–180. doi:10.1002/jocb.94
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goos, M., Galbraith, P., & Renshaw, P. (2002). Socially mediated metacognition: Creating collaborative zones of proximal development in small group problem solving. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 49(2), 193–223. doi:10.1023/A:1016209010120
   Google Scholar
• Harms, C., & Biocca, F. (2004). Internal consistency and reliability of the networked minds measure of social presence.
   Google Scholar
• Hawlina, H., Gillespie, A., & Zittoun, T. (2017). Difficult differences: A socio‐cultural analysis of how diversity can enable and inhibit creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, Special Issue, 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Hinds, P., Kiesler, S. B., & Kiesler, S. (2002). Distributed work. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.
   Google Scholar
• Hutchins, E. (2006). The distributed cognition perspective on human interaction. Roots of Human Sociality: Culture, Cognition and Interaction, 1, 375.
   Google Scholar
• Ibarra, H., & Andrews, S. B. (1993). Power, social influence, and sense making: Effects of network centrality and proximity on employee perceptions. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 277–303. doi:10.2307/2393414
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackson, S. A., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). Flow in sports. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, S. A., & Eklund, R. (2004). The flow scales manual. Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, S. A., & Eklund, R. C. (2002). Assessing flow in physical activity: The flow state scale-2 and dispositional flow scale-2. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 24, 133–150. doi:10.1123/jsep.24.2.133
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackson, S. A., & Marsh, H. W. (1996). Development and validation of a scale to measure optimal experience: The flow state scale. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 18, 17–35.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• John-Steiner, V. (2000). Creative collaboration. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• John-Steiner, V., & Mahn, H. (1996). Sociocultural approaches to learning and development: A Vygotskian framework. Journal of Educational Psychology, 31(3–4), 191–206.
   Google Scholar
• Kumpulainen, K., Mikkola, A., & Jaatinen, A. M. (2014). The chronotopes of technology-mediated creative learning practices in an elementary school community. Learning, Media and Technology, 39(1), 53–74. doi:10.1080/17439884.2012.752383
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larson, J. R. (2007). Deep diversity and strong synergy. Small Group Research, 38(3), 413–436. doi:10.1177/1046496407301972
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mackinnon, M. J., & Puterman, M. L. (1989). Collinearity in generalized linear models. Communications in Statistics-theory and Methods, 18(9), 3463–3472. doi:10.1080/03610928908830102
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazzoni, E. (2014). The Cliques Participation Index (CPI) as an indicator of creativity in online collaborative groups. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 13(1), 32. doi:10.1891/1945-8959.13.1.32
   Google Scholar
• Mazzoni, E., & Gaffuri, P. (2009). Personal learning environments for overcoming knowledge boundaries between activity systems in emerging adulthood. E-learning Papers, 15(5), 1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Mazzoni, E., Gaffuri, P., & Selleri, P. (2013). Is it better to be alone or in company?: The impact of the structural profile of interpersonal skills on computer-supported group-based learning. In Cases on online learning communities and beyond: Investigations and applications (pp. 37–67). IGI GLOBAL.
   Google Scholar
• McKay, A. S., Grygiel, P., & Karwowski, M. (2017). Connected to create: A social network analysis of friendship ties and creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 11(3), 284. doi:10.1037/aca0000117
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molm, L. D. (1994). Dependence and risk: Transforming the structure of social exchange. Social Psychology Quarterly, 57, 163–176. doi:10.2307/2786874
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montuori, A., & Purser, R. E. (1995). Deconstructing the lone genius myth: Toward a contextual view of creativity. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 35(3), 69–112. doi:10.1177/00221678950353005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muzio, M, Riva, G, & Argenton, N. (2012). Flow, benessere e prestazione eccellente. dai modelli teorici alle applicazioni nello sport e in azienda. Milano: Franco Angeli.
   Google Scholar
• Nemeth, C. J., & Chiles, C. (1988). Modeling courage: The role of dissent in fostering independence. European Journal of Psychology, 18(3), 275–280. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420180306
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nemeth, C. J., & Rogers, J. (1996). Dissent and the search for information. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35(1), 67–76. doi:10.1111/bjso.1996.35.issue-1
   Google Scholar
• Palonen, T., & Hakkarainen, K. (2013). Patterns of interaction in computersupported learning: A social network analysis, Oxford, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Paulus, P. B., & Brown, V. (2003). Ideational creativity in groups. In P. B. Paulus & B. A. Nijstad (Eds.), Group creativity (pp. 110–136). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Porter, C. M., Keith, M. G., & Woo, S. E. (2018). A meta-analysis of network positions and creative performance: Differentiating creativity conceptualizations and measurement approaches. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts.
   Google Scholar
• Sacks, H. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4 Pt 1), 696–735. doi:10.1353/lan.1974.0010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saqr, M., Fors, U., Tedre, M., & Nouri, J. (2018). How social network analysis can be used to monitor online collaborative learning and guide an informed intervention. PloS One, 13(3), e0194777. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0194777
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sawyer, K. (2007). Group genius: the collective power of collaboration. New York, NY: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Sawyer, R. K. (2008). Creativity, innovation, and obviousness. Lewis & Clark L. Rev., 12, 461.
   Google Scholar
• Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse marker. Cambridge,UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, J. (2000). Social network analysis: A handbook. SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Snijders, T. A. (2014). Siena: Statistical modeling of longitudinal network data. Encyclopedia of Social Network Analysis and Mining, 1718–1725.
   Google Scholar
• So, H.-J., & Brush, T. A. (2008). Student perceptions of collaborative learning, social presence and satisfaction in a blended learning environment: Relationships and critical factors. Computers & Education, 51(1), 318–336. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2007.05.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sparrowe, R. T., Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Kraimer, M. L. (2001). Social networks and the performance of individuals and groups. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 316–325.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stasson, M. F., & Bradshaw, S. D. (1995). Explanation of individual-group performance differences. Small Group Research, 26(2), 296–308. doi:10.1177/1046496495262007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swann, W. B., Jr., Kwan, V. S. Y., Polzer, J. T., & Milton, L. P. (2003). Fostering group identification and creativity in diverse groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(11), 1396–1406. doi:10.1177/0146167203256868
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trognon, A., & Batt, M. (2010). Interlocutory logic. A unified framework for studying conversational interaction. In J. Streeck (Ed.), New Adventures in Language and Interaction (pp. 9–46). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Turel, O., & Zhang, Y. (2010). Does virtual team composition matter? Trait and problem-solving configuration effects on team performance. Behaviour & Information Technology, 29(4), 363–375. doi:10.1080/01449291003752922
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Eemeren, F., & Grootendorst, R. (1992). Argumentation, communication, and fallacies a pragma-dialectical perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Walton, A. P. (2003). The impact of interpersonal factors on creativity. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 9(4), 146–162. doi:10.1108/13552550310485120
   Google Scholar
• Wasserman, S. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications (Vol. 8). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge university press.
   Google Scholar
• Zohar, D., & Tenne-Gazit, O. (2008). Transformational leadership and group interaction as climate antecedents: A social network analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(4), 744. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.93.4.744
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar