Anonymously productive and socially engaged while learning at work

References

• Armstrong, H. L., & Forde, P. J. (2003). Internet anonymity practices in computer crime. Information Management & Computer Security, 11(5), 209–215. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/212335646?accountid=11979 doi: 10.1108/09685220310500117
   Google Scholar
• Bond, R. (2005). Group size and conformity. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 8(4), 331–354. Retrieved June 27, 2011 from http://gpi.sagepub.com/cgi/doi/10.1177/1368430205056464 doi: 10.1177/1368430205056464
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bradner, S. (2007). Anonymity as a thing of the past. Network World, 24(45), 26–26. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/215981930?accountid=11979
   Google Scholar
• Burkell, J. (2006). Anonymity in behavioural research: Not being unnamed, but being unknown. Media, 3(1), 189–204.
   Google Scholar
• Chester, A., & Gwynne, G. (1998). Online teaching: Encouraging collaboration through anonymity. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 4(2). Retrieved from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol4/issue2/chester.html
   Google Scholar
• Coghlan, D. (2001). Insider action research projects: Implications for practicing managers. Management Learning, 32, 49–60. doi: 10.1177/1350507601321004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coghlan, D., & Brannick, T. (2005). Doing action research in your own organization (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Connolly, T., Jessup, L. M., & Valacich, J. S. (1990). Effects of anonymity and evaluative tone on idea generation. Management Science, 36(6), 689–689. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/213166281?accountid=11979 doi: 10.1287/mnsc.36.6.689
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crews, C. W. (2007). Cybersecurity and authentication: The marketplace role in rethinking anonymity – before regulators intervene. Philosophy & Technology, 20(2), 97–105.
   Google Scholar
• Froomkin, A. M. (1999). Legal Issues in anonymity and pseudonymity. The Information Society, 15, 113–127. doi: 10.1080/019722499128574
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Futrell, C. M., & Swan, J. E. (1977). Anonymity and response by salespeople to a mail questionnaire. JMR, Journal of Marketing Research (Pre-1986), 14(000004), 611–615. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/208732287?accountid=11979 doi: 10.2307/3151211
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gallupe, B., Cooper, W., Polard, S., & Cadsby, J. (1992). Controversiality, anonymity and electronic brain storming. Working Paper 92–29, School of Business, Queens University, Kingston, Ontario.
   Google Scholar
• Gritzalis, S. (2004). Enhancing web privacy and anonymity in the digital era. Information Management & Computer Security, 12(2), 255–288. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/212364059?accountid=11979 doi: 10.1108/09685220410542615
   Google Scholar
• Gummesson, E. (2000). Qualitative methods in management research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Hachmeister, A., & Schiereck, D. (2010). Dancing in the dark: Post-trade anonymity, liquidity and informed trading. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 34(2), 145–177. doi: 10.1007/s11156-010-0165-4
   Google Scholar
• Hiltz, R. S., Turoff, M., & Johnson, K. (1989). Disinhibition, deindividuation and group process in pen mane and real name computer conferences. Decision Support Systems, 5(2), 217–232. doi: 10.1016/0167-9236(89)90008-0
   Google Scholar
• Jaffe, M. J., Lee, Y.-E., Huang, L.-N., & Oshagan, H. (1999). Gender identification, interdependence, and pseudonyms in CMC: Language patterns in an electronic conference. The Information Society, 15, 221–234.
   Google Scholar
• Jessup, L. M., Connolly, T., & Gallagher, J. (1990). The effects of anonymity on GDSS group process with an idea-generating task. MIS Quarterly, 14(3), 312–321. doi: 10.2307/248893
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jessup, L. M., Connolly, T., & Tansik, D. (1990). Toward a theory of automated group work: The deindividuating effects of anonymity. Small Group Research, 21(3), 333–348. doi: 10.1177/1046496490213003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jessup, L. M., & Tansik, D. (1991). Decision making in an automated environment: The effects of anonymity and proximity with a group decision support system. Decision Sciences, 22(2), 266–279. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5915.1991.tb00346.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahai, S. S., Avolio, B. J., & Sosik, J. J. (1998). Effects of source and participant anonymity and difference in initial opinions in an EMS context. Decision Sciences, 29(2), 427–460. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/198067440?accountid=11979 doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5915.1998.tb01583.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kilner, P. G., & Hoadley, C. M. (2005). Anonymity options and professional participation in an online community of practice. Proceedings of the 2005 conference on Computer support for collaborative learning 2005: The next 10 years! – CSCL ‘05, 272–280. Retrieved from http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1149293.1149328
   Google Scholar
• Lea, M., & Spears, R. (1991). Computer-mediated communication, de-individuation and group decision-making. International Journal of Man Machine Studies, 34, 283–301. doi: 10.1016/0020-7373(91)90045-9
   Google Scholar
• Lu, R., & Bol, L. (2007). A Comparison of anonymous versus identifiable e-peer review on college student writing performance and the extent of critical feedback. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 6(2), 100–115.
   Google Scholar
• Magni, L. (2010). Remote administration of repertory grids through Microsoft Live Meeting in an organizational context. Personal Construct Theory & Practice, 7, 49–64.
   Google Scholar
• Metcalfe, B. (1994). New technologies provide better combinations of privacy and anonymity. InfoWorld, 16(48), 65–65. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/194281002?accountid=11979
   Google Scholar
• Miyazoe, T., & Anderson, T. (2011). Anonymity in blended learning: Who would you like to be? Educational Technology & Society, 14, 175–187.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nijboer, J. (2004). Big brother versus anonymity on the internet: Implications for internet service providers, libraries and individuals since 9/11. New Library World, 105(7), 256–261. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/229690999?accountid=11979 doi: 10.1108/03074800410551002
   Google Scholar
• Nissenbaum, H. (1999). The meaning of anonymity in an information age. Information Society, 15(2), 141–144. doi: 10.1080/019722499128592
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfitzmann, A., & Hansen, M. (2006). Anonymity, unlinkability, unobservability, pseudonymity, and identity management - a consolidated proposal for terminology, 0.TU Dresden and ULD Kiel, version v0.28 May 29, 2006. Retrieved from: http://dud.inf.tu-dresden.de/literatur/Anon_Terminology_v0.28.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Pissarra, J., & Jesuino, J. C. (2005). Idea generation through computer-mediated communication: The effects of anonymity. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20(3/4), 275–291. doi: 10.1108/02683940510589055
   Google Scholar
• Sayer, A. (2000). Realism and social science. Sage: London.
   Google Scholar
• Schepman, T., Koren, M., Kurtovic, D., & Horvat, A. (2008). Anonymity of library users in the Netherlands and Croatia. New Library World, 109(9), 407–418. doi: 10.1108/03074800810910441
   Google Scholar
• Scott, C. R. (2004). Benefits and drawbacks of anonymous online communication: Legal challenges and communicative recommendations. In S. Drucker (Ed.), Free speech yearbook (Vol. 41, pp. 127–141). Washington, DC: National Communication Association.
   Google Scholar
• Sia, C. L., Tan, B. C. Y., & Wei, K. K. (2002). Group polarization and computer-mediated communication: Effects of communication cues, social presence, and anonymity. Information Systems Research, 13(1), 70–90. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/208160401?accountid=11979 doi: 10.1287/isre.13.1.70.92
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waldmeir, P. (2001, December 27). Farewell to privacy: America's tradition of respect for anonymity is at risk from demands for greater security. Financial Times, p. 7. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/249220178?accountid=11979
   Google Scholar
• Wallace, K. A. (1999). Anonymity. Ethics and Information Technology, 1(1), 21–35. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/222241627?accountid=11979 doi: 10.1023/A:1010066509278
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, J. L., Griffin, T. E., & Jessup, L. M. (2010). GSS anonymity effects on small group behavior. Academy of Information and Management Sciences Journal, 13(2), 41–57. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/808619060?accountid=11979
   Google Scholar