Social facilitation effects in online coaction: the moderating role of social comparison direction

References

• Yu R, Wu X. Working alone or in the presence of others: exploring social facilitation in baggage X-ray security screening tasks. Ergonomics. 2015;58(6):857–865. doi:10.1080/00140139.2014.993429
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guerin B. Social facilitation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1993.
   Google Scholar
• Liu N, Yu R. Determining effects of virtually and physically present co-actor in evoking social facilitation. Hum Factor Ergon Man. 2018;28(5):260–267. doi:10.1002/hfm.20743
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eubanks DL, Palanski M, Olabisi J, et al. Team dynamics in virtual, partially distributed teams: optimal role fulfillment. Comput Human Behav. 2016;61:556–568. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.035
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gunawardena CN, Zittle FJ. Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer-mediated conferencing environment. Am J Distance Edu. 1997;11(3):8–26. doi:10.1080/08923649709526970
   Google Scholar
• Swan K, Shea P, Fredericksen E, et al. Building knowledge building communities: consistency, contact and communication in the virtual classroom. J Educ Comput Res. 2000;23(4):359–383. doi:10.2190/W4G6-HY52-57P1-PPNE
   Google Scholar
• Yang Z, Liu Q. Research and development of web-based virtual online classroom. Comput Educ. 2007;48(2):171–184. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2004.12.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hertel G, Geister S, Konradt U. Managing virtual teams: a review of current empirical research. Hum Resour Manage Rev. 2005;15(1):69–95. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2005.01.002
   Google Scholar
• Claypoole VL, Szalma JL. Examining social facilitation in vigilance: a hit and a miss. Ergonomics. 2017;60(11):1485–1499. doi:10.1080/00140139.2017.1308563
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Claypoole VL, Szalma JL. Independent coactors may improve performance and lower workload: viewing vigilance under social facilitation. Hum Factors. 2018;60(6):822–832. doi:10.1177/0018720818769268
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flynn FJ, Amanatullah ET. Psyched up or psyched out? The influence of coactor status on individual performance. Organ Sci. 2012;23(2):402–415. doi:10.1287/orsc.1100.0552
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huguet P, Galvaing MP, Monteil JM, et al. Social presence effects in the Stroop task: further evidence for an attentional view of social facilitation. JPSP. 1999;77(5):1011–1025.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu N, Yu R, Yang L, et al. Gender composition mediates social facilitation effect in co-action condition. Sci Rep. 2017;7:15073. doi:10.1038/s41598-017-15437-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muller D, Atzeni T, Butera F. Coaction and upward social comparison reduce the illusory conjunction effect: support for distraction-conflict theory. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2004;40(5):659–665. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2003.12.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Triplett N. The dynamogenic factors in pacemaking and competition. Am J Psychol. 1898;9(4):507–533. doi:10.2307/1412188
   Google Scholar
• Strauss B. Social facilitation in motor tasks: a review of research and theory. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2002;3(3):237–256. doi:10.1016/S1469-0292(01)00019-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zajonc RB. Social facilitation. Science. 1965;149(3681):269–274. doi:10.1126/science.149.3681.269
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergum BO, Lehr DJ. Effects of authoritarianism on vigilance performance. J Appl Psychol. 1963;47(1):75–77. doi:10.1037/h0043188
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allport FH. Social psychology. New York (NY): Houghton Mifflin; 1924.
   Google Scholar
• Husband RW. Analysis of methods in human maze learning. Pedagogical Seminary J Genet Psychol. 1931;39(2):258–278. doi:10.1080/08856559.1931.10532308
   Google Scholar
• Pessin J, Husband RW. Effects of social stimulation on human maze learning. J Abnorm Soc Psychol. 1933;28(2):148–154. doi:10.1037/h0074711
   Google Scholar
• Zajonc RB, Sales SM. Social facilitation of dominant and subordinate responses. J Exp Soc Psychol. 1966;2(2):160–168. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(66)90077-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henchy T, Glass DC. Evaluation apprehension and the social facilitation of dominant and subordinate responses. JPSP. 1968;10(4):446–454.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cottrell NB, Wack DL, Sekerak GJ, et al. Social facilitation of dominant responses by the presence of an audience and the mere presence of others. JPSP. 1968;9(3):245–250.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hertz N, Wiese E. Under pressure: examining social conformity with computer and robot groups. Hum Factors. 2018;60(8):1207–1218. doi:10.1177/0018720818788473
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seta JJ, Seta CE, Donaldson S. The impact of comparison processes on coactors’ frustration and willingness to expend effort. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 1991;17(5):560–568. doi:10.1177/0146167291175011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wheeler L, Miyake K. Social comparison in everyday life. JPSP. 1992;62(5):760–773.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muller D, Butera F. The focusing effect of self-evaluation threat in coaction and social comparison. JPSP. 2007;93(2):194–211.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanders GS, Baron RS, Moore DL. Distraction and social comparison as mediators of social facilitation effects. J Exp Soc Psychol. 1978;14(3):291–303. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(78)90017-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aspinwall LG, Taylor SE. Effects of social comparison direction, threat, and self-esteem on affect, self-evaluation, and expected success. JPSP. 1993;64(5):708–722.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seta JJ. The impact of comparison processes on coactors’ task performance. JPSP. 1982;42(2):281–291. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.42.2.281
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Bruijn ERA, Miedl SF, Bekkering H. Fast responders have blinders on: ERP correlates of response inhibition in competition. Cortex. 2008;44(5):580–586. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2007.09.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aiello JR, Kolb KJ. Electronic performance monitoring and social context: impact on productivity and stress. J Appl Psychol. 1995;80(3):339–353. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.80.3.339
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aiello JR, Svec CM. Computer monitoring of work performance: extending the social facilitation framework to electronic presence. J Appl Soc Psychol. 1993;23(7):537–548. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1993.tb01102.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall B, Henningsen DD. Social facilitation and human–computer interaction. Comput Human Behav. 2008;24(6):2965–2971. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2008.05.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davidson R, Henderson R. Electronic performance monitoring: a laboratory investigation of the influence of monitoring and difficulty on task performance, mood state, and self-reported stress levels. J Appl Soc Psychol. 2000;30(5):906–920. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02502.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ravid DM, Tomczak DL, White JC, et al. EPM 20/20: a review, framework, and research agenda for electronic performance monitoring. J Manage. 2020;46(1):100–126. doi:10.1177/0149206319869435
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Claypoole VL, Szalma JL. Electronic performance monitoring and sustained attention: social facilitation for modern applications. Comput Human Behav. 2019;94:25–34. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2019.01.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zanbaka CA, Ulinski AC, Goolkasian P, et al. editors. Social responses to virtual humans: implications for future interface design. New York (NY): ACM; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Park S, Catrambone R. Social facilitation effects of virtual humans. Hum Factors. 2007;49(6):1054–1060. doi:10.1518/001872007X249910
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niehaves B, Ortbach K, Tavakoli A, editors. On the relationship between the IT artifact and design theory: the case of virtual social facilitation. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Riether N, Hegel F, Wrede B, et al. editors. Social facilitation with social robots? New York (NY): ACM; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Hertz N, Wiese E, editors. Social facilitation with non-human agents: possible or not? Los Angeles (CA): Sage; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Salvy S-J, Vartanian LR, Coelho JS, et al. The role of familiarity on modeling of eating and food consumption in children. Appetite. 2008;50(2):514–518. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2007.10.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang D, Rau P-LP, Liu Y. Effects of font size, display resolution and task type on reading Chinese fonts from mobile devices. Int J Ind Ergon. 2009;39(1):81–89. doi:10.1016/j.ergon.2008.09.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu N, Yu R. Influence of social presence on eye movements in visual search tasks. Ergonomics. 2017;60(12):1667–1681. doi:10.1080/00140139.2017.1342870
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu R, Chan AHS. Display movement velocity and dynamic visual search performance. Hum Factor Ergon Man. 2015;25(3):269–278. doi:10.1002/hfm.20592
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olejnik S, Algina J. Generalized eta and omega squared statistics: measures of effect size for some common research designs. Psychol Methods. 2003;8(4):434–447. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.8.4.434
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wühr P, Huestegge L. The impact of social presence on voluntary and involuntary control of spatial attention. Soc Cogn. 2010;28(2):145–160. doi:10.1521/soco.2010.28.2.145
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Funke GJ, Warm JS, Baldwin CL, et al. The independence and interdependence of coacting observers in regard to performance efficiency, workload, and stress in a vigilance task. Hum Factors. 2016;58(6):915–926. doi:10.1177/0018720816646657
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martens R, Landers DM. Evaluation potential as a determinant of coaction effects. J Exp Soc Psychol. 1972;8(4):347–359. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(72)90024-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zajonc RB. Compresence. In: Paulus PB, editor. Psychology of group influence. Hillsdale (NJ): Erlbaum; 1980. p. 35–60.
   Google Scholar
• Cottrell NB. Social facilitation. In: McClintock CG, editor. Experimental social psychology. New York (NY): Holt, Rinehart & Winston; 1972. p. 185–236.
   Google Scholar
• Baumeister RF. A self-presentational view of social phenomena. PsyB. 1982;91(1):3–26.
   Google Scholar
• Bond CF. Social facilitation: a self-presentational view. JPSP. 1982;42(6):1042–1050.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carver CS, Scheier MF. The self-attention-induced feedback loop and social facilitation. J Exp Soc Psychol. 1981;17(6):545–568. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(81)90039-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antheunis ML, Schouten AP, Valkenburg PM, et al. Interactive uncertainty reduction strategies and verbal affection in computer-mediated communication. Commun Res. 2012;39(6):757–780. doi:10.1177/0093650211410420
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown SA, Fuller RM, Vician C. Who’s afraid of the virtual world? Anxiety and computer-mediated communication. J Assoc Inf Syst. 2004;5(2):79–107. doi:10.17705/1jais.00046
   Google Scholar
• Volante WG, Sosna J, Kessler T, et al. Social conformity effects on trust in simulation-based human-robot interaction. Hum Factors. 2019;61(5):805–815. doi:10.1177/0018720818811190
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinberg RS, Gould D. Foundations of sport and exercise psychology. 6th ed. Champaign (IL): Human Kinetics; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Leary MR, Nezlek JB, Downs D, et al. Self-presentation in everyday interactions: effects of target familiarity and gender composition. JPSP. 1994;67(4):664–673.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leary MR. Self-presentation: impression management and interpersonal behavior. Madison (WI): Brown & Benchmark; 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Baumeister RF, Hutton DG. Self-presentation theory: self-construction and audience pleasing. In: Mullen B, Goethals GR, editors. Theories of group behavior. New York (NY): Springer; 1987. p. 71–87.
   Google Scholar
• Festinger L. A theory of social comparison processes. Hum Relat. 1954;7(2):117–140. doi:10.1177/001872675400700202
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood JV. Theory and research concerning social comparisons of personal attributes. PsyB. 1989;106(2):231–248.
   Google Scholar
• Lount RB, Wilk SL. Working harder or hardly working? Posting performance eliminates social loafing and promotes social laboring in workgroups. Manage Sci. 2014;60(5):1098–1106. doi:10.1287/mnsc.2013.1820
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lockwood P, Kunda Z. Superstars and me: predicting the impact of role models on the self. JPSP. 1997;73(1):91–103.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lockwood P, Kunda Z. Increasing the salience of one’s best selves can undermine inspiration by outstanding role models. JPSP. 1999;76(2):214–228.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen K, Chan AHS. Gerontechnology acceptance by elderly Hong Kong Chinese: a senior technology acceptance model (STAM). Ergonomics. 2014;57(5):635–652. doi:10.1080/00140139.2014.895855
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uziel L. Individual differences in the social facilitation effect: a review and meta-analysis. J Res Pers. 2007;41(3):579–601. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2006.06.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clendenen VI, Herman CP, Polivy J. Social facilitation of eating among friends and strangers. Appetite. 1994;23(1):1–13. doi:10.1006/appe.1994.1030
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar