You are here:

Learning Effectiveness in On-Line Collaborative Concept Mapping via CMC: Comparing Different Mode of Interactions

, , University of York, United Kingdom

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Montreal, Canada ISBN 978-1-880094-56-3 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC


This paper presents an experimental study investigating the effect of three different modes of interactions in synchronous collaborative concept mapping via computer-mediated communication. Sixty pair of students built group concept maps (CM) on a problem-solving task in three modes of interactions: shared, moderated and distributed. Communication was through text-based chat and an audio link. Participants constructed two individual CMs, one before and one after the group CM. The results showed participants' interpersonal awareness in web-based conditions was considerably higher than in the non-web-based condition. In contrast, whilst there was not a significant difference among the conditions in most learning effectiveness measures at the group level, learning effectiveness at the level of interaction between group and individual was significantly higher than for the distributed interaction than for the shared interaction, including individual achievement, knowledge acquisition, overlapping, and transfer from group to individual.


Khamesan, A. & Hammond, N. (2005). Learning Effectiveness in On-Line Collaborative Concept Mapping via CMC: Comparing Different Mode of Interactions. In P. Kommers & G. Richards (Eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2005--World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 3179-3186). Montreal, Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved March 18, 2019 from .


View References & Citations Map


  1. Canas, A.J., Ford, K.M., Novak, J.D., Hayes, P., Reichherzer, T.R., & Suri, N. (2001). Using concept maps with technology to enhance collaborative learning in Latin America. The Science Teacher, 68, 49-51.
  2. De Simone, C., Schmid, R.F., & McEwen, L.A (2001). Supporting the learning process with collaborative concept mapping using computer based communication tools and process. Educational Research and Evaluation, 7(2/3), 263-283.
  3. Fischer, F., Bruhn, J., Grasel, C., & Mandl, H. (2002). Fostering collaborative knowledge construction with visualisation tools. Learning and Instruction, 12, 213-232.
  4. Jonassen, D.J. (1992). What are cognitive tools? In P.A.M. Kommers, D.H. Jonassen, & J.T. Mayes (Eds.), Cognitive tools for learning, 1-6. Germany, Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
  5. Jonassen, D.H., Peck, K., & Wilson, B.G. (1999). Learning with technology: A constructivist perspectives. NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.
  6. Novak, J.D. (2002). Meaningful learning: The essential factor for conceptual change in limited or inappropriate prepositional hierarchies leading to improvement of learners. Science Education, 86(4), 587-571.
  7. Novak, J.D., & Gowin, D.B. (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge, NJ: Cambridge University press.
  8. Novak, J.D., Gowin, D.B., & Johansen, G.T. (1983). The use of Concept mapping and knowledge vee mapping with junior high school science students. Science Education, 67, 625-645.
  9. Reader, W., & Hammond, N. (1994). Computer-based tools to support learning from hypertext: Concept mapping tools and beyond. Computer and Education, 12, 99-106.
  10. Stoyanova, N., & Kommers, P. (2002). Concept mapping as a medium of shared cognition in computer supported collaborative problem solving. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 13(1/2), 111-133.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact

View References & Citations Map

Cited By

  1. Using Synchronous Computer-Mediated Communication to Teach Foreign Students Spoken English: An Exploratory Study

    Cheun Yeong Lee, Ohio University, United States; Sandra Turner, Ohio.University, United States; Wayne Huang & Greg Kessler, Ohio University, United States

    Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2007 (Mar 26, 2007) pp. 397–404

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact