Anonymity in computer-mediated communication (CMC) is valued in organizations because it can facilitate participation in discussions, especially of sensitive issues. Concerns over maintaining the motivation to participate in such discussions, because of the inability to reward people for their contributions, have led to the development of techniques that allow rewards to be allocated without identifying their distributors and recipients. It was hypothesized, however, that anonymous rewards are not equivalent to identified rewards in the ability to motivate people. Results from a laboratory experiment using a group electronic brainstorming task supported this hypothesis. Task effort was higher when reward recipients were identified than when they were anonymous; comparing rewards further increased the effects of identification. Identification combined with comparison increased task effort slightly more for recipients of the middle level than the top or bottom levels of rewards. Negligible effects were found for idea quality. Implications are discussed for anonymity, comparison targets, task structure, and the intersection of technical and social factors in organizations.
Anonymous (1998). To reveal or not to reveal: A theoretical model of anonymous communication . Communication Theory, 8, 381-407. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.1998 .tb00226.x
3.
Banaji, M.R., & Prentice, D.A. (1994). The self in social contexts . Annual Review of Psychology, 45, 297-332.
4.
Bandura, A. ( 1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.
5.
Bonito, J.A. ( 2002). The analysis of participation in small groups: Methodological and conceptual issues related to interdependence. Small Group Research, 33, 412-438. doi:10.1177/104649640203300402
6.
Bostrom, R.P., Gupta, S., & Dominic, T. ( 2009). A meta-theory for understanding information systems within sociotechnical systems. Journal of Management Information Systems, 26, 17-47. doi:10.2753/MIS0742-1222260102
7.
Brown, T.M., & Miller, C.E. ( 2000). Communication networks in task-performing groups: Effects of task complexity, time pressure, and interpersonal dominance. Small Group Research, 31, 131-157. doi:10.1177/104649640003100201
8.
Burroughs, J.D. ( 1982). Pay secrecy and performance: The psychological research . Compensation Review, 14, 44-54.
9.
Buunk, A.G., Cohen-Schotanus, J., & Henk van Nek, R. (2007). Why and how people engage in social comparison while learning social skills in groups. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research and Practice, 11, 140-152. doi:10.1037/1089-2699.11.3.140
10.
Colella, A., Paetzold, R.J., Zardkoohi, A., & Wesson, M.J. ( 2007). Exposing pay secrecy. Academy of Management Review, 32, 55-71.
11.
Connolly, T., Jessup, L.M., & Valacich, J.S. (1990). Effects of anonymity and evaluative tone on idea generation in computer-mediated groups. Management Science, 36, 689-703.
12.
Dennis, A.R., Aronson, J.E., Heninger, W.G., & Walker, E.D. ( 1999). Structuring time and task in electronic brainstorming . MIS Quarterly, 23, 95-108.
13.
Dennis, A.R., & Valacich, J.S. (1993). Computer brainstorms: More heads are better than one. Journal of Applied Psychology , 78, 531-537. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.78.4.531
14.
Dennis, A.R., & Williams, M.L. (2003). Electronic brainstorming: Theory, research, and future directions. In P. B. Paulus & B. A. Nijstad (Eds.), Group creativity: Innovation through collaboration (pp. 160-178). London, UK: Oxford University Press.
15.
DeRosa, D.M., Smith, C.L., & Hantula, D.A. ( 2007). The medium matters: Mining the long-promised merit of group interaction in creative idea generation tasks in a meta-analysis of the electronic group brainstorming literature. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 1549-1581. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2005.07.003
16.
Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. ( 1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 53, 497-509. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.53.3.497
17.
Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. ( 1991). Productivity loss in idea-generating groups: Tracking down the blocking effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 392-403. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.61.3.392
18.
Exline, J.J., & Lobel, M. ( 1999). The perils of outperformance: Sensitivity about being the target of a threatening upward comparison. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 307-337. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.125.3.307
19.
Exline, J.J., & Lobel, M. ( 2001). Private gain, social strain: Do relationship factors shape responses to outperformance?European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 593-607. doi:10.1002/ejsp.79
20.
Exline, J.J., Single, P.G., Lobel, M., & Geyer, A.L. ( 2004). Glowing praise and the envious gaze: Social dilemmas surrounding the public recognition of achievement. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 26, 119-130. doi:10.1207/ s15324834basp2602 3_2
21.
Faddegon, K., Ellemers, N., & Scheepers, D. ( 2009). Eager to be the best, or vigilant not to be the worst: The emergence of regulatory focus in disjunctive and conjunctive tasks . Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 12, 653-671. doi:10.1177/1368430209339922
22.
Festinger, L.A. ( 1954). Theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 114-140. doi:10.1177/13684302030063006
23.
Frank, R.H. ( 1999). Luxury fever: Why money fails to satisfy in an era of excess. New York, NY: Free Press .
24.
Furr, R.M., & Rosenthal, R. ( 2003). Evaluating theories efficiently: Nuts and bolts of contrast analysis. Understanding Statistics, 2, 45-67.
25.
Gavish, B., & Gerdes, J.H. ( 1998). Anonymous mechanisms in group decision support systems communication. Decision Support Systems, 23, 297-328. doi:10.1016/ S0167-9236(98)00057-8
26.
Gavish, B., Gerdes, J.H., & Kalvenes, J. ( 2000). Performance-based reward distribution methods for anonymous decision-making groups. Group Decision and Negotiation , 9, 393-413. doi:10.1016/S0167-9236(98)00057-8
Gibbons, F.X., & Buunk, B.P. ( 1999). Individual differences in social comparison: Development of a scale of social comparison orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 129-142. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.76.1.129
29.
Gibbons, F.X., Lane, D.J., Gerrard, M., Reis-Bergan, M., Lautrup, C.L., Pexa, N.A., & Blanton, H. ( 2002). Comparison-level preferences after performance: Is downward comparison theory still useful? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 865-880. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.83.4.865
30.
Harkins, S.G., & Szymanski, K. ( 1988). Social loafing and self-evaluation with an objective standard. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 24, 354-365. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(88)90025-X
31.
Harkins, S.G., & Szymanski, K. ( 1989). Social loafing and group evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 934-941. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.56.6.934
32.
Harris, M.M., Anseel, F., & Lievens, F. ( 2008). Keeping up with the Joneses: A field study of the relationships among upward, lateral and downward comparisons and pay level satisfaction . Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 665-673. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.93.3.665
33.
Hayes, A.F. ( 2006). A primer on multilevel modeling. Human Communication Research, 32, 385-410. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2006.00281.x
34.
Henagan, S.C., & Bedeian, A.G. ( 2009). The perils of success in the workplace: Comparison target responses to coworkers’ upward comparison threat. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39, 2438-2468. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2009 .00533.x
35.
Hertel, G., Kerr, N.L., & Messé, L.A. (2000). Motivation gains in performance groups: Paradigmatic and theoretical developments on the Köhler effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 580-601. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.4.580
36.
Hertel, G., Niemeyer, G., & Clauss, A. ( 2008). Social indispensability or social comparison: The why and when of motivation gains of inferior group members. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38, 1329-1363. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00350.x
37.
Herzberg, F. ( 1987, September-October). One more time: How do you motivate employees? Harvard Business Review, 65, 109-120.
38.
Hyland, M.E. ( 1989). There is no motive to avoid success: The compromise explanation for success-avoiding behaviors. Journal of Personality , 57, 665-693. doi:10.1111/1467-6494.ep8970814
Jessup, L.M., Connolly, T., & Galegher, J. ( 1990). The effects of anonymity on GDSS group process with an idea-generating task. MIS Quarterly, 14, 313-321.
41.
Jessup, L.M., Connolly, T., & Tansik, D.A. ( 1990). Toward a theory of automated group work: The deindividuating effects of anonymity. Small Group Research, 21, 333-348. doi:10.1177/1046496490213003
42.
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, 266-279. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.1991.tb00346.x
43.
Karau, S.J., & Williams, K.D. (1993) Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 681-706. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.65.4.681
44.
Kerr, N.L. ( 1983). Motivation losses in small groups: A social dilemma analysis . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 819-828. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.45.4.819
45.
Kerr, N.L., Messé, L.A., Park, E.S., & Sambolec, E.J. (2005). Identifiability, performance feedback and the Köhler effect. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 8, 375-390. doi:10.1177/1368430205056466
46.
Klein, W.M.P. ( 2003). Effects of objective feedback and "single other" or "average other" social comparison feedback on performance judgments and helping behavior . Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , 29, 418-429. doi:10.1177/0146167203251195
47.
Larey, T.S., & Paulus, P.B. ( 1995). Social comparison and goal-setting in brainstorming groups . Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25, 1579-1596. doi:10.1111/ j.1559-1816.1995.tb02634.x
48.
Lawler, E.E. ( 1967). Secrecy about management compensation: Are there hidden costs? Organizational Behavior & Human Performance , 2, 182-189. doi:10.1016/ 0030-5073(67)90030-X
49.
Leary, M.R., & Kowalski, R.M. (1990). Impression management: A literature review and two-component model. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 34-47. doi:10.1037/ 0033-2909.107.1.34
50.
Leventhal, G.S. ( 1976). The distribution of rewards and resources in groups and organizations. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 9, pp. 207-250). New York, NY: Academic Press.
51.
Levine, J.M., & Moreland, R.L. (1987). Social comparison and outcome evaluation in group contexts. In. J. C. Masters , & W. P. Smith (Eds.), Social comparison, social justice, and relative deprivation: Theoretical, empirical, and policy perspectives (pp. 105-127). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
52.
Levine, J.M., & Moreland, R.L. (1990). Progress in small group research. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 585-634.
53.
Locke, E.A., & Latham, G.P. ( 1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
54.
Lount, R.B. Jr., Park, E.S., Kerr, N.L., Messé, L.A., & Seok, D.H. ( 2008). Evaluation concerns and the Köhler effect: The impact of physical presence on motivation gains. Small Group Research , 39, 795-812. doi:10.1177/1046496408323215
55.
McLeod, P.L. ( 2000). Anonymity and consensus in computer-supported group decision making. In T. L. Griffith (Ed.), Research on managing groups and teams: Technology (pp. 175-204). Stamford, CT: JAI Press.
56.
Messé, L.A., & Watts, B.L. ( 1983). Complex nature of the sense of fairness: Internal standards and social comparison as bases for reward evaluations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 684-693. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.45.1.84
57.
Michinov, N., & Primois, C. ( 2005). Improving productivity and creativity in online groups through social comparison process: New evidence for asynchronous electronic brainstorming. Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 11-28. doi:10.1016/ j.chb.2004.02.004
58.
Mullen, B., Johnson, C., & Salas, E. ( 1991). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: A meta-analytic integration. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 12, 3-23.
59.
Munkes, J., & Diehl, M. ( 2003). Matching or competition? Performance comparison processes in an idea generation task. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 6, 305-320. doi:10.1177/13684302030063006
60.
Neumann, Y. ( 1980). A contingency approach for understanding equity theory and its predictions. Social Behavior and Personality , 8, 153-159.
61.
Paulus, P.B., & Dzindolet, M.T. (1993). Social influence processes in group brainstorming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 575-586. doi:10.1037/ 0022-3514.64.4.575
62.
Paulus, P.B., Larey, T.S., Putman, V.L., Leggett, K.L., & Roland, E.J. ( 1996). Social influence processes in computer brainstorming . Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 18, 3-14.
63.
Paulus, P.B., & Yang, H.C. ( 2000). Idea generation in groups: A basis for creativity in organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82, 76-87. doi:10.1006/obhd.2000.2888
64.
Pennebaker, J.W., Francis, M.E., & Booth, R.J. ( 2001). Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC): LIWC2001 . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum .
65.
Postmes, T., Spears, R., Sakhel, K., & de Groot, D. ( 2001). Social influence in computer-mediated communication: The effects of anonymity on group behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1243-1254. doi:10.1177/01461672012710001
66.
Rains, S.A. ( 2007). The impact of anonymity on perceptions of source credibility and influence in computer-mediated group communication: A test of two competing hypotheses. Communication Research, 34, 100-125. doi:10.1177/0093650206296084
67.
Rosenthal, R. ( 1985). Contrast analysis: Focused comparisons in the analysis of variance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
68.
Rosenthal, R., Rosnow, R.L., & Rubin, D.B. ( 2000). Contrasts and effects sizes in behavioral research: A correlational approach. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
69.
Roy, M.C., Gauvin, S., & Limayem, M. ( 1996). Electronic group brainstorming: The role of feedback on productivity. Small Group Research, 27, 215-247. doi:10.1177/1046496496272002
70.
Schlenker, B.R. ( 1975). Self-presentation: Managing the impression of consistency when reality interferes with self-enhancement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 1030-1037. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.32.6.1030
71.
Schlenker, B.R., & Leary, M.R. ( 1982). Audiences’ reactions to self-enhancing, self-denigrating, and accurate self-presentation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18, 89-104. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(82)90083-X
72.
Schlenker, B.R., & Weigold, M.F. ( 1992). Interpersonal processes involving impression regulation and management. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 133-168.
73.
Shepherd, M.M., Briggs, R.O., Reinig, B.A., Yen, J., & Nunamaker, J.F. , Jr. (1995-1996). Invoking social comparison to improve electronic brainstorming: Beyond anonymity. Journal of Management Information Systems, 12, 155-170.
74.
Shepperd, J.A. ( 1993). Productivity loss in performance groups: A motivation analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 67-81.
75.
Smith, R.H., & Insko, C.A. ( 1987). Social comparison choice during ability evaluation: The effects of comparison publicity, performance feedback, and self-esteem . Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 13, 111-122. doi:10.1177/0146167287131011
76.
Suls, J., Martin, R., & Wheeler, L. ( 2002). Social comparison: Why, with whom, and with what effect?Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 159-165.
77.
Sweeney, P.D. ( 1990). Distributive justice and pay satisfaction: A field test of an equity theory prediction. Journal of Business and Psychology , 4, 329-341. doi:10.1007/ BF01125243
78.
Szymanski, K., & Harkins, S.G. ( 1987). Social loafing and self-evaluation with a social standard . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 891-897. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.53.5.891
79.
Tal-Or, N. ( 2008). Communicative behaviors of outperformers and their perception by the outperformed people. Human Communication Research, 34, 234-262. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2008.00320.x
80.
Tesser, A. ( 1988). Toward a self-evaluation maintenance model of social behavior. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 21, pp.181-227). New York, NY: Academic Press.
81.
Tesser, A. ( 2000). On the confluence of self-esteem maintenance mechanisms . Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 290-299.
82.
Tyler, J.M. ( 2009). Compensatory self-presentation in upward comparison situations . Human Communication Research, 35, 511-533. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2009.01361.x
83.
Tyler, T.R., & Blader, S.L. ( 2002). Autonomous vs. comparative status: Must we be better than others to feel good about ourselves?Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89, 813-838. doi:10.1016/S0749-5978(02)00031-6
84.
Valacich, J.S., Dennis, A.R., & Nunamaker, J.F. (1992). Group size and anonymity effects on computer-mediated idea generation. Small Group Research, 23, 49-73. doi:10.1177/1046496492231004
85.
Valacich, J.S., Jessup, L.M., Dennis, A.R., & Nunamaker, J.F. , Jr. (1992). A conceptual framework of anonymity in group support systems. Group Decision and Negotiation, 1, 219-241. doi:10.1007/BF00126264
86.
van den Bos, K., Lind, E.A., Vermunt, R., & Wilke, H.A.M. ( 1997). How do I judge my outcomes when I do not know the outcome of others? The psychology of the fair process effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1034-1046. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.72.5.1034
87.
Weber, B., & Hertel, G. ( 2007). Motivation gains of inferior group members: A meta-analytical review. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 973-993. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.93.6.973
88.
Webster, J.M., Duvall, J., Gaines. L. M., & Smith, R.H. ( 2003). The roles of praise and social comparison information in the experience of pride. Journal of Social Psychology, 143, 209-232.
89.
White, P.H., Sanbonmatsu, D.M., Croyle, R.T., & Smittipatana, S. (2002). Test of socially motivated underachievement: "Letting up" for others. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 162-169. doi:10.1006/jesp.2001.1495
90.
Williams, K.D., & Karau, S.J. ( 1991). Social loafing and social compensation: The effects of expectations of co-worker performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 570-581. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.61.4.570
91.
Wills, T.A. ( 1981). Downward comparison principles in social psychology . Psychological Bulletin, 90, 245-271. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.90.2.245
92.
Wittenbaum, G.M., Hollingshead, A.B., & Botero, I.C. ( 2004). From cooperative to motivated information sharing in groups: Moving beyond the hidden profile paradigm. Communication Monographs, 7, 286-310. doi:10.1080/ 0363452042000299894
93.
Wood, J.V. ( 1989). Theory and research concerning social comparisons of personal attributes. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 231-248. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.106.2.231
94.
Zajonc, R.B. ( 1965). Social facilitation. Science, 149, 269-274.
95.
Zell, E., & Alicke, M.D. ( 2009).Self-evaluative effects of temporal and social comparison . Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 223-227. doi:10.1016/ j.jesp.2008.09.007
96.
Zell, E., & Alicke, M.D. ( 2010). Comparisons over time: Temporal trajectories, social comparison and self-evaluation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 375-382.
