Communicating via videoconference makes us LESS intelligent, as a group, than we would be if we communicated by phone with just our voices. That’s the surprising finding of a new study by researchers at Carnegie Mellon University. The reason why is fascinating. 1/8
Research previously found that SYNCHRONY among group members—the alignment of non-verbal behaviors—promotes collective intelligence. You might think that synchrony would be easier to achieve when members can see each other—but in fact such visual cues act as distractions. 2/8
Groups that communicated using voice only paid close attention to auditory cues and achieved higher levels of synchrony. They were also more equal in their turn-taking—another factor that promotes collective intelligence. 3/8
In groups that communicated by video, some individuals used visual signals to grab a larger share of airtime.
Because of these two factors—better synchronization, more equal turn-taking—groups that communicated by voice only were better at solving problems together. 4/8
“Our study underscores the importance of audio cues, which appear to be compromised by video access," says Anita Williams Woolley, one of the researchers. "We found that video conferencing can actually reduce collective intelligence." 5/8
That's a larger lesson here. Research shows that collective intelligence is dependent on members’ ability to pick up on subtle nonverbal cues, and is strongly associated with teams’ ability to engage in 'tacit' coordination—that is, coordination without verbal communication. 6/8
Moreover, individuals who are more prosocial and more attentive to social cues are more likely to achieve synchrony and cooperation with interaction partners.
In groups, social and emotional intelligence IS intelligence, full stop. 7/8
I've been reading a fascinating new book that is all about how the SPACES in which teachers and students operate affect the learning that takes place there. It includes one of my favorite anecdotes about the role of physical space in our thinking processes. 1/8
After the British House of Commons was severely damaged by German bombs in 1941, Winston Churchill weighed in on plans for the reconstruction of the building, writes the book's co-editor, Thomas Kvan, in an introductory essay. 2/8
Churchill believed that the reconstructed room should retain its rectangular shape, arguing that "the narrow rectilinear form of the chamber forced debaters to take clear positions, unlike a semi-circular space that facilitated subtle nuances by displacements along an arc." 3/8
Designers of digital tools aim to make them as “seamless” as possible—such that our technology supplies us with the information we need right away, without us having to ask for it. But it’s precisely these qualities that undermine our own sense of how difficult a task is. 1/8
An interesting new paper by Matthew Fisher and Daniel Oppenheimer in Psychological Science looks at what happens when our mental work is augmented by technological resources—say, using spellcheck to correct our writing. 2/8
The use of such "external sources," they found, appears to "distort metacognitive assessments of one’s own abilities." In other words, when we extend our minds with technology, we tend to lose touch with how hard the task is and what we would be able to do on our own. 3/8