A doubly multivariate analysis of variance was performed on each of the teamwork measures. The within-subjects independent variable treated multivariately was communication modality. Simple contrasts were planned for communication modality for each of the dependent variables to specifically compare the face-to-face and shared workspace application conditions with that of audio only.
Communication modality had a significant effect on teamwork, F (8,10) = 5.40, p= .01, η2= .81. Means and standard deviations are presented in Table 2 for comparisons. In addition, Cohen’s effect size (Cohen, 1988) for standardized differences is also presented. By convention, effect sizes of 0.2 are deemed small, 0.5 are moderate, and 0.8 are large. Simple contrast comparisons indicated that participants rated monitoring higher in both the face-to-face (F [1,17] = 25.32, p= .00, η2= .60) and shared workspace (F [1,17] = 41.31, p= .00, η2= .71) conditions in comparison to using audio only. Participants also rated backup higher in both the face-to-face (F [1,17] = 8.22, p= .01, η2= .33) and shared workspace (F [1,17] = 6.26, p= .02, η2= .27) conditions in comparison to using audio only. Participants rated feedback significantly higher in the shared workspace condition than in the audio-only condition, F [1,17] = 7.00, p= .02, η2= .29. No difference was noted between the face-to-face and audio conditions for feedback, F [1,17] = 2.23, p= .15, η2= .12. There was no difference found for either of the contrasts for communication, ps > .10.
H1 predicted a significant difference between participants’ perceptions of teamwork in the face-to-face and audio-only conditions. In particular, teamwork would be perceived to be greater in the face-to-face condition. The above-mentioned analyses provide support for this hypothesis. While not all contrasts were significant, p < .05, all d values were positive (range = .1 to 1.6). The teamwork behaviors monitoring and backup were perceived to be greater when operating face-to-face, p < .05. However, for communication and feedback, the modes were not significantly different from each other. Collectively, these results lend support for hypothesis 1 in that team members experience greater teamwork when collocated rather than geographically dispersed.
H3 predicted that teamwork would be perceived to be greater in the shared workspace condition than in the audio-only condition. The above analyses provide support in that some aspects of teamwork (i.e., monitoring, feedback, and backup) were reported to a greater extent when working with a shared workspace application than when using audio only. In addition, all d values were positive (range = .2 to 1.9) indicating that the teams experienced greater teamwork in the shared workspace application condition than in the audio-only condition.