کتاب‌نامه

1. Alberici, A. I., & Milesi, P. (2016). Online discussion, politicized identity, and collective action. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 19(1), 43–59.
2. Appenzeller, T. (2017, July 7). The AI revolution in science. Science. doi:10.1126/science. aan7064.
3. Aristeidou, M., Scanlon, E., & Sharples, M. (2017). Profiles of engagement in online communities of citizen science participation. Computers in Human Behavior 74, 246–256.
4. Arrow, H., McGrath, J. E., & Berdahl, J. L. (2000). Small groups as complex systems: Formation,coordination, development and adaptation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5. Baker, W. E., & Bulkley, N. (2014). Paying it forward vs. rewarding reputation: Mechanisms of generalized reciprocity. Organization Science 25(5), 1493–1510.
6. Bartel, C. A., Wrzesniewski, A., & Wiesenfeld, B. M. (2011). Knowing where you stand: Physical isolation, perceived respect, and organizational identification among virtual employees. Organization Science 23(3), 743–757.
7. Baruah, J., & Paulus, P. B. (2016). The role of time and category relatedness in electronic brainstorming. Small Group Research 47(3), 333–342.
8. Bazarova, N. N., & Walther, J. B. (2009). Attributions in virtual groups: Distances and behavioral variations in computer-mediated discussions. Small Group Research 40(2), 138–162.
9. Beck, S. J., Bourdeaux, R., DiTunnariello, N., & Paskewitz, E. A. (2016). A review and technological consideration of the bona fide group perspective. Small Group Research 47(6), 665–691.
10. Bell, B. S., & Kozlowski, S. W. (2002). A typology of virtual teams. Group & Organization Management 27(1), 14–49.
11. Black, L. W., Welser, H. T., Cosley, D., & DeGroot, J. M. (2011). Self-governance through group discussion in Wikipedia: Measuring deliberation in online groups. Small Group Research 42(5), 595–634.
12. Boh, W. F., Ren, Y., Kiesler, S., & Bussjaeger, R. (2007). Expertise and collaboration in the geographically dispersed organization. Organization Science 18(4), 595–612.
13. Bosch-Sijtsema, P. M., Fruchter, R., Vartiainen, M., & Ruohom ن ki, V. (2011). A framework to analyze knowledge work in distributed teams. Group & Organization Management 36(3), 275–307.
14. boyd, d. m., & Ellison, N. B. (2008). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13(1), 210–230.
15. Brandon, D. P., & Hollingshead, A. B. (2007). Categorizing on-line groups. In A. Joinson, K. McKenna, T. Postmes, & U. Reips (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Internet psychology (pp. 105–120). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
16. Burke, M., Kraut, R., & Joyce, E. (2010). Membership claims and requests: Conversation-level newcomer socialization strategies in online groups. Small Group Research 41(1), 4–40.
17. Butts, C. T. (2008). A relational event framework for social action. Sociological Methodology 38, 155–200.
18. Callon, M. (1986). Some elements of a sociology of translations: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen in St. Brieuc Bay. In J. Law (Ed.), Power, action, and belief: A new sociology of knowledge. London: Routledge.
19. Chattopadhyay, P., George, E., & Shulman, A. D. (2008). The asymmetrical influence of sex dissimilarity in distributive vs. co-located work groups. Organization Science 19(4), 581–593.
20. Clément, M., & Guitton, M. J. (2015). Interacting with bots online: Users’ reactions to actionsof automated programs in Wikipedia. Computers in Human Behavior 50, 66–75.
21. Clerwall, C. (2014). Enter the robot journalist. Journalism Practice 8(5), 519–531.
22. Cogliser, C. C., Gardner, W. L., Gavin, M. B., & Broberg, J. C. (2012). Big Five personality factors and leader emergence in virtual teams: Relationships with team trustworthiness, member performance contributions, and team performance. Group & Organization Management 37(6), 752–784.
23. Contractor, N., Monge, P., & Leonardi, P. M. (2011). Multidimensional networks and the dynamics of sociomateriality: Bringing technology inside the network. International Journal of Communication 5, 682–720.
24. Cramton, C. D., & Hinds, P. J. (2014). An embedded model of cultural adaptation in global teams. Organization Science 25(4), 1056–1081.
25. Cummings, J. N., Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. B. (2002). Beyond hearing: Where the real-world and online support meet. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice 6(1), 78–88.
26. Dahlander, L., & Frederiksen, L. (2011). The core and cosmopolitans: A relational view of innovation in user communities. Organization Science 23(4), 988–1007.
27. Dahlander, L., Klapper, H., & Piezunka, H. (2018). You shall (not) pass: Who votes for whom in granting authority in online knowledge production communities? Academy of Management Global Proceedings, Surrey 2018, 156.
28. de Janasz, S. C., & Godshalk, V. M. (2013). The role of E-mentoring in protégés’ learning and satisfaction. Group & Organization Management 38(6), 743–774.
29. DeSanctis, G., & Monge, P. (1999). Introduction to the special issue: Communication processes for virtual organizations. Organization Science 10(6), 693–703.
30. Dodgson, M., Gann, D. M., & Phillips, N. (2013). Organizational learning and the technology of foolishness: The case of virtual worlds at IBM. Organization Science 24(5), 1358–1376.
31. Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends:” Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer- Mediated Communication 12(4), 1143–1168.
32. Engel, D., Woolley, A. W., Jing, L. X., Chabris, C. F., & Malone, T. W. (2014). Reading the mind in the eyes or reading between the lines? Theory of mind predicts collective intelligence equally well online and face-to-face. PLoS ONE 9(12), e115212.
33. Erhardt, N., Gibbs, J., Martin-Rios, C., & Sherblom, J. (2016). Exploring affordances of email for team learning over time. Small Group Research 47(3), 243–278.
34. Faraj, S., von Krogh, G., Monteiro, E., & Lakhani, K. R. (2016). Special section introduction: Online community as space for knowledge flows. Information Systems Research 27(4), 668–684.
35. Geiger, R. S. (2011). The lives of bots. In G. Lovink & N. Tkacz (Eds.), Critical point of view:A Wikipedia reader (pp. 78–93). Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures.
36. Geiger, R. S., & Halfaker, A. (2013). When the levee breaks: Without bots, what happens to Wikipedia’s quality control processes? In Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on Open Collaboration (p. 6:1–6:6). New York, NY: ACM.
37. Gibbs, J. L., Nekrassova, D., Grushina, S. V., & Wahab, S. A. (2008). Reconceptualizing virtual teaming from a constitutive perspective review, redirection, and research agenda. Annals of the International Communication Association 32(1), 187–229.
38. Gibson, C. B., & Gibbs, J. L. (2006). Unpacking the concept of virtuality: The effects of geographic dispersion, electronic dependence, dynamic structure, and national diversity on team innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 51(3), 451–495.
39. Gibson, C. B., Gibbs, J. L., Stanko, T. L., Tesluk, P., & Cohen, S. G. (2011). Including the “I” in virtuality and modern job design: Extending the job characteristics model to include the moderating effect of individual experiences of electronic dependence and copresence. Organization Science 22(6), 1481–1499.
40. Goodman, J. K., & Paolacci, G. (2017). Crowdsourcing consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research 44(1), 196–210.
41. Goodrich, M. A., Morse, B. S., Gerhardt, D., Cooper, J. L., Quigley, M., Adams, J. A., & Humphrey, C. (2008). Supporting wilderness search and rescue using a camera-equipped mini UAV. Journal of Field Robotics 25(1–2), 89–110.
42. Griffith, T. L., Sawyer, J. E., & Neale, M. A. (2003). Virtualness and knowledge in teams: Managing the love triangle of organizations, individuals, and information technology. MIS Quarterly 27(2), 265.
43. Groom, V., & Nass, C. (2007). Can robots be teammates? Benchmarks in human-robot teams. Interaction Studies 8(3), 483–500.
44. Haas, M. R., Criscuolo, P., & George, G. (2015). Which problems to solve? Online knowledge sharing and attention allocation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal 58(3), 680–711.
45. Hampton, K. N., Shin, I., & Lu, W. (2017). Social media and political discussion: When online presence silences offline conversation. Information, Communication & Society 20(7), 1090–1107.
46. Han, S. J., & Beyerlein, M. (2016). Framing the effects of multinational cultural diversity on virtual team processes. Small Group Research 47(4), 351–383.
47. Harbers, M., Greeff, J. de, Kruijff-Korbayov ل, I., Neerincx, M. A., & Hindriks, K. V. (2017). Exploring the ethical landscape of robot-assisted search and rescue. In M. I. Aldinhas Ferreira, J. Silva Sequeira, M. O. Tokhi, E. Kadar, & G. S. Virk (Eds.), A World with robots: International conference on robot ethics: ICRE 2015 (pp. 93–107). Lisbon: Springer.
48. Harbers, M., Jonker, C. M., & Van Riemsdijk, M. B. (2014). Context-sensitive sharedness criteria for teamwork. In Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-agent Systems (pp. 1507–1508). Richland, SC: International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems.
49. Hardin, A. M., Fuller, M. A., & Davison, R. M. (2007). I know I can, but can we? Culture and efficacy beliefs in global virtual teams. Small Group Research 38(1), 130–155.
50. Hauser, D. J., & Schwarz, N. (2016). Attentive Turkers: MTurk participants perform better on online attention checks than do subject pool participants. Behavior Research Methods 48(1),400–407.
51. Heaney, M. T. (2014). Multiplex networks and interest group influence reputation: An exponential random graph model. Social Network 36(Suppl C), 66–81.
52. Hollingshead, A. B., & Contractor, N. S. (2006). New media and small group organizing. In L. Lievrouw and S. Livingstone (Eds.), Handbook of new media: Student edition. London, UK: Sage.
53. Hollingshead, A. B., Wittenbaum, G. M., Paulus, P. B., Hirokawa, R. Y., Ancona, D. G., Peterson, R. S., Jehn, K. A., & Yoon, K. (2005). A look at groups from the functional perspective. In M. S. Poole & A. B. Hollingshead (Eds.), Theories of small groups: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 21–62). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
54. Jans, L., Leach, C. W., Garcia, R. L., & Postmes, T. (2015). The development of group influence on in-group identification: A multilevel approach. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 18(2), 190–209.
55. Kahai, S. S. (2009). Anonymity and counter-normative arguments in computer-mediated discussions. Group & Organization Management 34(4), 449–478.
56. Kahai, S. S., Huang, R., & Jestice, R. J. (2012). Interaction effect of leadership and communication media on feedback positivity in virtual teams. Group & Organization Management 37(6), 716–751.
57. Karapanos, E., Teixeira, P., & Gouveia, R. (2016). Need fulfillment and experiences on social media: A case on Facebook and WhatsApp. Computers in Human Behavior 55, 888–897.
58. Katz, N., Lazer, D., Arrow, H., & Contractor, N. S. (2004). The network perspective on small groups: Theory and research. In M. S. Poole & A. B. Hollingshead (Eds.), Theories of small groups: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 277–312). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
59. Kim, M. J., Kim, K. J., Kim, S., & Dey, A. K. (2016). Evaluation of StarCraft artificial intelligence competition bots by experienced human players. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1915–1921). New York, NY: ACM.
60. Kim, Y. J., Engel, D., Woolley, A. W., Lin, J. Y.-T., McArthur, N., & Malone, T. W. (2017). What makes a strong team? Using collective intelligence to predict team performance in League of Legends. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work and social computing (pp. 2316–2329). New York, NY: ACM.
61. Kohler, T., Cramton, C. D., & Hinds, P. J. (2012). The meeting genre across cultures: Insights from three German-American collaborations. Small Group Research 43(2), 159–185.
62. Kozlowski, S. W. J., Chao, G. T., Chang, C. H., & Fernandez, R. (2015). Team dynamics: Using “big data” to advance the science of team effectiveness. In S. Tonidandel, E. King, & J. Cortina (Eds.), Big data at work: The data science revolution and organizational psychology. New York, NY: Routledge Academic.
63. Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor–network theory. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
64. Lazer, D., Pentland, A., Adamic, L., Aral, S., Barabasi, A.-L., Brewer, D.,… Van Alstyne, M. (2009). Computational social science. Science 323(5915), 721–723.
65. Lee, M. K., Kiesler, S., Forlizzi, J., & Rybski, P. (2012). Ripple effects of an embedded social agent: A field study of a social robot in the workplace. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 695–704). New York, NY: ACM.
66. Lee, M. K., Kusbit, D., Metsky, E., & Dabbish, L. (2015). Working with machines: The impact of algorithmic and data-driven management on human workers. In Proceedings of the 33^rd Annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1603–1612). New York, NY: ACM.
67. Leonardi, P. M., & Barley, S. R. (2008). Materiality and change: Challenges to building better theory about technology and organizing. Information and Organization 18(3), 159–176.
68. Martinez-Moreno, E., Zornoza, A., Gonzalez-Navarro, P., & Thompson, L. F. (2012). Investigating face-to-face and virtual teamwork over time: When does early task conflict trigger relationship conflict? Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice 16(3), 159–171.
69. Martins, L. L., Gilson, L. L., & Maynard, M. T. (2004). Virtual teams: What do we know and where do we go from here? Journal of Management 30, 805–835.
70. Martins, L. L., & Shalley, C. E. (2011). Creativity in virtual work: Effects of demographic differences. Small Group Research 42(5), 536–561.
71. Maznevski, M. L., & Chudoba, K. M. (2000). Bridging space over time: Global virtual team dynamics and effectiveness. Organization Science 11(5), 473–492.
72. McGrath, J. E. (1984). Groups: Interaction and performance. Englewood, NJ: Prentice-Hall. McGrath, J. E., Arrow, H., & Berdahl, J. L. (2000). The study of groups: Past, present, and future. Personality and Social Psychology Review 4(1), 95–105.
73. McLeod, P. L. (2013). Distributed people and distributed information: Vigilant decisionmaking in virtual teams. Small Group Research 44(6), 627–657.
74. Monge, P. R., & Contractor, N. (2003). Theories of communication networks. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
75. Mozur, P. (2017, May 23). Google’s AlphaGo defeats Chinese Go master in win for A.I. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/23/business/googledeepmind- alphago-go-champion-defeat.html.
76. Murgia, A., Janssens, D., Demeyer, S., & Vasilescu, B. (2016). Among the machines: Humanbot interaction on social Q&A websites. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1272–1279). New York, NY: ACM.
77. Nambisan, S., & Baron, R. A. (2009). Different roles, different strokes: Organizing virtual customer environments to promote two types of customer contributions. Organization Science 21(2), 554–572.
78. Nass, C., Fogg, B. J., & Moon, Y. (1996). Can computers be teammates? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 45, 669–678.
79. Nass, C., & Moon, Y. (2000). Machines and mindlessness: Social responses to computers. Journal of Social Issues 56, 81–103.
80. Neff, J. J., Fulk, J., & Yuan, C. Y. (2014). Not in the mood? Affective state and transactive communication. Journal of Communication 64(5), 785–805.
81. O’Leary, M. B., & Mortensen, M. (2009). Go (con)figure: Subgroups, imbalance, and isolates in geographically dispersed teams. Organization Science 21(1), 115–131.
82. O’Mahony, S., & Ferraro, F. (2007). The emergence of governance in an open source community. The Academy of Management Journal 50(5), 1079–1106.
83. Orlikowski, W. J. (2007). Sociomaterial practices: Exploring technology at work. Organization Studies 28(9), 1,435–1,448.
84. Orlikowski, W. J., & Scott, S. V. (2008). Sociomateriality: Challenging the separation of technology, work and organization. The Academy of Management Annals 2(1), 433–474.
85. Paulus, P. B., Kohn, N. W., Arditti, L. E., & Korde, R. M. (2013). Understanding the group size effect in electronic brainstorming. Small Group Research 44(3), 332–352.
86. Pentland, A. (2008). Honest signals: How they shape our world. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Peters, L., & Karren, R. J. (2009). An examination of the roles of trust and functional diversity on virtual team performance ratings. Group & Organization Management 34(4), 479–504.
87. Pilny, A., & Poole, M. S. (Eds.). (2017). Group processes: Data-driven computational approaches. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
88. Putnam, L. L. (1989). Perspectives on research on group embeddedness in organizations. In S. S. King (Ed.), Human communication as a field of study: Selected contemporary views(pp. 163–181). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
89. Putnam, L. L., & Stohl, C. (1996). Bona fide groups: An alternative perspective for communication and small group decision making. In R. Y. Hirokawa & M. S. Poole (Eds.), Communication and group decision making (pp. 147–178). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
90. Rainie, L., & Wellman, B. (2012). Networked: The new social operating system. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
91. Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
92. Ren, R. and Yan, B. (2017). Crowd diversity and performance in Wikipedia: The mediating effects of task conflict and communication. CHI2017: Proceedings of the ACM conference on human factors in computer systems. New York, NY: ACM.
93. Rentsch, J. R., Delise, L. A., Mello, A. L., & Staniewicz, M. J. (2014). The integrative team knowledge building training strategy in distributed problem-solving teams. Small Group Research 45(5), 568–591.
94. Reyt, J. N., & Wiesenfeld, B. M. (2015). Seeing the forest for the trees: Exploratory learning, mobile technology, and knowledge workers’ role integration behaviors. Academy of Management Journal 58(3), 739–762.
95. Rutkowski, A.-F., Saunders, C., Vogel, D., & van Genuchten, M. (2007). “Is it already 4 a.m. in your time zone?” Focus immersion and temporal dissociation in virtual teams. Small Group Research 38(1), 98–129.
96. Seibold, D. R., Hollingshead, A. B., & Yoon, K. (2014). Embedded teams and embedding organizations. In L. L. Putnam & D. Mumby (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organization communication (pp. 327–349). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
97. Shen, C., Monge, P., & Williams, D. (2014). Virtual brokerage and closure: Network structure and social capital in a massively multiplayer online game. Communication Research 41(4), 459–480.
98. Singh, P. V., & Phelps, C. (2013). Networks, social influence, and the choice among competing innovations: Insights from open source software licenses. Information Systems Research 24(3), 539–560.
99. Snijders, T. A. B., van de Bunt, G. G., & Steglich, C. E. G. (2010). Introduction to stochastic actor-based models for network dynamics. Social Networks 32(1), 44–60.
100. Soderberg, A.-M., & Romani, L. (2017). Boundary spanners in global partnerships: A case study of an Indian vendor’s collaboration with western clients. Group & Organization Management 42(2), 237–278.
101. Sparrow, B., Liu, J., & Wegner, D. M. (2011). Google effects on memory: Cognitive consequences of having information at our fingertips. Science 333(6043), 776–778.
102. Stohl, C., & Putnam, L. L. (2003). Communication in context: Implications for the study of bona fide groups. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), Group communication in context: Studies of natural groups (2nd ed.) (pp. 285–292). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
103. Tanis, M., & Postmes, T. (2008). Cues to identity in online dyads: Effects of interpersonal versus intragroup perceptions on performance. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice 12(2), 96–111.
104. Tawa, J., Negron, R., Suyemoto, K. L., & Carter, A. S. (2015). The effect of resource competition on Blacks’ and Asians’ social distance using a virtual world methodology. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 18(6), 761–777.
105. Tirado-Morueta, R., Maraver-L َ pez, P., & Hernando-G َ mez, ء. (2017). Patterns of participation and social connections in online discussion forums. Small Group Research 48(6), 639–664.
106. van der Kleij, R., Maarten Schraagen, J., Werkhoven, P., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2009). How conversations change over time in face-to-face and video-mediated communication. Small Group Research 40(4), 355–381.
107. Wang, X., Butler, B. S., & Ren, Y. (2012). The impact of membership overlap on growth: An ecological competition view of online groups. Organization Science 24(2), 414–431.
108. Wang, Y., Kraut, R., & Levine, J. M. (2012). To stay or leave? The relationship of emotional and informational support to commitment in online health support groups. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on computer supported cooperative work (pp. 833–842). New York, NY: ACM.
109. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
110. Wax, A., DeChurch, L. A., & Contractor, N. S. (2017). Self-organizing into winning teams: Understanding the mechanisms that drive successful collaborations. Small Group Research 48(6), 665–718.
111. Wilson, J., Crisp, C. B., & Mortensen, M. (2013). Extending construal-level theory to distributed groups: Understanding the effects of virtuality. Organization Science 24(2), 629–644.
112. Yan, B., and Jian, L. (2017). Beyond reciprocity: The bystander effect of knowledge response in online knowledge communities. Computers in Human Behavior 76, 9–18.
113. Yuan, Y. C., Carboni, I., & Ehrlich, K. (2010). The impact of awareness and accessibility on expertise retrieval: A multilevel network perspective. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 61(4), 700–714.