This study examines how social metacognition (including evaluations and questions) affected micro-creativity during group problem solving. Twenty groups of high school students were videotaped as they solved a mathematics problem. Analyses of the 2,951 conversation turns showed that the likelihood of a correct contribution (CC, a measure of micro-creativity) was higher after a group member expressed a wrong, new idea, correctly evaluated an idea, or justified an idea. In contrast, the likelihood of a CC was lower after a group member disagreed rudely or agreed. Meanwhile, group-level properties (racial diversity, gender diversity, and degree of status differences) did not significantly affect the likelihood of a CC. A CC was more likely after a justification in successful groups than in unsuccessful groups. CCs did not occur uniformly, as some time periods had many CCs while others had few CCs. Furthermore, agreements and correct evaluations had different effects across time periods within a group.
|Publication status||Published - Jun 2008|