




































Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                            June 2015, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 27-37  

http://www.gpejournal.org/                                                                                                                                                          ISSN 2163-758X 

 

27 

 

On-line Videoconferences: How to Make Intercultural Collaboration  
Effective for All Participants  

 
Svetlana A. Minyurova 

 
Svetlana G. Krylova 

 
Nadezhda S. Rudenko 

 
Ural State Pedagogical University, Russia 

 
Abstract 

 
On-line videoconferences with students from different cultures is a form 
of learning which provides participants of the Global Understanding 
course with unique opportunities for studying English and investigating 
other cultures. Current research highlights advantages of the Internet as 
well as videoconferencing technology for foreign language acquisition.  
However, these advantages might manifest themselves at maximum 
only if all the participants are actively involved in intercultural 
collaboration with their partners. The experience of Ural State 
Pedagogical University (USPU) testifies that there are a number of 
factors which may decrease activeness of interaction which means less 
learning effectiveness of videoconferencing technology for students. 
The article considers three groups of such factors which were observed 
during the Global Understanding course: objective, language, and 
psychological ones. The paper also analyses reasons for these factors 
and suggests psychological and pedagogical techniques aimed at 
compensation for their influence.   

 
Introduction 

 
The Global Understanding course provides students with an opportunity to be involved 
in synchronous intercultural interaction in English with students from all over the world 
(Chia, Poe, & Yang, 2011). Thanks to modern technology participants of the project do 
not have to change their place of residence and incur extra costs. Collaboration is 
carried out through such information technology tools as chats, social networks, e-
mailing, and on-line videoconferencing. Among them on-line videoconferences are the 
most effective in drawing academic collaboration closer to the real interaction and in 
providing students with detailed information about the other culture.  However, our 
experience shows that face-to-face collaboration is more difficult for non-native 
speakers. We suggest that it might be determined by a number of factors. Firstly, 
participants should be prompt enough to respond to questions with the English 
language they have at disposal. Secondly, they should speak in the presence of other 
people including strangers, which is a rather stressful situation for some people. While 
observing students during on-line conferences the authors noticed different degrees 
of involvement of students in collaboration. Since involvement in active intercultural 
collaboration influences the use of all advantages of such collaboration for foreign 
language learning and culture investigation, the authors decided to focus on factors 
which may lead to decrease of such involvement during on-line videoconferences. The 

http://www.gpejournal.org/


Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                            June 2015, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 27-37  

http://www.gpejournal.org/                                                                                                                                                          ISSN 2163-758X 

 

28 

 

authors differentiate at least three groups of such factors: objective, language, and 
psychological ones (individual and group factors). The paper analyzes content and 
reasons for each group of factors in detail and suggests several ways that might 
reduce their undesirable influence. 
 
Objective factors 
 
The term “objective” indicates the origin of these factors highlighting their 
independence from persons’ intentions and actions. On-line interaction is carried out 
in the environment which has its own objective characteristics: spatial, temporal, and 
technical. The authors’ experience proves that effective on-line interaction might be 
influenced by such factors as time difference and quality of videoconferencing 
determined by technology. 
 
Time Difference 
 
Description of the Problem 
 
During the Global Understanding course the authors witnessed the situations as well 
as students’ utterances which drew our attention to the importance of such a factor as 
time difference in countries of partner-universities. Below are the examples of 
influence of time difference factor on students’ interaction. E.g., students from one 
partner university have a link at 8.00 AM (local time), while students from another 
partner university have their class in the afternoon. From the perspective of dynamics 
of physiological indicators time period from 8.00 AM to 12.00 is a period of maximum 
physiological and psychological activity during 24 hours (Bünning, 1969). On the other 
hand, 8.00 AM is the beginning of classes, which is the so-called stage of inclusion in 
work. This stage lasts from several minutes to an hour and manifests itself in gradual 
increase in ability to work up to the optimal level (Egorov & Zagryadskyi, 1973). 
Students with a more extended stage of inclusion in work may demonstrate less 
activity during the first morning class. Therefore students from a partner-university 
might observe that some of their partners are less active. 
 
Videoconference creates an illusion that all the participants are present at the same 
place and at the same time in the same conditions. As a result, participants 
unintentionally ignore time difference. That is why students who attend the Global 
Understanding class in the afternoon and as a result feel more able to work might 
consider behavior of their less active partners unusual. According to Attribution theory 
by Fritz Heider (1958) people have motivation to explain other people’s behavior by 
the behavior or actions of others towards themselves, especially if such behavior 
seems unusual or differs from their expectations. Besides, Attribution theory says that 
people tend to underestimate influence of the situation on other people’s behavior and 
account for the reasons by inner dispositions (interests, attitudes, moods)—the so-
called fundamental attribution error (Ross, 1977). Consequently, students whose local 
time is the afternoon may subconsciously interpret their partners’ behavior, for whom 
it is the morning time, as a lack of interest. Since collaboration is a two-way process, 
such interpretation may influence participants’ behavior. Misinterpretation may lead 
not only to misunderstanding but also to decrease in collaboration intensity. 
 

http://www.gpejournal.org/


Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                            June 2015, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 27-37  

http://www.gpejournal.org/                                                                                                                                                          ISSN 2163-758X 

 

29 

 

At first we suggested that time difference factor should be taken into consideration only 
when difference in local time between partner universities exceeds 8 hours. However, 
later we came to a conclusion that for the adequate interpretation of partners’ behavior 
it is not absolute difference in local time that matters but difference in time of day when 
videoconference takes place: morning-afternoon, afternoon-evening, morning-
evening. 
 
Possible Solutions 
 
To prevent unconscious tendency to “extrapolate” their local time onto 
videoconference partners we employed a very simple technique: we reminded the 
students before each video session what time it is at the moment in a partner 
university. Thanks to it USPU students understood reasons for late coming and slow 
involvement in collaboration of their partners whose class started in the morning. As a 
result they did not perceive such behavior as a lack of interest or disrespect.    
 
We also used this technique to avoid false interpretation of long breaks in e-mailing. If 
the time difference is considerable, e-mail sent by a USPU student may be delivered 
to their partner only late at night or early in the morning. Their partner cannot respond 
promptly enough because he/she is sleeping at night and goes to university in the 
morning. Besides, sometimes partners cannot answer straight after the classes, for 
example, if they have a lot of homework. In its turn their answer may be delivered to 
the sender also at night which prolongs time between sending an e-mail and receiving 
the answer. As a result of all these time shifts even diligent pen-pal partners may 
produce an impression of being indifferent and undisciplined.  Therefore, it is crucial 
to discuss possible period of delay connected with time factor before the collaboration.  
According to the authors’ experience, such discussion improves psychological 
atmosphere of intercultural collaboration and decreases tendency of wrong 
interpretation of partner’s behavior.  
 
Quality of the Video 
 
Description of the Problem 
 
During group on-line videoconferences participants can only see video images of the 
partners’ faces. In case there is a picture of the whole group due to technical 
conditions, images of separate faces become very small. That is why it is almost 
impossible to differentiate mimic movements on a speaker’s face. Mimic movements 
(together with gesticulation and pantomimic) provide the interlocutor with information 
about their partner’s emotional state, preferred type of relationship, desired level of 
communication (Andreeva, 2009). Difficulties relating to differentiation of mimic 
movements lead to loss of information which could contribute to speech utterances 
(Andreeva, 2009). 
 
Referring to Edward T. Hall’s concept (1976) of high context and low context cultures 
we may assume that lack of non-verbal information might interfere with understanding 
one’s interlocutor only for representatives of high context cultures such as Russia. The 
reason is that communication in high context cultures (Сhina, Japan, France)  depend 
on the context of non-verbal component of communication to a larger extent, while in 

http://www.gpejournal.org/


Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                            June 2015, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 27-37  

http://www.gpejournal.org/                                                                                                                                                          ISSN 2163-758X 

 

30 

 

low context cultures (USA, Scandinavia, Germany) communication is focused on 
verbal messages (Hall, 1976). 
 
Possible Solutions 
 
Quality of video images is an objective factor, however, its influence might lead to such 
psychological consequences as deterioration of understanding of one’s interlocutor. 
Measures that might allow to compensate for the influence of this factor are the 
following: it might be effective to use zoom of the video camera to make the image of 
the speakers’ face bigger. In authors’ view, influence of this factor is not significant. 
That is why, if understanding among students is satisfactory, it is possible to ignore 
this factor. 
 
Language Factor 
 
Description of the Problem 
 
Language factor is all the factors regarding knowledge and use of the foreign 
language. The basic means of communicative interaction during videoconferences is 
the English language. Low proficiency students are less active in intercultural 
collaboration because of limited instrumental opportunities for such collaboration.  In 
USPU Global Understanding classes are heterogeneous: one half of participants are 
students of Foreign Languages Department while the second half includes both 
students majoring in sciences and humanities. Although the English language is 
integral part of the curriculum, number and quality of classes is insufficient for 
successful intercultural communication.  
 
Possible Solutions 
 
One of the ways to enhance students’ English language competence is to increase the 
number of tasks carried out in the English language. Undoubtedly, participation in the 
Global Understanding course enhances level of language competence. All the 
participants study ethnographic materials about culture of partner countries, read 
newspaper articles and write essays in English. They also practice their speaking skills 
during local classes. However, students who do not major in English may lack 
confidence to ask a question and participate in discussion. Such students are offered 
to prepare mini-reports on one of the subtopics in written form in advance.  A ready-
made text in front of the eyes allows the student to feel more prepared to take part in 
collaboration. The authors realize that this technique may lead to decrease in 
spontaneity as well as in value of videoconference as form of learning. On the other 
hand, students acquire positive experience which influences their readiness for 
collaboration in further video sessions.  
 
At the same time authors’ experience proves that language proficiency is not always 
in direct proportion to students’ activity during videoconferences. Among participants 
of the project we could observe students with limited vocabulary and knowledge of 
basic grammar rules who actively collaborated with their partners. That could be 
accounted for by psychological factors.   
 
 

http://www.gpejournal.org/


Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                            June 2015, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 27-37  

http://www.gpejournal.org/                                                                                                                                                          ISSN 2163-758X 

 

31 

 

Psychological Factors 
 
Psychological factors are further subdivided into two groups. The first group includes 
individual psychological factors—individual characteristics of participants of the Global 
Understanding course which manifest themselves in interpersonal collaboration. The 
second group includes group psychological factors which describe group’s influence 
on person’s behavior.  
 
Individual Psychological Factors 
 
Description of the Problem 
 
Videoconferencing technology allows to bring on-line collaboration closer to real face-
to-face collaboration. Therefore, individual psychological characteristics will manifest 
themselves to a larger extent in such type of collaboration rather than in anonymous 
forms of Internet collaboration (email, chats). However, not all individual psychological 
characteristics manifest themselves equally in interaction between people. One of 
such characteristics which significantly decreases student’s involvement in 
collaboration is shyness. Shy people are afraid of strangers because they do not know 
what could be expected from them. They try to avoid situations of interpersonal 
communication as well as actions which may draw attention to them (Zimbardo, 
1977/1990). Representatives of other cultures are not only strangers but also people 
with other value system and social norms.  That is why it is possible to suggest that 
discrepancy in their behavior and expectations of the “shy” representative of the other 
culture might be wider in comparison with situations of collaboration within their own 
culture. Therefore, such manifestations of shyness as fear and avoidance of 
interpersonal collaboration might be more obvious in intercultural contacts than in 
contacts with representatives of one’s own culture.  
 
The authors’ observations show that participation of such students in face-to-face 
collaboration amounts to formal presence at videoconferences. At the same time shy 
students are actively involved in other forms of intercultural collaboration, e.g. 
emailing. They also fulfill tasks which require use of written English. This way they 
partially compensate for lower grades for participation in videoconferences. However, 
this problem is not very serious because there are few really shy students.  As a rule, 
in Russian student groups it is one person per a group of sixteen people. Such people 
stand out because of their reticence.  
 
Possible Solutions 
 
Obviously, shyness of separate students as a psychological problem cannot be solved 
within educational process. However, we could suggest some steps which may help 
shy students to enhance level of their activity in intercultural collaboration during 
videoconferences. While designing these steps we defined shyness as insufficiently 
formed social skills (Zimbardo, 1977/1990). It means that a shy person avoids 
interaction with other people because he/she does not know how to initiate and 
support contact and he/she is afraid to look ridiculous. To make forthcoming 
collaboration more predictable and as result less frightening for shy students, like in 
the case with low proficiency students, we offer them to prepare and rehearse aloud a 
mini-report on each topic of the videoconference. It is also possible to inform shy 

http://www.gpejournal.org/


Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                            June 2015, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 27-37  

http://www.gpejournal.org/                                                                                                                                                          ISSN 2163-758X 

 

32 

 

students beforehand that a group leader will ask him/her to talk during the 
videoconference which increases personal responsibility for the given commitments.    
 
To stimulate participation of shy students in on-line interaction it is important to use 
both verbal (praise) and non-verbal (eye contact between a student and a teacher, 
nodding, smile) techniques. It is important for all students, especially for those students 
who are afraid of demonstrating their activity. 
 
Group Psychological Factors: Influence of the Environment 
 
Description of the Problem 
 
A group psychological factor which may lead to decrease in student’s involvement in 
intercultural collaboration during videoconferences is the presence of others. During 
videoconferences students interact with peers from their culture as well as students 
from partner university. In the presence of other people a person is worried about the 
impression he/she produces on people around which leads deterioration of complex 
actions (Cottrell, Wack, Sekerak, & Rittle, 1968). Communication in English is a 
challenging type of activity for students with low competence in the English language. 
That is why they might experience more difficulties while making utterances in the 
presence of others.  
 
Such failures may lead to their passive participation in collaboration. On the contrary, 
for those students who are familiar with interaction in English and used to it, presence 
of others may have a positive effect contributing to the improvement of their 
communicative activity (the so-called social facilitation effect). 
 
Possible Solutions 
 
 While choosing the ways to compensate for influence of the environment we referred 
to the conclusions by R. Zajonc, who stated that in the presence of others the dominant 
response will be enhanced (Zajonc & Sales, 1966). Therefore it is necessary to 
enhance the level of communicative skills so that communicative activity acquires 
character of dominant reaction in the situation of intercultural interaction.  
 
Group Psychological Factors: Group Formation 
 
Description of the Problem 
 
Influence of the second group psychological factor is significant since participants of 
the Global Understanding course are members of an academic group which is a type 
of a small group. In a student group as well as in any other group there is change over 
time which is referred to as “group’s development” in social psychology. There are 
various models of group’s development. Authors of several popular models of group’s 
development claim that at the first stage group members get familiarized with one 
another and establish relationships (Fisher, 1970; Tuckman & Jensen, 1977). 
Emotional state of group members is characterized as a primary tension (Fisher, 
1970). Such tension arises since group members are surrounded by new unfamiliar 
people and they do not know what should be expected from them. Besides, at the first 
stage group norms regulating communication within the group have not been defined 

http://www.gpejournal.org/


Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                            June 2015, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 27-37  

http://www.gpejournal.org/                                                                                                                                                          ISSN 2163-758X 

 

33 

 

yet. The authors suggest that at the first stage of group dynamics within the Global 
Understanding course participants may also experience emotional tension, and 
uncertainty of communication rules influences students’ behavior as well as each 
participant’s activity during on-line collaboration. This situation is especially topical for 
students in Russia. In Russian universities a student attends all the classes within the 
same academic group. That is why becoming a member of a new group as well as the 
corresponding adaptation is a less familiar task for Russian students rather than for 
students from other countries.    
 
Possible Solutions  
 
To compensate for this factor we have a two-hour class “Acquaintance Training” before 
links as such. This training session is aimed at further effective collaboration of group 
members and includes following objectives:  1. decrease of emotional tension in the 
group through acquaintance of group members with one another; 2. defining goals 
and expectations from participation in the project by group members. “Acquaintance 
Training” creates conditions for more active participation of each group member in 
group work during class session especially during videoconferences. Meeting 
members of the group before the links makes the situation more clear and predictable. 
Realizing personal goals regarding participation in the project forms motivation for 
more active participation. 
 
Since “Acquaintance Training” is an educational one to a greater extent, a professor 
in charge of it does not necessarily have to possess psychological background. While 
choosing the exercises one may use, for example, a short guide “500 Tips for Trainers” 
(Race & Smith, 1995, 1996). At the beginning of the class students may be offered 
simply to get to know one another by introducing themselves one by one (students talk 
about what they find important). Then students are paired up so that they may ask and 
answer questions about each other. After that each member introduces his/her partner 
to the group. It is easier for students to talk about their partner to the group rather than 
about themselves. They may also describe their partner’s merits about which the 
partner himself/herself would keep silent because of shyness. According to the 
authors’ experience, the tasks which require physical activity are emotionally positive 
and useful.  For example, the group is offered to divide itself into subgroups according 
to some characteristic.  It is worth beginning with outward characteristics which are 
available for immediate perception such as eye color or clothes details. Then it is 
possible to proceed with more complex characteristics identification of which demands 
interaction with each other (who likes spaghetti, who would like to spend a holiday on 
the Caribbean islands, who likes singing in the bathroom, etc.) (Race & Smith 1995, 
1996). It is also possible to divide group members into subgroups (not more than four 
people) to find out their goals and expectations with respect to the project. As soon as 
each subgroup formulates their goals and expectations, all the ideas should be 
discussed by the whole group. Sheets of paper with written goals and expectations 
should be kept until the end of the course – they may be used for final discussion 
during the last class.   
 
 
 
 
 

http://www.gpejournal.org/


Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                            June 2015, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 27-37  

http://www.gpejournal.org/                                                                                                                                                          ISSN 2163-758X 

 

34 

 

Group Psychological Factors: Differentiation of Roles 
 
Description of the Problem 
 
The third group psychological factor is determined by distribution of roles in an 
academic group. Differentiation of group members takes place in any small group 
during the very first stage, the criterion for differentiation is group members’ abilities 
and skills which are necessary for acquisition of the group goal (Wilke & Wit, 2001).  
Observing students’ behavior during on-line videoconferences the authors also 
discovered that participants’ roles in intercultural collaboration varied. Almost in every 
Global Understanding group leaders may be clearly defined during the first links 
(approximately 3-5 people in a group of 16 students). Regardless the fact whether they 
are actually appointed as formal leaders of discussion or not they get actively involved 
in collaboration, and the level of their activity remains equally high during the whole 
link. On the whole, such leaders are a positive factor for both the group and the project 
since they provide uninterrupted on-line collaboration which in its turn leads to the 
accomplishment of the project’s goals. On the other hand, active communication of 
group leaders decreases activity of the rest of group. They agree to be passive 
listeners because they doubt whether they will be a success in comparison with group 
leaders.  Since role distribution gets stable along with the group development, gap in 
the use of videoconference opportunities by active and passive participants widens. 
The authors suggest that other professors also observed such cases of active 
collaboration between 2-3 students from each partner university. The rest of the group 
remains passive demonstrating only non-verbal communication. Besides, there are 
differences in space arrangement: active participants choose to sit closer to the video 
camera while “listeners” prefer background position. The authors suggest that division 
of group members into passive and active ones is more probable in large groups 
because in such groups there are more opportunities “to hide behind other people’s 
backs”. 
 
In our opinion, the situation when two relatively small sub-groups on either side interact 
with each other during the videoconference limits participants’ opportunities in 
enriching their ideas about another culture. Obviously, each participant while 
answering their partner’s questions or reporting about some aspect of his/her own 
culture introduces subjective and therefore incomplete point of view. In order to obtain 
a complete image of some object one should have an opportunity to investigate it from 
various angles. By analogy, in order to have a complete idea about another culture it 
is important to listen to a number of opinions, not only to points of view of the most 
active students. This is one of the reasons why we think it is crucial to provide active 
involvement of all students in videoconferences.  
 
Possible Solutions  
 
To provide participation of all students in on-line videoconference it is possible to use 
experience of group discussion management accumulated by social psychology.  
Since only one student is chosen as a class leader during videoconferences, it is worth 
reminding him/her about the necessity to involve all group members in verbal 
interaction with students from the partner university. It is also advisable to make a class 
leader familiar with particular techniques which may be effective in regulating activity 
of group members. If there are too active students in the group, a leader may shift 

http://www.gpejournal.org/


Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                            June 2015, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 27-37  

http://www.gpejournal.org/                                                                                                                                                          ISSN 2163-758X 

 

35 

 

attention to other participants using such expressions as: “This is one point of view. 
Are there any other opinions on the problem?” (Krueger, 1988).  In order to activate 
shy students who do not speak a lot and speak in a low voice it is advisable to 
strengthen eye contact, let them feel that their opinions are equally important and 
interesting, invite them to answer the question calling them by their first names. As 
soon as a participant has said something, it is easier for him/her to participate in the 
conversation again. On the whole, the role of the class leader is to equal everybody’s 
activity in on-line collaboration: suspend too active students and involve passive ones. 
Since each student should experience the role of a class leader, it is important to form 
an idea about effective supervision of the discussion. After each videoconference 
students may reflect upon effectiveness of the class leader’s actions in organizing 
discussion.  
 
In conclusion we would like to mention one more factor which does not lead directly to 
decrease in students’ activity in on-line collaboration with students from a partner 
university but may be used to enhance the degree of students’ involvement in such 
collaboration. This is evaluation: correlation between the number of points a student 
may receive for participation in videoconferences and the number of points for the 
whole course. For example, if participation in videoconferences brings 20 points at 
maximum, and the sum total of points for the course is 400 points, then even if a 
student is only present at videoconferences without demonstrating any activity, he/she 
may have the highest grade for the whole course (≥ 360 points). Such correlation of 
points is reasonable for those students who are native speakers of English because 
participation in videoconferences is natural speech activity for them. For speakers of 
other languages it is crucial to increase the number of points given for immediate 
intercultural collaboration so that they cannot get the highest grade in case they remain 
passive in this type of activity. In the above mentioned example the number of points 
should be increased up to 40 points. We do not consider that the grade should be the 
leading motive for participation in the project. Nevertheless, the number of points for 
each type of activity draws students’ attention to significance of this type of activity for 
the acquisition of the goals of the Global Understanding course. 
 
Perhaps, the authors could be criticized for being too particular about psychology of 
the education process. The authors together with prospective critics share the point of 
view that students are responsible enough for their involvement in learning. At the 
same time if we know how to improve the situation to make the learning process more 
effective, we should employ our knowledge.  
 

Conclusion 
 
The idea of the authors of the Global Understanding project to provide students from 
all over the world an opportunity to immediately collaborate with each other by means 
of videoconferences is very productive. Students have a chance without any financial 
or time costs to perfect their language competence and enrich their idea of the world 
diversity through collaboration with native speakers of English as well as 
representatives of other cultures. However, the authors’ experience shows that 
immediate cross-cultural collaboration is a necessary but insufficient condition which 
helps to achieve the project’s goals. Students do not always use potential of 
intercultural communication fully because of the range of factors. Some of these 
factors are not consciously realized by students but influence their behavior which 

http://www.gpejournal.org/


Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                            June 2015, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 27-37  

http://www.gpejournal.org/                                                                                                                                                          ISSN 2163-758X 

 

36 

 

leads to decrease in their activity in cross-cultural collaboration.  Professors involved 
in the Global Understanding course should investigate these factors and choose 
adequate means which may help to reduce negative effect from these factors.  
 
Summing up our observations of students of Ural State Pedagogical University 
participating in the Global Understanding project we discovered a number of factors 
which may lead to decrease in students’ activity in immediate intercultural collaboration 
with the use of videoconferencing technology. That is why we focused our efforts on 
the search of psychological and pedagogical means which would allow to compensate 
for the influence of these factors and help students use all the advantages of on-line 
collaboration. The authors offered and tried out the following techniques:  
- drawing students’ attention to differences in time zones and associated behavioral 

variations during intercultural collaboration; 
- helping students to overcome language and psychological barriers through setting 

simpler communicative goals so that they could be involved in intercultural 
collaboration and obtain positive experience; 

- exercises aimed at facilitation of group formation, building more comfortable 
emotional atmosphere in the group, reduction of fear of talking in the presence of 
unfamiliar people during the first class; 

- making discussion leaders familiar with techniques which may allow to involve 
those group members who prefer passive role; 

- stimulating the role of evaluation by increasing the number of points given for 
participation in videoconferences throughout the course.  

 
We clearly realize that there are other psychoeducational techniques which may allow 
to enhance students’ activity in intercultural collaboration during videoconferences. 
However, techniques described in this paper proved to be effective while organizing 
students’ work during the Global Understanding course in USPU. Perhaps some of 
these techniques reflect peculiarities of the Russian culture and mentality and 
therefore will be less effective with students from other cultural backgrounds. This 
question needs further discussion. 
 

References 
 
Andreeva, G. M. (2009). Social psychology.  Moscow: Aspekt. 
Bünning, E. (1969). Rhythms of physiological processes. Moscow: Mir.  
Chia, R., Poe, E., & Yang, B. (2011). History of Global Partners in Education. Global 

Partners in Education Journal, 1, 3-7. Retrieved from 
 http://www.gpejournal.org/index.php/GPEJ/article/view/11/7   

Cottrell, N. B., Wack, D. L., Sekerak, G. J., & Rittle, R. H. (1968). Social facilitation of 
dominant responses by the presence of an audience and the mere presence of 
others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 245–250. 

Egorov, A. S. & Zagryadskyi V. P. (1973) Psychophysiology of mental labour. 
Leningrad: Nauka.  

Fisher, B. A. (1970). Decision emergence: Phases in group decision-making. Speech 
Monographs, 37, 53-66.  

Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond culture, New York: Doubleday. 
Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley. 
Krueger, R. A. (1988). Focus groups. A practical guide for applied research. Newbury 

Park, CA. Sage. 

http://www.gpejournal.org/
http://www.gpejournal.org/index.php/GPEJ/article/view/11/7


Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                            June 2015, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 27-37  

http://www.gpejournal.org/                                                                                                                                                          ISSN 2163-758X 

 

37 

 

Race, P. & Smith, B. (1995, 1996). 500 tips for trainers. London: Kogan Page Limited.  
Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the 

attribution process (pp. 173-220). In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in 
experimental social psychology (vol. 10). New York: Academic. 

Tuckman, B. W., & Jensen, M. A. (1977). Stages of small-group development revisited. 
Group & Organization Management, 2, 419-427. 

Wilke, H. & Wit, A. (2001). Group performance (pp. 445-478). In M. Hewstone & W. 
Stroebe (Eds.), Introduction to social psychology: A European perspective (3rd 
ed.) Oxford: Blackwell. 

Zajonc, R. B. & Sales, S. M. (1966). Social facilitation of dominant and subordinate 
responses. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2, 160-168. 

Zimbardo, P. G. (1977/1990). Shyness: What it is, what to do about it. Reading, MA: 
Addison-Wesley. 

 
 
About the Authors 
 
Svetlana A. Minyurova is a Professor of Chair of General Psychology, a Provost of 
Ural State Pedagogical University (Yekaterinburg, Russia). She holds a post-doctoral 
degree in Psychology. Her primary research focus is psychology of self-development, 
psychology of self-awareness, psychology of personal-professional development. She 
can be reached at minyurova@uspu.ru.  
 
Svetlana G. Krylova is an Associate Professor of Chair of Social Psychology, 
Conflictology and Management, Institute of Psychology at Ural State Pedagogical 
University (Yekaterinburg, Russia). She holds a doctoral degree in Psychology. Her 
primary research focus is social psychology, psychology of advertising, interpersonal 
understanding, psychological aspects of communication. She can be reached at 
s_g_krylova@mail.ru. 
 
Nadezhda S. Rudenko is an Assistant Professor of Chair of English Language, 
Teaching  Methods and Translation at Ural State Pedagogical University 
(Yekaterinburg, Russia). She holds a doctoral degree in English Language Teaching. 
Her primary research focus is self-access in EFL, intercultural communication. She 
can be reached at nadya_rogotneva@list.ru. 
 
  

http://www.gpejournal.org/
mailto:minyurova@uspu.ru
mailto:s_g_krylova@mail.ru
mailto:nadya_rogotneva@list.ru

