This qualitative study explored students' experiences using Google Docs for collaborative scientific writing. Using Braun and Clarke's (2006) thematic analysis, it examined interaction patterns, perceptions of synchronous feedback, and challenges with coping strategies. Twenty students (13 female, 7 male) from Urmia University were purposively sampled. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews and revision history observations until saturation.
Findings clustered into three axes. For interaction patterns, five themes emerged: temporal diversity (simultaneous/asynchronous/hybrid), role-based structures (editor-author, primary author-editors), discourse-oriented interaction (written debate, structured critique), structuralist interaction (section-based division), and coordination beyond Docs (external channels). For synchronous feedback perceptions, five themes were identified: technical features (suggestion vs. direct editing), multidimensionality (multiple sources), perceived effectiveness (clarity vs. ambiguity), learning outcomes (critical thinking, self-efficacy), and emotional experiences (stress, anxiety, confidence). Challenges fell into three categories: technical barriers (internet, devices, formulas), group interaction barriers (coordination, untimely responses), and cognitive/emotional barriers (visibility stress, excessive comments, embarrassment). Students employed adaptive strategies: technical solutions (plugins, offline backups), collaboration enhancement (shared calendars, access settings), and metacognitive strategies (prioritizing feedback, categorizing revisions by content/structure/editing).
Results indicate that Google Docs effectively supports collaborative writing and synchronous feedback but imposes significant psychological burdens on learners.