Literature DB >> 11414374

Quality of decision making and group norms.

T Postmes1, R Spears, S Cihangir.   

Abstract

Two studies investigated the impact of group norms for maintaining consensus versus norms for critical thought on group decisions in a modification of the biased sampling paradigm (G. Stasser & W. Titus, 1985). Both studies showed that critical norms improved the quality of decisions, whereas consensus norms did not. This effect appeared to be mediated by the perceived value of shared and unshared information: Consensus norm groups valued shared information more highly than critical groups did, and valence was a good predictor of decision outcome. In addition, the 2nd study showed that the group norm manipulation has no impact on individual decisions, consistent with the assumption that this is a group effect. Results suggest that the content of group norms is an important factor influencing the quality of group decision-making processes and that the content of group norms may be related to the group's proneness for groupthink.

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11414374

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol        ISSN: 0022-3514


  8 in total

1.  Clinical ethics and the dynamics of group decision-making: applying the psychological data to decisions made by ethics committees.

Authors:  Erica K Rangel
Journal:  HEC Forum       Date:  2009-06

2.  Biases in the production and reception of collective knowledge: the case of hindsight bias in Wikipedia.

Authors:  Aileen Oeberst; Ina von der Beck; Mitja D Back; Ulrike Cress; Steffen Nestler
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2017-04-17

3.  Competition and Sensemaking in Ethical Situations.

Authors:  Jay J Caughron; Alison L Antes; Cheryl K Stenmark; Chaise E Thiel; Xiaoqian Wang; Michael D Mumford
Journal:  J Appl Soc Psychol       Date:  2013-06-16

4.  Heterogeneity Improves Speed and Accuracy in Social Networks.

Authors:  Bhargav Karamched; Megan Stickler; William Ott; Benjamin Lindner; Zachary P Kilpatrick; Krešimir Josić
Journal:  Phys Rev Lett       Date:  2020-11-20       Impact factor: 9.185

5.  Uniform and Complementary Social Interaction: Distinct Pathways to Solidarity.

Authors:  Namkje Koudenburg; Tom Postmes; Ernestine H Gordijn; Aafke van Mourik Broekman
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-05       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Why and When Team Reflexivity Contributes to Team Performance: A Moderated Mediation Model.

Authors:  Mengxi Yang; Hilary Schloemer; Zheng Zhu; Yuying Lin; Wansi Chen; Niannian Dong
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2020-01-21

7.  Entangled N-photon states for fair and optimal social decision making.

Authors:  Nicolas Chauvet; Guillaume Bachelier; Serge Huant; Hayato Saigo; Hirokazu Hori; Makoto Naruse
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-11-24       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  How to Manage Diversity and Enhance Team Performance: Evidence from Online Doctor Teams in China.

Authors:  Xuan Liu; Meimei Chen; Jia Li; Ling Ma
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2019-12-19       Impact factor: 3.390

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.