Psychological entrapment in group decision making: An assigned decision rule and a groupthink phenomenon.

Addressed interpersonal factors affecting group entrapment and also attempted to delineate a conceptual link between collective entrapment and I. L. Janis's (1972, 1982) notion of groupthink. Two experiments were conducted in which 3-person groups were assigned either majority or unanimity rule as an official consensus requirement for their initial decision. It was expected and confirmed that groups whose initial decision processes were guided by unanimity rule were entrapped more often to the chosen course of action than were groups with majority rule. The results also suggested that homogeneity of members' opinions at the outset of interaction and group's rationalization norm were responsible for the observed difference. Discussion is focused on the implications of these findings for administrative decision contexts and their conceptual link of the notion of groupthink. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Beyond fiasco: A reappraisal of the groupthink phenomenon and a new model of group decision processes.

Provides a comprehensive evaluation of the groupthink phenomenon (I. L. Janis; 1971, 1972, 1982). The evaluation indicates that research does not provide convincing support for the validity of the groupthink phenomenon or for the suggestion that groupthink characteristics lead to negative outcomes. This review, coupled with evidence from other literature suggested by a problem-solving perspective and a direct examination of groupthink implicit assumptions, guided the development of a new, more general model termed the general group problem-solving model. This model incorporates a variety of antecedent conditions, emergent group characteristics, decision process characteristics, and group decision outcomes. Following the review and model development, potential concerns relating to the model are discussed, the allure of groupthink is addressed, and implications of the analysis for group problem solving as well as directions for future research are presented. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Signal-detection analysis of group decision making.

How effectively can groups of people make yes-or-no decisions? To answer this question, we used signal-detection theory to model the behavior of groups of human participants in a visual detection task. The detection model specifies how performance depends on the group's size, the competence of the members, the correlation among members' judgments, the constraints on member interaction, and the group's decision rule. The model also allows specification of performance efficiency, which is a measure of how closely a group's performance matches the statistically optimal group. The performance of our groups was consistent with the theoretical predictions, but efficiency decreased as group size increased. This result was attributable to a decrease in the effort that members gave to their individual tasks rather than an inefficiency in combining the information in the members' judgments. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Quality of decision making and group norms.

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. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Information pooling: When it impacts group decision making.

Three-person groups decided which of 2 professors was nominated for a teaching award. Prior to discussion, half of the information available for this decision was given to every group member (shared information), whereas the rest was evenly divided among them (unshared information). Further, this information was distributed in such a way that the correct choice was not obvious to members prior to discussion. As predicted, discussion focused more on members' shared than unshared information. However, decision quality was affected only by the amount of unshared information discussed and by member's prediscussion choice preferences. The amount of shared information discussed did not affect decision quality. These results suggest a dual-process model of how the prediscussion distribution of decision-relevant information impacts group decision-making effectiveness. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of decision making by group members on recall of finished and unfinished tasks.

The hypothesis is suggested that as a result of decision making, motivational energy tends to be channeled into action which may be indexed by the tendency to recall unfinished tasks; and in the absence of decision making, motivational energy tends to be channeled into wish fulfillment which may be indexed by the tendency to recall finished tasks. The data presented tend to support this hypothesis. 20 references. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Biased information search in group decision making.

Research has shown that people prefer supporting to conflicting information when making decisions. Whether this biased information search also occurs in group decision making was examined in three experiments. Experiment 1 indicated that groups as well as individuals prefer supporting information and that the strength of this bias depends on the distribution of the group members' initial decision preferences. The more group members had chosen the same alternative prior to the group discussion (group homogeneity), the more strongly the group preferred information supporting that alternative. Experiment 2 replicated these results with managers. Experiment 3 showed that the differences between homogeneous and heterogeneous groups reflect group-level processes. Higher commitment and confidence in homogeneous groups mediated this effect. Functional and dysfunctional aspects of biased information seeking in group decision making are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of trial complexity on decision making.

The ability of a civil jury to render fair and rational decisions in complex trials has been questioned. However, the nature, dimensions, and effects of trial complexity on decision making have rarely been addressed. In this research, jury-eligible adults saw a videotape of a complex civil trial that varied in information load and complexity of the language of the witnesses. Information load and complexity differentially affected liability and compensatory decisions. An increase in the number of plaintiffs decreased blameworthiness assigned to the defendant despite contrary evidence and amount of probative evidence processed. Complex language did not affect memory but did affect jurors' ability to appropriately compensate differentially worthy plaintiffs. Jurors assigned compensatory awards commensurate with the plaintiffs' injuries only under low-load and less complex language conditions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Territorial dominance: The influence of the resident advantage in triadic decision making.

Hypothesized that the resident over visitor advantage would surface in triads and that it would accrue to low-dominance as well as high-dominance persons. 68 male freshmen completed the Gough 60-point Dominance Scale and a questionnaire on university budget cuts. 10 triads, each composed of a low-, medium-, and high-dominance male, met in either the high- or low-dominance person's room to reach consensus on the budget problem. The group's solution most closely reflected the resident's original solution to the problem, even if he was outnumbered by his visitors in his decision and regardless of whether he was a high- or low-dominance person. Parallel results were obtained from questionnaire data. Dyad-centered work on residential advantage should be combined with group-centered work on territorial behavior and position in a dominance hierarchy to more closely reflect the nested nature of small-group interaction within larger-sized social groupings. (32 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of member participation and commitment in group decision making on influence, satisfaction, and decision riskiness.

Divided 120 psychology students into 40 3-member groups assigned to discuss structured decision issues. Participation in only 1 of 3 decision-making phases (generation, evaluation, or choice) constituted partial participation, in contrast to complete participation. Group members were committed or not committed to carrying out the decisions reached. Results indicate that perceived intragroup influence and satisfaction were greatest with complete participation. With partial participation, influence and satisfaction were greatest in the choice phase. Although perceived influence was greater under commitment conditions, satisfaction was greater under noncommitment conditions. Decision riskiness was affected by neither treatment. (17 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Four techniques of group decision making under uncertainty.

4 techniques of group decision-making—authoritarian, leader suggestion, census, and chairman—under risk and uncertainty were compared using a survival situation with 45 aircrews. "1. In a conflict situation, when a group discussion method… is involved, the members' reactions to the alternatives are relatively undifferentiated in contrast to the condition in which the leader alone makes the decision… . 2… . the groups appear to be least favorably disposed toward the authoritarian technique of decision-making… . 3. When the decision-making procedure is group centered the group reaches a decision involving greater personal risk to the members." (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Explanation-based decision making: Effects of memory structure on judgment.

This article reports research that supports an explanation-based model of decision making applied to judicial decisions. In Experiment 1, recognition memory responses demonstrated that subjects spontaneously evaluated evidence in a legal judgment task by constructing an explanatory representation in the form of a narrative story. Furthermore, an item's membership in the story associated with the chosen or rejected verdict predicted subjects' ratings of its importance as evidence. In Experiment 2, subjects listened to evidence from criminal trials presented in various orders designed to manipulate the ease with which a particular explanatory summary of the evidence (story) could be constructed. The order manipulation shifted verdict choices in the direction of the more easily constructed story, implying that story structure causes decisions. In addition, the coherence of the explanatory story structure and the strength of alternative stories were major determinants of perceptions of strength of evidence and of confidence in the decision. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The stepladder technique: An alternative group structure facilitating effective group decision making.

A new group problem-solving structure entitled the stepladder technique is introduced. The stepladder technique is intended to allay the problems associated with group decision making by structuring the entry of group members into a core group and by ensuring that each member contributes to the decision-making process. Four-person groups, randomly assigned to either the stepladder group condition (15 groups) or the conventional group condition (15 groups), performed D. Johnson and F. Johnson's (1987) winter survival exercise. Stepladder groups produced significantly (p?     

Power relationships and group decision making in organizations.

Reviews theory and research on the distribution of power in organizations. Theories stressing power centralization are contrasted with the contemporary emphasis on the sharing of decision-making power. A situational-process approach to power relationships and group decision making integrates previous research and directs future study. This approach views power relationships as intervening processes in organizational development, with multiple determinants and outcomes. The group decision process is characterized as a multiphased process, in which participation, multiple bases of power, and interaction dynamics affect power relationships. Linkages between decision processes and power, and between power and organizational consequences, are mediated by characteristics of the organizational environment, decision tasks, and individual motives. (89 ref.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The power motive as an influence on group decision making.

40 groups of 5 undergraduates came together to discuss a business study case; each group member had a different role and a role sheet specifying items of information available only to him/her. The case featured most of the characteristics I. L. Janis (1972) identified as the kinds of policy decisions that produce "groupthink." Need for power was assessed by the TAT. Extreme top and bottom scorers were group leaders, and an attempt was made to create group cohesiveness in 20 groups by offering a reward for best group performance. Groups whose leaders scored low on the power motive brought more factual information from their role sheets into group discussion and considered more action proposals than did leaders who scored high. Group cohesiveness did not affect the quality of the decision-making process. (24 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of anticipatory stress on decision making in a gambling task.

Recent research has highlighted the fact that emotion that is intrinsic to a task benefits decision making. The authors tested the converse hypothesis, that unrelated emotion disrupts decision making. Participants played the Iowa Gambling Task, during which only experimental participants anticipated giving a public speech (A. Bechara, D. Tranel, & H. Damasio, 2000). Experimental participants who were anticipating the speech learned the contingencies of the choices more slowly, and there was a gender interaction later in the game, with stressed female participants having more explicit knowledge and more advantageous performance and stressed male participants having poorer explicit knowledge and less advantageous performance. Effects of anticipatory stress on decision making are complex and depend on both the nature of the task and the individual. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of straw polls on group decision making: Sequential voting pattern, timing, and local majorities.

Six-person juries (evenly divided between members inclined toward guilty and not-guilty verdicts) responded to a straw poll either early or late, with subjects inclined toward guilty or not guilty voting first, or simultaneous voting. Critical (fourth) voters in straw polls were somewhat influenced by the preceding voter sequence, and were substantially influenced by the timing of the poll. We interpreted the asymmetry in opinion change observed for members initially inclined toward guilty and toward not guilty in terms of the defendant protection norm (leniency bias), the salience of which had apparently been emphasized by discussion and voting, even the prospect of public voting. We extrapolated member-level opinion changes to the group level, illustrating the verdict consequences of individual-level opinion changes. Observed group consensus verdicts, however, deviated from predictions, implying a different role for procedural factors and emphasizing the importance of group-level data in such research settings. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Understanding moral thought: Effects on moral reasoning and decision making.

89 16–18 yr olds' understanding of processes involved in moral reasoning and decision making was examined in relation to the Ss' level of moral reasoning, extent of prudential concerns, and consistency of decision making. Four qualitatively different levels of understanding of moral thought were identified. These levels were related to moral scores in 2 dilemmas: one involving a fictitious other and the other involving the self as protagonist. Ss with less understanding of moral thought were more likely to demonstrate lower moral scores and more prudential concerns in each perspective and to make a different decision (often prudentially rather than morally based) in the self-perspective. Ss who changed their decision in the self-perspective demonstrated lower self-perspective moral scores than Ss who demonstrated decision consistency. It is suggested that Ss with less understanding of the processes involved in moral thought are more likely to use moral reasons in the service of decisions they want to make for prudential reasons. (34 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Assessing political group dynamics: A test of the groupthink model.

Used the Group Dynamics Q sort to explore the empirical underpinnings and theoretical logic of the groupthink model. Examination of 10 decision-making episodes revealed considerable historical support for I. L. Janis's (1982) classification of groups into groupthink and vigilant decision-making episodes. LISREL analysis, however, revealed less support for Janis's causal model of groupthink. Neither group cohesiveness nor situational stress emerged as independent predictors of symptoms of groupthink. Structural and procedural faults of the organization did, however, emerge as a potent predictor. Little support was found for Janis's suggestion that the ill-fated Mayaguez and Iran rescue decisions were the product of groupthink. The results illustrate the symbiotic relationship between social psychology and history. Historical case studies allow for testing theories of group dynamics; social-psychological concepts and research methods can inform interpretations of historical events. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Identifying victims of groupthink from public statements of decision makers.

Tested hypotheses derived from I. Janis's (1972) groupthink analysis of several foreign policy decisions of the American government. Content analyses were performed using the public statements of key decision makers involved in crises for which Janis's case studies revealed or did not reveal evidence of groupthink. Consistent with Janis's theory, it was found that, relative to non-groupthink decision makers, groupthink decision makers were more simplistic in their perceptions of policy issues and made more positive references to the US and its allies (own group). Inconsistent with Janis's theory, groupthink decision makers did not make significantly more negative references to Communist states and their allies (opponents). Methodological and practical obstacles to definitive testing of the groupthink model are examined. (33 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)