| Abstract: | Two experiments examined solicitation of information in a group structured as a judge–advisor system (JAS) with 1 group member designated as the decision maker and the other 2 members as advisors. The decision maker solicited information from 2 advisors. One advisor's information was shared in common with the decision maker, and the other's information was predominantly unshared. In 2 experiments, decision makers asked for more information from the advisor with unshared information and rated this advisor's information as more important and influential than the advisor with only redundant, shared information. When decision makers were not limited in the amount of information they could ask for, decision makers significantly increased requests for information from the advisor with shared information but not the advisor with unshared information. Experiment 2 found that whether or not an advisor agreed with the decision maker did not affect decision makers' preference for the advisor with unshared information. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) |
