Information sampling and group decision making: The effects of an advocacy decision procedure and task experience

Tobias Greitemeyer*, Stefan Schulz-Hardt, Felix C. Brodbeck, Dieter Frey

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Group discussions tend to focus on information that was previously known by all members (shared information) rather than information known by only 1 member (unshared information). If the shared information implies a suboptimal alternative, this sampling bias is associated with inaccurate group decisions. The present study examines the impact of 2 factors on information exchange and decision quality: (a) an advocacy group decision procedure versus unstructured discussion and (b) task experience. Results show that advocacy groups discussed both more shared and unshared information than free-discussion groups. Further, with increasing experience, more unshared information was mentioned in advocacy groups. In contrast, there was no such increase in unstructured discussions. Yet advocacy groups did not significantly improve their decision quality with experience.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)31-42
Number of pages12
JournalJournal of Experimental Psychology: Applied
Volume12
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Mar 2006

Fingerprint

Selection Bias
Decision Making

Keywords

  • Dialectical techniques
  • Group decision making
  • Hidden profile
  • Information sampling

Cite this

Greitemeyer, Tobias ; Schulz-Hardt, Stefan ; Brodbeck, Felix C. ; Frey, Dieter. / Information sampling and group decision making : The effects of an advocacy decision procedure and task experience. In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 2006 ; Vol. 12, No. 1. pp. 31-42.
@article{b031b54718094fafb034db82f664c80c,
title = "Information sampling and group decision making: The effects of an advocacy decision procedure and task experience",
abstract = "Group discussions tend to focus on information that was previously known by all members (shared information) rather than information known by only 1 member (unshared information). If the shared information implies a suboptimal alternative, this sampling bias is associated with inaccurate group decisions. The present study examines the impact of 2 factors on information exchange and decision quality: (a) an advocacy group decision procedure versus unstructured discussion and (b) task experience. Results show that advocacy groups discussed both more shared and unshared information than free-discussion groups. Further, with increasing experience, more unshared information was mentioned in advocacy groups. In contrast, there was no such increase in unstructured discussions. Yet advocacy groups did not significantly improve their decision quality with experience.",
keywords = "Dialectical techniques, Group decision making, Hidden profile, Information sampling",
author = "Tobias Greitemeyer and Stefan Schulz-Hardt and Brodbeck, {Felix C.} and Dieter Frey",
year = "2006",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1037/1076-898X.12.1.31",
language = "English",
volume = "12",
pages = "31--42",
journal = "Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied",
issn = "1076-898X",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "1",

}

Information sampling and group decision making : The effects of an advocacy decision procedure and task experience. / Greitemeyer, Tobias; Schulz-Hardt, Stefan; Brodbeck, Felix C.; Frey, Dieter.

In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, Vol. 12, No. 1, 01.03.2006, p. 31-42.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Information sampling and group decision making

T2 - The effects of an advocacy decision procedure and task experience

AU - Greitemeyer, Tobias

AU - Schulz-Hardt, Stefan

AU - Brodbeck, Felix C.

AU - Frey, Dieter

PY - 2006/3/1

Y1 - 2006/3/1

N2 - Group discussions tend to focus on information that was previously known by all members (shared information) rather than information known by only 1 member (unshared information). If the shared information implies a suboptimal alternative, this sampling bias is associated with inaccurate group decisions. The present study examines the impact of 2 factors on information exchange and decision quality: (a) an advocacy group decision procedure versus unstructured discussion and (b) task experience. Results show that advocacy groups discussed both more shared and unshared information than free-discussion groups. Further, with increasing experience, more unshared information was mentioned in advocacy groups. In contrast, there was no such increase in unstructured discussions. Yet advocacy groups did not significantly improve their decision quality with experience.

AB - Group discussions tend to focus on information that was previously known by all members (shared information) rather than information known by only 1 member (unshared information). If the shared information implies a suboptimal alternative, this sampling bias is associated with inaccurate group decisions. The present study examines the impact of 2 factors on information exchange and decision quality: (a) an advocacy group decision procedure versus unstructured discussion and (b) task experience. Results show that advocacy groups discussed both more shared and unshared information than free-discussion groups. Further, with increasing experience, more unshared information was mentioned in advocacy groups. In contrast, there was no such increase in unstructured discussions. Yet advocacy groups did not significantly improve their decision quality with experience.

KW - Dialectical techniques

KW - Group decision making

KW - Hidden profile

KW - Information sampling

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33644983866&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2006-02910-003

U2 - 10.1037/1076-898X.12.1.31

DO - 10.1037/1076-898X.12.1.31

M3 - Article

C2 - 16536657

AN - SCOPUS:33644983866

VL - 12

SP - 31

EP - 42

JO - Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied

JF - Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied

SN - 1076-898X

IS - 1

ER -