• Tobias Greitemeyer, Stefan Schulz-Hardt, Felix C Brodbeck, and Dieter Frey.
• Department of Psychology, Ludwig-Maximilians University Munich, Munich, Germany. togre@psy.unimuenchen.de
• J Exp Psychol Appl. 2006 Mar 1;12(1):31-42.

AbstractGroup 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.

7 keywords...

hide…