In Hidden Profiles gelingt es Gruppen häufig nicht, ihr Potenzial, bessere Entscheidungen als jedes ihrer Mitglieder zu treffen, zu erfüllen. Für dieses Phänomen wurden bereits verschiedene Ursachen ermittelt. Dazu gehören insbesondere Verzerrungen im Inhalt der Gruppendiskussion sowie der Bewertung von entscheidungsrelevanten Informationen durch die Gruppenmitglieder. In der vorliegenden Arbeit wird nun ein weiterer Aspekt individueller Informationsverarbeitung untersucht, dessen Verzerrung einen nachteiligen Einfluss auf die Entscheidungsqualität von Diskussionsgruppen haben könnte: der individuelle Recall bezüglich aufgabenrelevanter Informationen. Dabei werden zwei Verzerrungen postuliert: Ein Erinnerungsvorteil von Informationen, welche die ursprüngliche Präferenz des jeweiligen Gruppenmitglieds unterstützen sowie eine Verzerrung zugunsten von Informationen, die bereits vor der Diskussion verfügbar sind. Es wird angenommen, dass beide Verzerrungen einen negativen Einfluss auf die Entscheidungsqualität des Individuums und somit auch der gesamten Gruppe haben. Diese Annahmen wurden in einer Reihe von vier Experimenten und der Reanalyse zweier früherer Studien untersucht. Insgesamt wurde dabei Evidenz für einen Erinnerungsvorteil eigener, vor der Diskussion bekannter Informationen gegenüber in der Diskussion neu gelernten Informationen gefunden. Belege für einen Erinnerungsvorteil präferenzkonsistenter Informationen zeigten sich dagegen nur vereinzelt und in einer metaanalytischen Zusammenfassung nicht in signifikantem Maße. Eine experimentelle Manipulation der Erinnerungsverzerrungen liefert keinen Hinweis auf einen Zusammenhang zwischen diesen Faktoren und der Entscheidungsqualität in Hidden-Profile- Situationen. Eine Verzerrung der individuellen Erinnerung im Hinblick auf entscheidungsrelevante Informationen ist somit nach den Ergebnissen dieser Arbeit keine sinnvolle Erweiterung der bestehenden Erklärungsansätze für das Scheitern von Entscheidungsgruppen an der Realisierung von Synergien.

Self-directed work groups are a growing phenomenon in the field of organisational psychology (Kauffeld, 2006; Neck & Manz, 1994). While much is known about what factors affect information sharing in these kinds of groups, little is known about why these factors have an impact and how they relate to each other. Through the concept of hidden profiles (tasks that by nature have shared and unshared information), this study explored the information sharing and group decision making processes and aimed to illuminate the group processes involved. The study employed a qualitative, ideographic approach where case studies were used. The sample consisted of twenty four undergraduate and postgraduate students studying at the University of the Witwatersrand divided into groups of four members each. A group task to rank the best candidate for a job was self-designed based on the theory and design utilized by Stasser and Titus (1985; 1987). This was first completed individually and then as a group – the group discussion was filmed and coded using a self-developed observation rubric. Participants also completed a self-developed post-task questionnaire regarding their perspectives of various aspects of the decision making process. The analysis was carried out using frequency counts and thematic content analysis. It was found that all the groups discussed more shared information and more unshared negative information was discussed than unshared positive information. Information sharing increased when there was debate about which pieces of information were relevant. In most cases, group members were motivated to share information because they wanted to have their opinion heard. Although the majority of the sample stated that they did not withhold any information, there was evidence of strategic information sharing. Group 5 made a decision that was closest to the ideal decision. Characteristics of this group that could have contributed to this included: long duration of discussion; high number of talking turns; respecting each other’s talking turns; moderate levels of disagreement; no obvious role of leader; moderately high levels of group familiarity; diversity in race not gender; similar educational backgrounds and a norm of critical evaluation. The study found that the interactions between factors that were perceived to affect the information sharing and decision-making (such as duration of discussion, number of talking turns, group familiarity, competitive aspects, group composition and group roles) were more interwoven than previously thought.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / Research has repeatedly shown that when groups whose members have varying expertise are combined to make a decision, they tend to discuss common information at a higher rate than unique information, hindering their ability to make the best decision. In response to these findings and the fact that organizations are increasingly using groups rather than individuals to make important decisions, a new intervention was developed based on past research to help groups make better decisions and discuss more unique information. The intervention was developed through three phases to determine which techniques were most powerful. The formal evaluation of the intervention was tested on a total of 228 undergraduate students (44 groups of four and 52 individuals). Groups were randomized into an experimental condition, receiving the intervention, or a control condition. Groups participated in a hidden profile business simulation acting as the top management team of a fictional Hollywood movie studio. Information was distributed so that there was common and unique information for each group. Groups given the intervention made significantly better decisions, shared more unique information, and performed significantly better than individuals. Unique information sharing was positively related to performance and the unique information given to one group member mediated the relationship between the condition and performance. In addition, this study revealed that within the inventory of unique information, different types of information may be more critical in reaching the best possible decision than others. Future research aims and implications are discussed.

No description available.

No description available.