3) Group Decision Making Flashcards
What is the impact of gender (-composition) on decision making (and on team performance) ?
- Women are more risk-averse than men
- Women are more situationally specific in social preferences (they are not more social than men, but more malleable in their social preferences)
- Women are more averse to competition than men
- diverse boards in companies perform better
Healthy suspicion: The value of low swift trust for information processing and performance of temporary teams
A healthy suspicion toward the contribution of other may ultimately allow better team success in complex decision-making tasks.
Intrateam trust benefits performance outcomes
BUT being suspicious about each other inputs may prevent an over-reliance on simplified strategies (that may lead to damaging decisions.)
Swift Trust
The cognitive process that emphasizes belief in their party’s capability, reliability and dependability
Distrust
Negative expectations about others contribution
(Dis-) Advantages of Groups over Individuals in DM
- More accurate forecasts (i.e. prediction markets)
- More creative ideas
- Groups receive higher scores on academic tests
- Recall information more accurately
VS
- Evidence that the superiority of groups is not a given
(Bay of Pigs, Challenger Explosion)
Perfect calibration diagnosticity
In a simple aggregation process, a J (the number of estimators) increases, the average will tend toward PCD (=accurate representation of the true state of affairs)
Median Voter Theorem
- When member preferences are single peaked
- Each member has a single best point along the response continuum
- Median of the members’ initial preferences is the most stable outcome
Mode (as aggregation procedure)
Evidence that it does very well
- Majority models come close to optimal performance when group member expertise is not knowable
- Reflect social sharedness at the preference level
- Amplify in the group distributions those response tendencies that are prevalent at the individual level
Aggregation with limited information exchange
1) Delphi Technique
2) Prediction Markets
3) Judge Advisor Systems
Delphi Technique
- ) Group of experts makes a series of estimates, rankings, idea lists etc.
- ) Facilitator compiles the list of member responses and summarizes them in a meaningful way
- ) Summaries are given back to the group members and they can revise their initial estimates
• Typically anonymous group members
–> Allows information to be shared while avoiding conformity pressure or undue influence by high-status members
Do better than individuals and as least as good as face to face groups
Prediction Markets
- Mutual social influences can occur
* Very dynamic, continuous aggregation process
Judge Advisor Systems (JAS)
AND Egocentric advice discounting
1) Judge is responsible for final decision but receives suggestions from advisors
They discount other opinions much less when
- Advisor is known expert
- task is complex
- financial incentive to be accurate
- They trust the advisor
They use it more in unfamiliar territory and learn to discount un-confident opinions
- -> Anchoring and adjustment
- -> Information Advantage
- -> Instance of General Egocentric Bias
Social Sharedness
Shared common cognition that are task relevant have a greater influence than the not shared ones
The greater the sharedness, the greater the probability of the information influencing the decision.
A shift in context and thus to inappropriateness of the cognition can lead to a poorer outcome.
Group Consensus as Combining Preferences
Combinatorial Approach
1) Focus on the distribution of initial member preferences and how they can get combined
–> Social Decision Scheme Theory
Assumes that each member has particular preferred option and set of alternatives is known by group
Can be used to describe or prescribe group behaviour during decision-making
–> Basic Aggregation Model
2) Group consensus model for continuous response dimensions
Assumes that the amount of influence of a particular member is an inverse exponential function of the sum of the distances from that member’s position to all other members’ positions
Group Consensus Through Information Processing
1) Hidden Profile
= information held by only one (or a few) member and not shared with the group
o Shared Information Effect
- Groups perform better if their member share their unique knowledge
2) Information Asymmetries Model
Categorizes the various conditions that lead to poor information sharing into:
- Negotiation Focus
- Discussion Bias
- Evaluation Bias