Triads, working under time pressure or not, participated in a management simulation that asked groups to decide which of two cholesterol-reducing drugs to market. The total distribution of information available to the group always favored the same drug. However, members’ initial preferences were manipulated by varying the distribution of shared information (provided to all members) and unshared information (provided to only a single member) supporting each alternative. Thus, each member’s fact sheet either (a) favored the correct decision (correct preference condition), (b) mildly favored the incorrect decision (weak incorrect preference condition), or (c) strongly favored the incorrect decision (strong incorrect preference condition). Initial preferences were major determinants of group decisions. Time pressure either enhanced or reduced decision quality depending on the strength of initial preferences and the content of the group interactions. These findings are discussed in light of Karau and Kelly’s Attentional Focus Model of group performance.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anderson, N. H. , & Graesser, C. (1976). An information integration analysis of attitude change in group discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 210-222.
2.
Baron, R. S. (1986). Distraction-conflict theory: Progress and problems. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 1-40). New York: Academic Press.
3.
Burnstein, E. , & Vinokur, A. (1977). Persuasive argumentation and social comparison as determinants of attitude polarization. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 315-332.
4.
Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 752-766.
5.
Cohen, S. (1978). Environmental load and the allocation of attention. In A. Baum, J. E. Singer, & S. Valins (Eds.), Advances in environmental psychology: Volume 1. The urban environment (pp. 1-29). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6.
Craik, F. I. M. , & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671-684.
7.
Easterbrook, J. A. (1959). The effect of emotion on cue utilization and the organization of behavior. Psychological Review, 66, 183-201.
8.
Hackman, J. R. , Brousseau, K. R., & Weiss, J. A. (1976). The interaction of task design and group performance strategies in determining group effectiveness. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 350-365.
9.
Hackman, J. R. , & Morris, C. G. (1975). Group tasks, group interaction process, and group performance effectiveness: A review and proposed integration. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 8, pp. 45-99). New York: Academic Press.
10.
Hirokawa, R. Y. (1988). Group communication and decision-making performance: A continued test of the functional perspective. Human Communication Research, 14, 487-515.
11.
Hoffman, R. L. (Ed.). (1979). The group problem solving process: Studies of a valence model. New York: Praeger.
12.
Janis, I. L. (1982). Victims of groupthink (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
13.
Kaplan, M. F. , & Miller, C. E. (1987). Group decision making and normative versus informational influence: Effects of type of issue and assigned decision rule. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 306-313.
14.
Karau, S. J. , & Kelly, J. R. (1992). The effects of time scarcity and time abundance on group performance quality and interaction process. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 542-571.
15.
Kelly, J. R. (1988). Entrainment in individual and group behavior. In J. E. McGrath (Ed.), The social psychology of time: New perspectives (pp. 89-110). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
16.
Kelly, J. R. , Futoran, G. C., & McGrath, J. E. (1990). Capacity and capability: Seven studies of entrainment of task performance rates. Small Group Research, 21, 283-314.
17.
Kelly, J. R. , Jackson, J. W., & Hutson-Comeaux, S. L. (1997). The effects of time pressure and task differences on influence modes and accuracy in decision-making groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 10-22.
18.
Kelly, J. R. , & McGrath, J. E. (1985). Effects of time limits and task types on task performance and interaction of four-person groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 395-407.
19.
Kerr, N. L. , MacCoun, R. J., Hansen, C. H., & Hymes, J. A. (1987). Gaining and losing social support: Momentum in decision-making groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 23, 119-145.
20.
Kruglanski, A. W. , & Webster, D. M. (1996). Motivated closing of the mind: “Seizing” and “freezing.”Psychological Review, 103, 263-283.
21.
Larson, J. R. , Foster-Fishman, P. G., & Keys, C. B. (1994). The discussion of shared and unshared information in decision-making groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 446-461.
22.
Locke, E. A. , & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
23.
Maheswaran, D. , & Chaiken, S. (1991). Promoting systematic processing in low-motivation settings: Effect of incongruent information on processing and judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 13-25.
24.
McGuire, T. W. , Kiesler, S., & Siegel, J. (1987). Group and computer-mediated discussion effects in risk decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 917-930.
25.
Parks, C. D. , & Cowlin, R. (1995). Group discussion as affected by number of alternatives and by a time limit. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62, 267-275.
26.
Pepinsky, P. , Pepinsky, H., & Pavlik, W. (1960). The effects of task complexity and time pressure upon team productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 44, 34-38.
27.
Petty, R. E. , & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 124-205). New York: Academic Press.
28.
Stasser, G. (1988). Computer simulation as a research tool: The DISCUSS model of group decision making. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 24, 393-422.
29.
Stasser, G. , Kerr, N. L., & Davis, L. H. (1989). Influence processes and consensus models in decision-making groups. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.), Psychology of group influence (2nd ed., pp. 279-326). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
30.
Stasser, G. , & Stewart, D. (1992). Discovery of hidden profiles by decision-making groups: Solving a problem versus making a judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 426-434.
31.
Stasser, G. , Taylor, L. A., & Hanna, C. (1989). Information sampling in structured and unstructured discussions of three-and six-person groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 67-78.
32.
Stasser, G. , & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1467-1478.
33.
Stasser, G. , & Titus, W. (1987). Effects of information load and percentage of shared information on the dissemination of unshared information during group discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 81-93.
34.
Weisband, S. P. (1992). Group discussion and first advocacy effects in computer-mediated and face-to-face decision making groups. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 53, 352-380.
35.
Wittenbaum, G. M. , & Stasser, G. (1996). Management of information in small groups. In J. L. Nye & A. M. Brower (Eds.), What’s social about social cognition? Research on socially shared cognition in small groups (pp. 3-28). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
