Performances for male and female groups were compared using three different
group problem-solving procedures: unstructured, structured-open (anyone
could contribute to the group solution at any time), and structured-forced (turn
taking). As predicted, the results indicated that female groups performed better
with the structured-forced procedure than with the structured-open procedure
and male groups performed better with the structured-open procedure than with the structured-forced procedure. These results provide support for the contention that males andfemales perform best under a different set of group problem-solv
ing procedures. Implications of these results for managers and group facili
tators are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Carey, G.L.Sex differences in problem-solving performance as a function of attitude differences . Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1958, 56, 256-260.
2.
Cummings, L.L., Huber, G.P., & Arendt, E.Effects of size and spatial arrangements on group decision making . Academy of Manayement Journal, 1974, 17, 460-475.
3.
Hall, J., & Watson, W.H.The effects of a normative intervention on group decision-making performance . Human Relations, 1970, 23, 299-317.
4.
Hoffman, L.R.The group problem solving process: Studies of a valence model. New York: Praeger, 1979 .
5.
Hoffman, L.R., & Maier, N.R.F.Sex differences, sex composition, and group problem solving. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1961, 63, 453-456.
6.
Hoffman, L.R., & Maier, N.R.F.Social factors influencing problem solving in women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1966, 4, 382-390.
7.
Holloman, C.R., & Hendricks, H.W.Adequacy of group decisions as a function of the decision-making process. Academy of Management Journal , 1972, 15, 175-184.
8.
Lane, I.M., Mathews, R.C., & Buco, S.M.Toward developing an unbiased scoring algorithm for "NASA" and similar ranking tasks. Group & Organization Studies, 1981 , 6, 235-243.
9.
Lane, I.M., Mathews, R.C., Chaney, C.M., Erffmeyer, R.C., Reber, R.A., & Teddlie, C.B.Effects of making the goals of acceptance and quality explicit on group decisions . Small Group Behavior, in press.
Maier, N.R.F., & Casselman, G.G.The SAT as a measure of problem-solving ability in males and females. Psychological Reports, 1970, 26, 927-939.
12.
Maier, N.R.F., & Casselman, G.G.Problem solving-ability as a factor in selection of major in college study: Comparison of the processes of "idea-getting" and "making essential distinctions" in males and females. Psychological Reports, 1971, 28, 503-514.
13.
Meeker, B.F., & Weitzel-O'Neill, P.A.Sex roles and interpersonal behavior in task-oriented groups. American Sociological Review, 1977, 42, 91-105.
14.
Megaree, E.I.Influence of sex roles on the manifestation of leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1969, 53, 377-382.
15.
Milton, G.A.The effects of sex-role identification upon problem solving skill . Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1957, 55, 208-212.
16.
Miner, F.C., Jr. A comparative analysis of three diverse group decision making approaches . Academy of Management Journal, 1979, 22, 81-93.
17.
Priest, R.F., & Hunsaker, P.L.Compensating for a female disadvantage in problem solving. Journal of Experimental Research in Personality, 1969, 4, 57-64.
18.
Rohrbaugh, J.Improving the quality of group judgment: Social judgment analysis and the Delphi Technique. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance , 1979, 24, 73-92.
19.
Sargent, A.G.Training men and women for androgynous behaviors in organizations . Group & Organization Studies, 1981, 6, 302-311.
20.
Sherman, J.A.A summary of psychological sex differences. In J. Sherman (Ed.), On the psychology of women: A survey of empirical studies. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas, 1971.
21.
Steiner, I.D.Group process and productivity. New York: Academic, 1972.
22.
Strodtbeck, F.L., Rita, M.J., & Hawkins, C.C.Social status in jury deliberations. American Sociological Review, 1957, 22, 713-719.
23.
Strodtbeck, F.L., & Mann, R.D.Sex role differentiation in jury deliberations. Sociometry , 1956, 19, 3-11.
24.
Thorndike, R.L.The effect of discussion upon the correctness of group decisions, when the factor of majority influence is allowed for. Journal of Social Psychology, 1938, 9, 343-362.
25.
Timmons, W.M.Can the product superiority of discussors be attributed to averaging or majority influences? Journal of Social Psychology, 1942, 15, 23-32.
