This article studies inferences from distributed, interdependent information in group problem-solving. Three inference types (collaborative, individual, and shared) are distinguished, based on information sharing and distribution, with a special focus on collaborative inferences that generate new information no individual group member could have inferred. In an experiment, n= 27 dyads solved a specifically designed inference task. Inferences from shared information were the most likely, individual inferences from unshared information less likely, and collaborative inferences from unshared, distributed information the least likely to be drawn. An analysis of inference patterns in dyads’ discussions points towards the individual- and group-level processes involved in drawing collaborative inferences, and explains why first support measures explored in this study were not optimally designed.
Black, A., Freeman, P., & Johnson-Laird, P. (1986). Plausibility and the comprehension of text. British Journal of Psychology,77,51-62.
2.
Brodbeck, F., Kerschreiter, R., Mojzisch, A., & Schulz-Hardt, S. (2007). Improving group decision making under conditions of distributed knowledge: The information asymmetries model. Academy of Management Review,32, 459-479.
3.
Carmien, S., Kollar, I., Fischer, G., & Fischer, F. ( 2007). The interplay of internal and external scripts. In F. Fischer, I. Kollar, H. Mandl, & J. M. Haake (Eds.), Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning. Cognitive, computational and educational perspectives (pp. 303-326). New York: Springer.
4.
Collins, A., & Michalski, R. ( 1989). The logic of plausible reasoning: A core theory. Cognitive Science, 13, 1-49.
5.
Collins, E.G., & Guetzkow, H. ( 1964). A social psychology of group processes for decision-making . New York: Wiley.
6.
Craik, F., & Lockhart, R. ( 1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research . Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671-684.
7.
Dennis, A., Hilmer, K., & Taylor, N. ( 1998). Information exchange and use in GSS and verbal group decision making: Effects of minority influence. Journal of Management Information Systems,14,61-88.
8.
Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. ( 1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 53, 497-509.
9.
Dillenbourg, P. ( 2002). Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. In P. A. Kirschner (Ed.), Three worlds of CSCL: Can we support CSCL? (pp. 61-91). Heerlen: Open Universiteit Nederland.
10.
Dunbar, K. ( 2000). How scientists think in the real world: Implications for science education. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology ,21(1), 49-58.
11.
Finlay, F., Hitch, G.J., & Meudell, P.R. ( 2000) Mutual inhibition in collective recall: Evidence for a retrieval based account. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition,26, 1556-1567.
12.
Fraidin, S.N. ( 2004). When is one head better than two? Interdependent information in group decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,93, 102-113.
13.
Grice, H.P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts (pp. 41-58). New York: Seminar Press.
14.
Härder, J. (2003). Wissenskommunikation mit Desktop-Videokonferenzen: Strukturierungsangebote für den Wissensaustausch und gemeinsame Inferenzen[Knowledge communication in desktop-videoconferencing: Structuring support for knowledge exchange and joint inferences]. Doctoral dissertation, University of Freiburg, Germany. Retrieved May 13, 2005, from http://www.freidok.uni-freiburg.de/volltexte/1157.
15.
Klauer, K.C. ( 2006). Hierarchical multinomial processing tree models: A latent-class approach. Psychometrika,71, 1-31.
16.
Kneser, C., & Ploetzner, R. ( 2001). Collaboration on the basis of complementary domain knowledge: Observed dialogue structures and their relation to learning success. Learning and Instruction,11, 53-83.
17.
Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Hesse, F. ( 2006). Collaboration scripts: A conceptual analysis. Educational Psychology Review,18, 159-185.
18.
Lam, S., & Schaubroeck, J. (2000). Improving group decisions by better pooling information: A comparative advantage of group decision support systems. Journal of Applied Psychology,85(4), 565-573.
19.
Mojzisch, A., & Schulz-Hardt, S. (2006). Information sampling in group decision making: Sampling biases and their consequences. In K. Fiedler & P. Justin (Eds.), Information sampling and adaptive cognition (pp. 299-326). New York: Cambridge University Press.
20.
O’Donnell, A. ( 1999). Structuring dyadic interaction through scripted cooperation . In A. O’Donnell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 179-196). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
21.
Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. ( 1993). Reasoning in explanation-based decision making. Cognition, 49, 123-163.
22.
Piontkowski, U., Keil, W., & Hartmann, J. ( 2007). Modelling collaborative and individual work sequences to improve information integration in hidden profile tasks. Journal of Psychology,215(4), 218-227.
23.
Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Cihangir, S. ( 2001). Quality of decision making and group norms. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,80(6), 918-930.
24.
Presidential Commission on the Space Shuttle Challenger Accident (1986). Report to the President. Washington, DC: The Commission. Retrieved February 17, 2009, from http://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/51lcover.htm.
25.
Rummel, N., & Spada, H. ( 2005). Learning to collaborate: An instructional approach to promoting problem-solving in computer-mediated settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences,14, 201-241.
26.
Stahl, C., & Klauer, K.C. ( 2007). HMMTree: A computer program for latent-class hierarchical multinomial processing tree models. Behavior Research Methods , 39, 267-273.
27.
Stasser, G., & Birchmeier, Z. (2003). Group creativity and collective choice. In P. B. Paulus & B. A. Nijstad (Eds.), Group creativity: Innovation through collaboration (pp. 85-109). New York: Oxford University Press.
28.
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.
29.
Stasser, G., Taylor, L., & 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.
30.
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.
31.
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.
32.
Tindale, R., & Kameda, T. ( 2000). "Social sharedness’" as a unifying theme for information processing in groups. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations , 3(2), 123-140.
33.
van Ginkel, W., & van Knippenberg, D. (2008). Group information elaboration and group decision making: The role of shared task representations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 105, 82-97.
34.
Webb, N.M., & Palincsar, A.S. (1996). Group processes in the classroom. In D. Berliner & R. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 841- 873). New York: Macmillan.
35.
Weinberger, A., Fischer, F., & Stegmann, K. (2005). Computer-supported collaborative learning in higher education: Scripts for argumentative knowledge construction in distributed groups. In T. Koschmann, D. Suthers , & T. Chan (Eds.), Computer-supported collaborative learning 2005: The next 10 years(pp. 717-726). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
36.
Witte, E.H. ( 2007). Toward a group facilitation technique for project teams . Group Processes & Intergroup Relations,10, 299-309.
37.
Wittenbaum, G.M., Hollingshead, A.B., & Botero, I.C. ( 2004). From cooperative to motivated information sharing in groups: Moving beyond the hidden profile paradigm. Communication Monographs, 71, 286-310.
38.
Wittenbaum, G.M., Hubbell, A., & Zuckermann, C. (1999). Mutual enhancement: Toward an understanding of the collective preference for shared information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,77(5), 967-978.
39.
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.
