Social choice theory and social decision scheme theory address the fundamental issue: How does a society or small group combine or aggregate a distribution of member preferences in a collective decision by known or possible voting rules and parliamentary procedures? However, research in each area has proceeded in relative independence of the other. This article (a) summarizes the major concepts of social choice theory, (b) summarizes the major concepts of social decision scheme theory, (c) presents illustrative research, (d) considers corresponding and complementary emphases of the two theories, and (e) suggests three interrelated areas of future research on group decision-making: preference for different social choice rules; successive decisions in a hierarchical system with random assignment of members at the initial level; successive decisions in a hierarchical system with nonrandom assignment of members at the initial level (gerrymandering).
Arrow, K.J. ( 1951). Social choice and individual values. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
3.
Arrow, K.J. ( 1963). Social choice and individual values (2ndd ed.).New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
4.
Black, D. ( 1948a). On the rationale of group decision making. Journal of Political Economy,56,23-34.
5.
Black, D. ( 1948b). The decisions of a committee using a special majority . Econometrica,16, 245-261.
6.
Black, D. ( 1948c). The elasticity of committee decisions with an alternating size of majority. Econometrica,16, 262-270.
7.
Black, D. ( 1949a). The theory of elections in single member constituencies . Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science,15, 158-159.
8.
Black, D. ( 1949b). Some theoretical schemes of proportional representation . Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science,15, 334-335.
9.
Black, D. ( 1958). The theory of committees and elections. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10.
Black, D. ( 1969). On Arrow’s impossibility theorem. Journal of Law and Economics,12,227-248.
11.
Borda, J-C. ( 1995). On elections by ballot. In I. McLean & A. B. Urken (Trans. and Eds.), Classics of social choice(pp. 83-89). Ann Arbor, MI : University of Michigan Press. (Original work published 1781)
Burnstein, E. ( 1982). Persuasion as argument processing. In H. Brandstatter, J. H. Davis, & G. Stocker-Kreichgauer (Eds.), Group decision making(pp. 103-124). London, United Kingdom: Academic Press.
14.
Castore, C.H., & Murnighan, J.K. (1978). Determinants of support for group decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance ,22,75-92.
15.
Condorcet, M. ( 1995). An essay on the application of analysis to the probability of decisions rendered by a plurality of votes. In I. McLean & A. B. Urken (Trans. and Eds.), Classics of social choice(pp. 91-112). Ann Arbor, MI : University of Michigan Press. (Original work published 1785)
16.
Crott, H.W., Szilvas, K., & Zuber, J.A. ( 1991). Group decision, choice shift, and polarization in consulting, political, and local political scenarios: An experimental investigation and theoretical analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 49, 22-41.
17.
Crott, H.W., Zuber, J.A., & Schermer, T. ( 1986). Social decision schemes and choice shift: An analysis of group decisions among bets. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,22, 1-21.
18.
Davis, J.H. ( 1973). Group decision and social interaction: A theory of social decision schemes. Psychological Review,80, 97-125.
19.
Davis, J.H. ( 1996). Group decision making and quantitative judgments: A consensus model. In E. Witte & J. H. Davis (Eds.), Group decision making: Consensual action by small groups (Vol. 1, pp. 35-59). Mahweh, New Jersey: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
20.
Davis, J.H.Hulbert, L., Au, W.-T., Chen, X.-P., & Zarnoth, P. ( 1997). Effects of group size and procedural influence on consensual judgments of quantity: The example of damage awards and mock civil juries . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 703-718.
21.
Davis, J.H., & Kerr, N.L. ( 1986). Thought experiments and the problem of sparse data in small-group performance research. In P. S. Goodman et al. (Eds.), Designing effective work groups (pp. 305-349). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
22.
Davis, J.H., Kerr, N.L., Atkin, R., Holt, R., & Meek, D. ( 1975). The decision processes of 6- and 12-person mock juries assigned unanimous and 2/3 majority rules. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,32, 1-14.
23.
Davis, J.H., Kerr, N.L., Stasser, G., Meek, D., & Holt, R. ( 1977). Victim consequences, sentence severity, and decision processes in mock juries. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance,18, 346-365.
24.
Davis, J.H., Kerr, N.L., Sussmann, R., & Rissman, A.K. ( 1974). Social decision schemes under risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,30, 248-271.
25.
Davis, J.H., Tindale, R.S., Nagao, D.H., Hinsz, V.B., & Robertson, B. ( 1984). Order effects in multiple decisions by groups: A demonstration with mock juries and trial procedures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,47,1003-1012.
26.
Devine, D.J., Clayton, L.D., Dunford, B.B., Seying, R., & Pryce, J. ( 2001). Jury decision making: 45 years of empirical research on deliberating groups. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law ,7,622-727.
27.
Dodgson, C.L. ( 1958). A method of taking votes on more than two issues. In D. Black, Theory of committees and elections (pp. 224-234). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. (Reprinted from Title, by C. L. Dodgson, 1877, Oxford, United Kingdom: Hall & Stacey)
28.
Feld, S.L., & Grofman, B. ( 1988). Majority rule outcomes and the structure of debate in one-issue-at-a-time decision making. Public Choice, 59, 239-252.
29.
Fishburn, P.C. ( 1973). The theory of social choice. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
30.
Grofman, B. ( 1981). The theory of committees and elections: The legacy of Duncan Black. In G. Tullock (Ed.), Towards a science of politics: Essays in honor of Duncan Black. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Press.
31.
Grofman, B. ( 1985). Research note: The accuracy of group majorities for disjunctive and conjunctive decision tasks. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,35, 119-123.
32.
Grofman, B., Feld, S.L., & Owen, G. ( 1984). Group size and the performance of a composite group majority: Statistical truths and empirical results. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,33, 350-359.
33.
Grofman, B., & Owen, G. ( 1986). Condorcet models, avenues for future research. In B. Grofman & G. Owen (Eds.), Information pooling and group decision making (pp. 93-102). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
34.
Hastie, R., & Kameda, T. ( 2005). The robust beauty of majority rules in group decisions . Psychological Review,112,494-508.
35.
Hastie, R., Penrod, S.D., & Pennington, N. (1983). Inside the jury. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
36.
Hinsz, V.B. ( 1990). Cognitive and consensus processes in group recognition memory performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology ,59, 705-718.
37.
Johnson v. Louisiana, 406 U. S. 356 (1972).
38.
Kameda, T. ( 1996). Procedural influence in consensus formation: Evaluating group decision making from a social choice perspective. In E. Witte & J. H. Davis (Eds.), Understanding group behavior (Vol. 1, pp. 137- 161). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
39.
Kerr, N.L. ( 1981). Social transition schemes: Charting the group’s road to agreement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology ,41, 684-702.
40.
Kerr, N.L. (1982). Social transition schemes: Model, method, and applications. In H. Brandstetter, J. H. Davis, & G. Stocker-Kreichgauer (Eds.), Group decision making (pp. 59-79). London, United Kingdom: Academic Press.
41.
Kerr, N.L., Atkin, R., Stasser, G., Meek, D., Holt, R., & Davis, J.H. ( 1976). Guilt beyond a reasonable doubt: Effects of concept definition and assigned decision rule on the judgments of mock jurors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,34, 282-294.
42.
Kerr, N.L., Davis, J.H., Meek, D., & Rissman, A.K. ( 1975). Group position as a function of member attitudes: Choice shift effects from the perspective of social decision scheme theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,31, 574-593.
43.
Kerr, N.L., Stasser, G., & Davis, J.H. ( 1979). Model-testing, model-fitting, and social decision schemes . Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 23, 399-410.
44.
Laughlin, P.R., & Adamopoulos, J.A. (1980). Social combination processes and individual learning for six-person cooperative groups on an intellective task. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 941-947.
45.
Laughlin, P.R., & Ellis, A.L. ( 1986). Demonstrability and social combination processes on mathematical intellective tasks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology ,22, 177-199.
46.
Laughlin, P.R., Kerr, N.L., Davis, J.H., Halff, H.M., & Marciniak, K.A. (1975). Group size, member ability, and social decision schemes on an intellective task. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,31, 522-535.
47.
Laughlin, P.R., Kerr, N.L., Munch, M.M., & Haggarty, C.A. (1976). Social decision schemes of the same four-person groups on two different intellective tasks. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 80-88.
48.
Levine, M.E., & Plott, C.R. ( 1977). Agenda influence and its implications. Virginia Law Review,63,561-604.
49.
Lorge, I., & Solomon, H. ( 1955). Two models of group behavior in the solution of Eureka-type problems. Psychometrika, 20, 139-148.
50.
MacCoun, R.J., & Kerr, N.L. ( 1988). Asymmetric influence in mock jury deliberations: Jurors’ bias for leniency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 54,21-33.
51.
McLean, I., & Urken, A.B. ( 1995). Classics of social choice. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
52.
Miller, N.R., Grofman, B., & Feld, S.L. ( 1990). Cycle avoiding trajectories, strategic agendas, and the duality of memory and foresight. Public Choice,64,265-277.
53.
Nadler, J., Irwin, J.Davis, J.H., Au, W.T., Zarnoth, P., Rantilla, A.R., & Koesterer, K. ( 2001). Order effects in individual and group policy allocations . Group Processes & Intergroup Relations,4,99-115.
54.
Ono, K., Tindale, R.S., Hulin, C.L., & Davis, J.H. ( 1988). Intuition vs. deduction: Some thought experiments concerning Likert’s linking-pin theory of organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 42, 135-154.
55.
Plott, C., & Levine, M. ( 1978). A model of agenda influence on committee decisions. American Economic Review,60,146-160.
56.
Regenwetter, M., Kim, A., Kantor, A., & Ho, M.-H.H. (2007). The unexpected empirical consensus among consensus methods. Psychological Science,18,629-635.
57.
Riker, W.H. ( 1982). Liberalism against populism. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.
58.
Riker, W.W. ( 1986). The art of political manipulation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
59.
Smoke, W.H., & Zajonc, R.B. ( 1962). On the reliability of group judgments and decisions. In J. H. Criswell, H. Solomon, & P. Suppes (Eds.), Mathematical methods in small group process(pp. 322-333). Stanford, CA : Stanford University Press.
60.
Sorkin, R.D., & Dai, H. ( 1994). Signal detection analysis of the ideal group. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,60,1-13.
61.
Sorkin, R.D., Hays, C.J., & West, R. ( 2001). Signal detection analyses in group decision making. Psychological Review,108,183-203.
62.
Sorkin, R.D., West, R., & Robinson, D.E. (1998). Group performance depends on the majority rule. Psychological Science,9,456-463.
63.
Stasser, G. ( 1999). A primer of social decision scheme theory: Models of group influence, competitive model testing and prospective modeling. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 80, 3-20.
64.
Stasser, G., & Davis, J.H. ( 1981). Group decision making and social influence: A social interaction sequence model. Psychological Review, 88, 523-551.
65.
Stasson, M.F., Kameda, T., Parks, C.D., Zimmerman, S.K., & Davis, J.H. ( 1991). Effects of assigned group consensus requirement on group problem solving and group members’ learning. Social Psychology Quarterly,54, 25-35.
66.
Taylor, A.D., (1995). Mathematics and politics: Strategy, voting, power, and proof. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
67.
Taylor, A.D., Conrad, B.P., &. Brams, S.J. (2006). Part III, voting and social choice. In S. Garfunkel (Ed.), For all practical purposes: Mathematical literacy in today’s world (pp. 337-472). New York, NY: W. H. Freeman.
68.
Thomas, E.J., & Fink, C.F. ( 1961). Models of group problem solving. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,63,53-63.
69.
Tindale, R.S., & Davis, J.H. ( 1983). Group decision making and jury verdicts. In H. Blumberg, A. P. Hare , V. Kent, & M. F. Davies (Eds.), Small groups and social interaction (Vol. 2, pp. 9-38). Chichester , United Kingdom: Wiley.
70.
Tindale, R.S., & Sheffey, S. ( 2002). Shared information, cognitive load, and group memory . Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 5, 5-18.
71.
Zuber, J.A., Crott, H.W., & Werner, J. ( 1992). Choice shift and group polarization: An analysis of the status of arguments and social decision schemes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,62, 50-61.
