Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Workers often work in groups of varying sizes, and those workers’ work is often judged by others. To examine how the two might relate, we first asked respondents to report the optimal number of collaborators for a variety of different tasks, finding substantial variability across tasks (Supplementary Study) that tracked with perceived task complexity (Study 1). Accordingly, framing a given task as more complex made people want more collaborators collaborating on it (Study 2), and believing that a task had been performed by the right number of collaborators—neither too few nor too many—fostered more favorable evaluations of both simulated (Study 3) and real (Study 4) experience with the collaborative output. The results of this collaboration suggest that perceivers hold an optimal size in mind when thinking about collaborations and that collaborative work benefits from ostensibly hitting this mark.

Keywords

collaboration groups social perception social cognition experience

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allison

R. I.

Uhl

K. P.

(1964). Influence of beer brand identification on taste perception. Journal of Marketing Research, 2, 36–39.

Bahrami

Olsen

Latham

P. E.

Roepstorff

Rees

Frith

C. D.

(2010). Optimally interacting minds. Science, 329, 1081–1085.

Crum

A. J.

Langer

E. J.

(2007). Mind-set matters: Exercise and the placebo effect. Psychological Science, 18, 165–171.

De Dreu

C. K.

Nijstad

B. A.

van Knippenberg

(2008). Motivated information processing in group judgment and decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12, 22–49.

Diehl

Stroebe

(1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 497–509.

Grice

H. P.

(1975). Logic and conversation. In Cole

Morgan

J. L.

(Eds.), Syntax and semantics (Vol. 3, pp. 41–58). New York, NY: Academic Press.

Hamilton

D. L.

Sherman

S. J.

(1996). Perceiving persons and groups. Psychological Review, 103, 336–355.

Hill

G. W.

(1982). Group versus individual performance: Are N + 1 heads better than one? Psychological Bulletin, 91, 517–539.

Huber

McCann

(1982). The impact of inferential beliefs on product evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research, 19, 324–333.

10.

Jackson

J. M.

Williams

K. D.

(1985). Social loafing on difficult tasks: Working collectively can improve performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 937–942.

11.

Jehn

K. A.

Northcraft

G. B.

Neale

M. A.

(1999). Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict and performance in workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 741–763.

12.

Karau

S. J.

Williams

K. D.

(1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 681–706.

13.

Kruger

Evans

(2004). If you don’t want to be late, enumerate: Unpacking reduces the planning fallacy. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 586–598.

14.

Kruger

Wirtz

Van Boven

Altermatt

T. W.

(2004). The effort heuristic. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 91–98.

15.

Latané

Williams

Harkins

(1979). Many hands make light the work: The causes and consequences of social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 822–832.

16.

Lickel

Hamilton

D. L.

Wieczorkowska

Lewis

Sherman

S. J.

Uhles

A. N.

(2000). Varieties of groups and the perception of group entitativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 223–246.

17.

Maglio

S. J.

Trope

(2011). Scale and construal: How larger measurement units shrink length estimates and expand mental horizons. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 165–170.

18.

McGrath

J. E.

(1984). Groups: Interaction and performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

19.

Paulus

P. B.

Dzindolet

M. T.

Poletes

Camacho

L. M.

(1993). Perception of performance in group brainstorming: The illusion of group productivity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 78–89.

20.

Paulus

P. B.

Larey

T. S.

Ortega

A. H.

(1995). Performance and perceptions of brainstormers in an organizational setting. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 249–265.

21.

Polman

Pollmann

M. M.

Poehlman

T. A.

(2013). The name-letter-effect in groups: Sharing initials with group members increases the quality of group work. PLoS One, 8, e79039.

22.

Rao

A. R.

Monroe

K. B.

(1989). The effect of price, brand name, and store name on buyers’ perceptions of product quality: An integrative review. Journal of Marketing Research, 36, 351–357.

23.

Rao

A. R.

Ruekert

R. W.

(1994). Brand alliances as signals of product quality. Sloan Management Review, 36, 87–97.

24.

Rozenblit

Keil

(2002). The misunderstood limits of folk science: An illusion of explanatory depth. Cognitive Science, 26, 521–562.

25.

Schwarz

(1996). Cognition and communication: Judgmental biases, research methods, and the logic of conversation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

26.

Shiv

Carmon

Ariely

(2005). Placebo effects of marketing actions: Consumers may get what they pay for. Journal of Marketing Research, 42, 383–393.

27.

Smith

P. K.

Smallman

Rucker

D. D.

(2016). Power and categorization: Power increases the number and abstractness of categories. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7, 281–289.

28.

Smith

P. K.

Trope

(2006). You focus on the forest when you’re in charge of the trees: Power priming and abstract information processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 578–596.

29.

Smith

R. K.

Newman

G. E.

(2014). When multiple creators are worse than one: The bias toward single authors in the evaluation of art. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8, 303–310.

30.

Staats

B. R.

Milkman

K. L.

Fox

C. R.

(2012). The team scaling fallacy: Underestimating the declining efficiency of larger teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 118, 132–142.

31.

Stroebe

Diehl

Abakoumkin

(1992). The illusion of group effectivity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 643–650.

32.

Valsesia

Nunes

J. C.

Ordanini

(2015). What wins awards is not always what I buy: How creative control affects authenticity and thus recognition (but not liking). Journal of Consumer Research, 42, 897–914.

33.

Van Dijk

Van Engen

M. L.

Van Knippenberg

(2012). Defying conventional wisdom: A meta-analytical examination of the differences between demographic and job-related diversity relationships with performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 119, 38–53.

34.

Wheelan

S. A.

(2009). Group size, group development, and group productivity. Small Group Research, 40, 247–262.

35.

Wilson

T. D.

Schooler

J. W.

(1991). Thinking too much: Introspection can reduce the quality of preferences and decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 181–192.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.03 MB

Perceptions of Collaborations: How Many Cooks Seem to Spoil the Broth?

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material