Alive and Well after 25 Years: A Review of Groupthink Research

Esser, James K.

doi:10.1006/obhd.1998.2758

Cited by 320 publications

(212 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

202

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Other elements can additionally contaminate the effectiveness of NRM institutions, including adherence to old models, groupthink, competing accountabilities, and risk averseness (Esser 1998. Different disturbances can focus the attentions of actors within NRM institutions on different types of trust.…”

Section: Empirical Cases Of Disturbance and Resilience In Natural Resmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trust ecology and the resilience of natural resource management institutions

Stern¹,

Baird²

2015

E&S

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. The resilience of natural resource management (NRM) institutions are largely contingent on the capacities of the people and organizations within those institutions to learn, innovate, and adapt, both individually and collectively. These capacities may be powerfully constrained or catalyzed by the nature of the relationships between the various entities involved. Trust, in particular, has been identified repeatedly as a key component of institutional relationships that supports adaptive governance and successful NRM outcomes. We apply an ecological lens to a pre-existing framework to examine how different types of trust may interact to drive institutional resilience in NRM contexts. We present the broad contours of what we term "trust ecology," describing a conceptual framework in which higher degrees of diversity of trust, as conceptualized through richness and evenness of four types of trust (dispositional, rational, affinitive, and systems based), enhance both the efficacy and resilience of NRM institutions. We describe the usefulness and some limitations of this framework based on several case studies from our own research and discuss the framework's implications for both future research and designing more resilient governance arrangements.

show abstract

Section: Empirical Cases Of Disturbance and Resilience In Natural Resmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trust ecology and the resilience of natural resource management institutions

Stern¹,

Baird²

2015

E&S

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First of all, there are pros and cons to teaming up (Sawyer 2008). There is the risk of "group think" smothering creativity (Esser 1998). Composing a diverse team may ward off this risk.…”

Section: Tensions and Paradoxesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teaching originality? Common habits behind creative production in science and arts

Scheffer¹,

Baas²,

Bjordam³

2017

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Originality is a prerequisite for world-changing science and arts alike, but it cannot be taught. Or can it? Here, we show that a set of habits that are-surprisingly-shared among successful artists and scientists may catalyze creative output. We reveal three groups of such habits, each corresponding to a cluster of personality traits, shown to be shared by creative artists and scientists. The first habit group "embrace the unexpected" corresponds to the character trait "openness to new experiences" and encompasses tendencies to go ahead without a plan, collect diverse experiences, and take risks. The second group "create conditions for creation" links to the personality trait "autonomous" and encompasses simple habits such as making empty time and carrying a notebook. The third class of habits "break away from dogma" links to the shared personality trait "norm doubting" and stands for a strong drive to escape from established systems and also occasionally destroy part of one's own work to break tunnel vision and start anew. Although personality traits are hard to change, the habits we found hint at techniques or skills that may be taught.

show abstract

“…This line of work seeks to understand whether groups are more or less efficient when making decisions, leading to theories about the "wisdom of the crowd" and "groupthink" models (for reviews, see Surowiecki 2005;Esser 1998). …”

Section: Is Jdm Individualistic and Lacking In Social Context?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Culture and Choice: Toward Integrating Cultural Sociology with the Judgment and Decision-Making Sciences

Vaisey¹,

Valentino²

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cultural sociologists frequently theorize about choices and decisions, although we tend to shy away from this language, and from concepts that are used by the judgment and decision-making (JDM) sciences. We show that cultural sociology and JDM are compatible and complementary fields by dispelling some common misunderstandings about JDM. We advocate for a strategic assimilation approach in which cultural sociologists are able to translate their work into key JDM terms like beliefs, preferences, and endowments. Learning to speak the JDM language will allow cultural sociologists to make important, and uniquely sociological, contributions to social scientific explanations of choices and decisions.

show abstract

Alive and Well after 25 Years: A Review of Groupthink Research

Cited by 320 publications

References 36 publications

Trust ecology and the resilience of natural resource management institutions

Trust ecology and the resilience of natural resource management institutions

Teaching originality? Common habits behind creative production in science and arts

Culture and Choice: Toward Integrating Cultural Sociology with the Judgment and Decision-Making Sciences

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About