Effects of Consensus Information and Task Demonstrability on Preference-Consistent Information Evaluation and Decision Quality in Group Decision Making

Abstract

Groups often fail to solve hidden profiles even when all information is exchanged. This is partly due to biased evaluation of information. We examined the effects of consensus information and task demonstrability on preference-consistent information evaluation and decision quality. The results showed that the evaluation of unshared but not shared information was moderated by consensus information and task demonstrability. For unshared information, majority members exhibited a higher evaluation bias favoring preference-consistent information than minority members. Task demonstrability reduced the evaluation bias only when group members received no information about the other members' preferences. Finally, majority members were less likely to solve the hidden profile than minority members, and this was partially mediated by the evaluation bias favoring preference-consistent unshared information.

How to achieve synergy in group decision making: Lessons to be learned from the hidden profile paradigm

“…In line with this idea, in the Greitemeyer and Schulz-Hardt (2003) study we could show that the individual preference effect was, at least partially, mediated by preference-consistent information evaluation (i.e., preferenceconsistent information was evaluated as being more reliable, more important, and stronger than preference-inconsistent information). Further evidence for the mediating role of this bias is provided by Rothmund, Mojzisch, and Schulz-Hardt (2011).…”

Effects of Cognitive Biases on Distributed Team Decision Making

“…The use of heuristics are often times successful, however in some circumstances they lead people to systematic errors or cognitive biases (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974). While there has been substantial research on mitigating cognitive biases (e.g., Cook & Smallman, 2008;Kayhan, 2013;Rothmund, Mojzisch & Schulz-Hardt, 2011), there is currently little work on how technologically-mediated, distributed teams may be more or less susceptible to them.…”

Ensuring Resident Competence: A Narrative Review of the Literature on Group Decision Making to Inform the Work of Clinical Competency Committees

“…50 When groups frame their work at least partially as an intellective task grounded in the evidence, this enhances members' openness to diverse opinions and can improve decision making. 51 …”