Group influence on individual risk taking.

Abstract

Does group interaction lead to greater conservatism or to greater risk taking in decisions than would obtain were the decisions arrived at individtrally-or is there an averaging effect? This question was investigated with a procedure in which the protagonist in each of 12 everyday life situations must choose between two courses o~action, one of which involves considerably more risk than the other but also is much more rewarding if successful. The S must decide on the lowest level of probability for the success of the risky alternative that he would deem sufficient to warrant its choice. A total of 218 liberal arts university students participated in the study. In the experimental condition, the~s first arrived at individual decisions concerning each of the 12 situations; then, the~r were brought together in discussion groups of six with the request that they reach a group consensus on each decision; and afterward, they were asked to make all their decisions privately once again. Some £s also made private decisions yet another time two to six ,.reeks later. The group members! judgments of one another's relative degrees of influence and of popularity within the group also were obtained. There were 14 all-male and 14 all-female groups. 'In the control condition, Sa made their decisions individually each of two times with one week intervening, under instructions the second time that encouraged them to change rather than simply to recall their earlier decisions. It was found that (1) group decisions exhibit greater risk taking than appears in pre-discussion individual decisions; (2) post-discussion private

Risky and cautious shifts in group decisions: The influence of widely held values

“…This "risky shift phenomenon" has been found with American (Stoner, 1961), English (Bateson, 1966), and Israeli (e.g., Rim, 1964) subjects, college students and senior executives (Marquis, 1962), males and females (Wallach, Kogan and Bern, 1962), in situations involving advice to a hypothetical person (Stoner, 1961) and in situations where the subjects believe they are risking money (Wallach, Kogan and Bern, 1964) or taking the chance of undergoing an unpleasant physical experience (Bem, Wallach and Kogan, 1965), Much of this research has utilized a set of 12 life situation problems developed by Kogan (1959 and1961).…”

The social life of the novel idea: what did social psychologists ever do for us?

“…In a study of the effects of group interaction on risk and caution in decision making, a significant Master's thesis study by Stoner in 1961(Stoner, 1968Cartwright, 1971;Pruitt, 1971) noted that greater risk taking occurs during social interaction than during individual evaluation. Wallach et al (1962) later posits that this is due to a spreading of responsibility for risks across the group and the fact that individuals with a previous propensity for taking risks are more likely to become dominant within that group. Interestingly, Wallach also notes that group members are likely to maintain the higher level of risk F o r P e e r R e v i e w taking for 2-6 weeks following the interaction.…”

Effects of Norm‐oriented Group Discussion on Individual Risk Taking and Conservatism1

“…Items were assigned to Forms A and B on the basis o:f item means obtained in prior research (Wallach, Kogan, & Bern, 1962). It was our intention to compose two forms that would yield approximately equal initial risk-taking scores.…”

“…We obviously wanted to generate a comparable d.egree For the purposes of the present study, the 12-item Choice-Dilemmas instrument was divided into two separate six-item Forms--A and B. Items were assigned to Forms A and B on the basis o:f item means obtained in prior research (Wallach, Kogan, & Bern, 1962). It was our intention to compose two forms that would yield approximately equal initial risk-taking scores.…”