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

The Neuropeptide Oxytocin Enhances Information Sharing and Group Decision Making Quality

“…This finding is important because carefully processing and integrating of new information is essential for reaching high quality decisions24583031. Results of our study points in the same direction: After group discussion the solve-rate of oxytocin groups was 26% higher than that of placebo groups.…”

“…While not reaching statistical significance, this effect on decision quality in combination with significant effects on both information exchange and information processing indicates that decision-making in groups is facilitated by oxytocin. As happens in most decision-making groups5, groups whose members received placebo were biased towards the exchange of commonly held information and were less likely to repeat unique information. However, groups whose members received oxytocin had more un-biased discussions and used each other’s inputs better.…”

“…Groups have the potential of making decisions of higher quality than individual decision makers when group members open-mindedly contribute and evaluate their own and their fellow group members’ unique information and insights, and when they constructively discuss doubts, criticisms, and competing scenarios12345. Conversely, the quality of group decision-making is often threatened by individual self-censorship along with conformity pressures and excessive need to affiliate with others3456. Such “groupthink”6 biases individuals away from sharing uniquely held insights and information, leaving the potential for groups to outperform individuals unrealized.…”

“…When group-focus is absent and group members are mostly focused on their personal interests, decision quality tends to decrease due to unwillingness to exchange information20 or due to a tendency to distort information21. In contrast, when group members are too much focused on their group, they might resort to conformity and shallow compromising by negotiating preferences instead of discussing information, which also decreases group performance5622.…”

From being diverse to becoming diverse: A dynamic team diversity theory

“…Whereas the above methods are suitable for field research, other promising methods to test DTDT include experimental designs and agent‐based modeling. For example, experiments with hidden profile tasks (e.g., Schulz‐Hardt & Mojzisch, ; van Ginkel & van Knippenberg, ) can be useful for studying how variety enlargement and decline affect subsequent team cognitive processes and performance. Experiments with distributed dynamic decision‐making tasks can be useful for the impacts of team disparity change (e.g., Hollenbeck et al, ; Johnson et al, ; Moon et al, ).…”