Risk-taking: Task, response pattern, and grouping

Davis, James H.; Hoppe, Ronald A.; Hornseth, John P.

doi:10.1016/0030-5073(68)90002-0

Cited by 29 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While focusing upon the traditional issue of individual-group differences, the theory is aimed at accounting for the distribution of group decisions by using formal hypotheses about the effects of social interaction when the inputs to discussion are individual member preferences. The basic assumptions underlying the model are similar in several respects to proposals by Davis (1962) andSteiner (1966) in group problem-solving research, and the model itself represents the general case of earlier theoretical notions by Smoke and Zajonc (1962), Davis, Hoppe andHornseth (1968), and in group decision making. In addition, several nonintuitive consequences of group decision making, assuming some form of the model, are discussed.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

Group decision and social interaction: A theory of social decision schemes.

Davis¹

1973

Psychological Review

Self Cite

641

579

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper proposes a general theory (social decision scheme theory) for many kinds of group decision making and illustrates some special case models with a variety of data from several experimental situations. While focusing upon the traditional issue of individual-group differences, the theory is aimed at accounting for the distribution of group decisions by using formal hypotheses about the effects of social interaction when the inputs to discussion are individual member preferences. The basic assumptions underlying the model are similar in several respects to proposals by Davis (1962) andSteiner (1966) in group problem-solving research, and the model itself represents the general case of earlier theoretical notions by Smoke and Zajonc (1962), Davis, Hoppe andHornseth (1968), and in group decision making. In addition, several nonintuitive consequences of group decision making, assuming some form of the model, are discussed.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 96%

Group decision and social interaction: A theory of social decision schemes.

Davis¹

1973

Psychological Review

Self Cite

641

579

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…& Haun, 1966), the analysis was repeated for proportions of risky decisions to total number of decisions made by each group in each period. The results remained essentially The increased risk-taking behavior could also be explained as an effect of time spent with a group of others (as might be predicted by theories calling for diffusion of responsibility, value, or censure testing); however, the fact that Davis et al (1968) produced similar results in individuals as well as in groups suggests that such an explanation might be of limited value. The fact that the results of this experiment remained stable even when proportions of risky decisions to total decisions were used as raw data suggests that risky decision making is at least partially independent of the number of decisions made (which also tend toward a general increase over participation time).…”

Section: Analysis Of Decision Makingmentioning

confidence: 78%

Information load, time spent, and risk taking in complex decision making

Streufert¹

1968

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of the quantity of information which decision makers receive per unit time and the effect of the length of time spent in decision-making groups on the degree of risk taking in decision making were examined. A simulated decision-making task of some complexity was used for data collection to permit comparison with results obtained in simpler laboratory settings. It was found that risk taking increases with time spent in decision making and reaches highest levels under optimal information conditions. Parallels to studies in simpler environments were examined.In recent years, psychologists have been widely concerned with the risk-taking and the risky-shift phenomena. Several theoretical views (e.g., Kogan & Wallach, 1964;Brown, 1965;Rettig, 1966; Pruitt, 1962), as well as considerable research, have been presented. Most of the research, whether quantitative in orientation (e.g., Edwards, 1953Edwards, , 1954 Coombs & Pruitt, 1960) or designed as an analysis of social-personality contexts (e.g., Wallach, Kogan, & Bem, 1962;Rettig, 1966), has utilized small-scale (e.g., gambling) tasks, where Ss were either operating as advisors with little or nothing to lose or to gain, or were able to win small sums of money by playing against the "strategy" of another team or against a program. Little research concerned with more "real" situations has been reported. In this study, an initial attempt was made to collect information on risk-taking variables in more complex decision-making tasks.Obtaining quantifiable risk-taking data for complex situations, which contain several underlying dimensions, does present some difficulty. In such settings, defInitions of "risky" decision making, and quantifications of such decisions into ordinal or interval scales on which the degree of risk or the amount of risky shift can be measured, are difficult to achieve. An opportunity for a first step in this direction was presented in the Tactical Game simulation of Streufert, Clardy, Driver, Karlins, Schroder, & Suedfeld (1965). This game utilizes an analysis of decision making in response to a preprogrammed environment. Decisions are made on a single task dimension (military operations), although the decisions may be based on multidimensional cognitions. The programmed environment permits experimenter induction of an independent variable of his choice (a manipulation possible only in this form of "experimental" simulation). Quantifiable analyses of decisions and decision-making patterns (cf. Streufert, Driver, & Haun, 1967; permit identification and quantification of risky decisions and of the degree oL risk involved.In this study we were concerned with the analysis of risky decision making in complex situations from two different points of view: (I) What was the effect of time spent in decision making on risk taking, and (2) (1965) and based on complexity theory (Driver & Streufert, 1966;Schroder, Driver, & Streufert, 1967;. These researchers demonstrated that decision making is optimal (in terms of an integration criterion) for ...

show abstract

“…First~the design of the present experiment resulted in comparing CD-I and CD-G decisions which were derived from different groups of~s, whereas the more common approach has been to employ a within-subjects design in which respondents first make individual decisions and then participate in group discussion. Hhether an initial individual decision is a prerequisite to a signific~lt postdiscussion shift, and why this should be the case, is unclear, but there is some evidence (Davis, Hoppe & Hornseth, 1968;Hunt & Rowe, 1960;Nordh¢y~1962) that there is a smaller shift in a betweensubjects design.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cultural values and the risky shift: A cross-cultural test in Uganda and the United States.

Carlson¹,

Davis²

1971

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clive Mo Davis Syracuse University '1'0 investigate the hypothesis that the "risky shift" is a function of a cultural value favoring risk~group and individual decisions of Ugandan and U. S, students were compared on two tasks: the choice dilemmas devised by Kogan and Wallach and the actual-consequence situation of Wallach, Kogan, and Bem. On both tasks the individual decisions of the Ugandans were more conservative, supporting the premise that Ugandan students are less favorably disposed to risk taking than are the U. S. students 0 For the Ugandan sample, group discussions produced no evidence of a risky shift. For the U o So sample, there was evidence of a risky shift, but not to the extent reported by other investigatorso The results were interpreted as consistent with the cultural-value hypothesis; some reservations were discussed o Cultural Values and the Risky Shift:

show abstract

Risk-taking: Task, response pattern, and grouping

Cited by 29 publications

References 26 publications

Group decision and social interaction: A theory of social decision schemes.

Group decision and social interaction: A theory of social decision schemes.

Information load, time spent, and risk taking in complex decision making

Cultural values and the risky shift: A cross-cultural test in Uganda and the United States.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About