The Gap Between Perceived and Actual Learning From Group Reflection

Abstract

Group reflection is often used as an intervention to facilitate group performance, but reflecting in groups may also affect individual learning. In this article, we compare the effects of individual and group reflection on individuals’ learning in two pairs of decision-making tasks. In two studies, we found that individuals who reflected in groups improved their performance from Task 1 to 2. However, individuals who reflected in groups did not realize greater performance improvements than individuals who reflected alone. Furthermore, individuals who reflected alone perceived that they learned more than individuals who reflected in groups. We discuss the implications of the gap between perceived and actual learning and describe the implications of our findings for group research, as well as recommendations for future research.

A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of the after-action review (or debrief) and factors that influence its effectiveness.

“…A related limitation of the AAR literature is in assessing its effectiveness for trainees who are experienced with the performance task and, in the case of the team-aligned AAR, with their team members. A typical study retained in this meta-analysis consisted of students or medical residents as trainees, who completed a task that they had never performed before (e.g., Bolinger & Stanton, 2014; Oden, 2008; Qudrat-Ullah, 2007; Soucisse et al, 2017). Likewise, a large majority of the team-based effects were for ad hoc (i.e., 93%; 57/61 k s), rather than intact teams.…”

The ebb and flow of learning motivation: The differentiated impact of the implicit theory of intelligence on learning behaviors

“…Rather, reflection has shown the be impactful when people have a large set of information because it enables them to detect underlying patterns and fundamental principles (Di Stefano et al, 2016). Scholars argue that reflection is most powerful in group settings because the information set is far larger than for a single individual (Bolinger & Stanton, 2014; Gurtner et al, 2006).…”