Individual Versus Group Decision Making: Social Comparison in Goals for Individual Task Performance

This experiment compares the decisions of individuals and groups on goals for the performance expected from individuals on a problem-solving or an error-checking task. For both tasks, two versions were constructed to reflect low and high levels of task difficulty. Predictions from two different social comparison of abilities approaches were formulated, with the social comparison based on success approach predicting that group goals would be easier than individual goals, while social comparison based on performance predicted the opposite pattern. Consistent with the social comparison based on success predictions, group goals were observed to be significantly less difficult than individual goals for both tasks, both levels of task difficulty, and for both an initial and a second goal-setting occasion. Of particular interest was a finding that the easier group goals reflected group member preferences for easy goals in anticipation of group decision making. It is proposed that social factors such as evaluation apprehension and social comparison may be responsible for the differences observed in group and individual goal decisions, and that social factors may have an important role in a variety of goal-setting situations.     

Computer-Mediated Communication and Group Decision Making: A Meta-Analysis

A meta-analysis of research comparing decision making in face-to-face versus computer-mediated communication groups was conducted. Results suggest that computer-mediated communication leads to decreases in group effectiveness, increases in time required to complete tasks and decreases in member satisfaction compared to face-to-face groups. All of the moderators tested (anonymity in the group process, limited versus unlimited time to reach decisions, group size, and task type) were significant for at least one of the dependent variables. The article concludes with cautions about the unbridled rush by organizations to adopt computer-mediated communication as a medium for group decision making and implications of the present findings for theory and research on computer-mediated communication and group decision making.     

决策的加工过程及个体差异:模糊痕迹理论视角

模糊痕迹理论是行为决策领域的重要解释理论,它认为个体在加工信息时存在字面加工和要义加工两种方式,在决策时个体更倾向于使用要义加工,而且这两种加工存在个体差异。决策的加工模型依据模糊痕迹理论提出,以框架效应和风险知觉为例对该模型进行解释。模糊痕迹理论通过分析加工方式的个体差异来解释决策的个体差异。未来研究应进一步比较模糊痕迹理论与其他理论,完善根据模糊痕迹理论提出的决策加工模型,并深入探索决策的个体差异。     

Decision Development in Computer-Assisted Group Decision Making

New computer technologies to aid group communication and decision making are becoming increasingly widespread. This study analyzes how one such technology, a group decision support system (GDSS), affected how group decisions developed over time. The study contrasted decision paths in groups using the GDSS with groups using the same procedural structures incorporated in the GDSS manually and with groups using no procedural structures. A flexible phase mapping method was employed to map group decision paths. The resulting set of seven decision paths varied in both sequence and number of decision phases. An optimal matching procedure was used to compute similarity measures among the 40 paths, and cluster analysis and multidimensional scaling were used to generate an empirical taxonomy of decision paths. Results indicated that the nature of decision paths varied both across the three conditions and within conditions. The decision path types were also related to three outcome variables: consensus change, perceived decision quality, and decision scheme satisfaction. Results indicated that those decision paths that most resembled logical normative sequences had superior outcomes to those that did not.     

Voice and Culture: A Prospect Theory Approach

The present study examines the congruence of individuals' minimum preferred amounts of voice with the prospect theory value function across nine countries. Accounting for previously ignored minimum preferred amounts of voice and actual voice amounts integral to testing the steepness of gain and loss functions explicated in prospect theory, we use curve fitting to show that ratings of procedural justice fit prospect theory's value function specifically. Further, we investigate the form of this function across nine countries that range in power distance. Results suggest that the form of the value function is congruent with prospect theory, showing an S‐shaped curve that is steeper in the loss than in the gain domain. Further, this pattern is similar across countries. Theoretical and practical implications of these results for both decision making and organizational justice are discussed. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

基于预期理论的风险决策的神经机制

预期理论基于对期望效用理论的批判与发展,提出了价值函数与权重函数,对以往风险决策研究中所发现的现象进行了很好的预测与解释。预期理论的核心概念包括参照依赖、损失规避与权重函数。基于预期理论的一些决策偏差包括框架效应、禀赋效应和默认偏差也部分揭示了与人们风险决策有关的脑区。近年来,通过采用功能性核磁共振等脑成像手段对预期理论的一些核心成分进行的研究表明,涉及到人们风险决策的脑区主要有前额叶、纹状体、脑岛与杏仁核。未来的研究可以从预期理论的产生根源、个体发展以及遗传基因等角度进行进一步的探讨。     

决策中个体差异研究现状述评

决策中个体差异的研究有助于进一步检验和深化传统决策理论。文章回顾了近十年决策个体差异研究的主要变量（人格、认知能力、认知风格和年龄）和研究结果,并简要总结了该类研究的背景、研究范式和理论意义。这些研究一致发现个体差异变量对决策过程、决策表现等具有影响作用,说明个体差异与决策加工中复杂的人-情境间联系有关。文章提出,未来研究应该综合考虑决策情境、情绪和决策主体的理论模型,以期对个体差异在决策中的作用做出更好解释     

决策中的过程追踪技术:介绍与展望

在过去50年的决策研究中,随着对核心问题的深入探索和信息技术的发展,决策过程信息得到了越来越多的重视.过程研究技术主要包括鼠标实验室技术、眼动技术及新提出的决策移窗技术.鼠标实验室技术和眼动技术已被用于解决多种决策问题.决策移窗技术结合了前两种技术的优势,其适用范围需在日后研究中进行更多探索.在未来的研究中,多种技术的结合使用将有助于回避单一技术的缺陷,分离研究方法对于被试行为的影响,提高研究效度.     

行为决策中模糊规避研究的回顾与展望

模糊规避是指在相同奖赏的情况下,决策者会偏好有精确概率的事件而不是从主观上判断具有相同模糊概率的事件。自从Ellsberg提出模糊规避的概念以来,模糊规避已在行为决策研究的多个领域得到广泛验证。本文梳理了近五十年来关于模糊规避的研究文献,系统分析了模糊规避的研究范式、心理机制和影响因素,同时提出了未来的研究展望。     

数学能力与决策的关系：个体差异的视角

即便在相同的情形中, 每个人所做的决策也有千差万别, 导致决策个体差异的因素之一就是数学能力。文章综述了算术能力、数量表征、概率推理能力以及数学认知启发式对各种决策的影响。目前这方面的研究或者采用相关范式将数学能力作为决策的外部关联因素, 或者采用成分范式确定决策过程所需要的特定数学认知成分; 观点上的主要争论在于是一般认知能力还是数学能力在预测决策表现, 以及数学能力是否总是对决策有积极作用; 此外, 双系统模型和模糊痕迹理论有望为决策的个体差异提供理论解释。今后研究应该澄清上述争论, 确定合适的研究范式和结果解释框架, 并探讨更多提高决策能力的措施。     

Group and Individual Decision Making for Task Performance Goals: Processes in the Establishment of Goals:in Groups1

The study examines the processes by which goals in groups are established. Performance goals and preferences for goals were stated by individuals acting alone, by groups deciding in unison, and by group members. All subjects performed a card-sorting task as individuals, and self-set goals were selected for expected levels of individual performance. Groups selected goals that were less difficult than individual goals on several occasions of goal setting. Analysis of the group goal decisions suggests that a success-based social comparison process occurs that implies groups select a goal slightly lower than the average of the member preferences so that the group members may appear successful. Analyses also indicated that the lower group goals arose quickly in the group interaction, and that group members readily adopted the lower goals as appropriate levels of performance. Discussion focuses on the observed differences among group, group member, and individual performance goals, and the ability of the success-based social comparison process to account for these differences.     

Decision Making in Vocational Theory: Evolution and Implications

This article examines the evolution of decision making from a position of minor significance to one of primary importance in vocational theory.     

The Effects of Interfirm Mobility and Individual versus Group Decision Making on Managerial Time Horizons

We conducted an experimental simulation to examine the impact of inter-firm mobility and individual versus group decision making on managerial time horizons. Subjects played the role of firm members in a market consisting of several firms between which there existed the possibility of mobility. Within each firm, over several rounds of play, subjects decided how much to withdraw from a limited fund. Funds not withdrawn received a positive expected return. We manipulated two variables: the rate of interfirm mobility and whether firm decision makers consisted of groups of five or of individual decision makers. Both factors significantly influenced withdrawals. High interfirm mobility led to high rates of withdrawal. In addition, individual decision makers withdrew more money than groups.     

Group Decision Making with Responses of a Quantitative Nature: The Theory of Social Decision Schemes for Quantities

Group decisions involving responses of a quantitative nature occur frequently in organizations. Although extensive research has considered group decisions involving discrete responses, only recently have responses involving quantities received comparable attention. It is proposed that the group decision processes related to quantities involve compromise and are characteristically different from the consensus processes that occur for discrete choices. The theory of social decision schemes (Davis, 1973) as originally formulated is intractable for quantitative responses because they involve a large number of response alternatives. This paper extends and adapts the theory of social decision schemes to apply it to group decisions of a quantitative nature. The decision schemes considered in modeling group decisions for quantitative responses also differ from those of discrete responses. The classes of decision schemes considered include central tendency, consensus-based, faction-attraction, coalition, distance-influence, dictator, special cases, and other. Unique approaches for evaluating the adequacy of these decision schemes for quantities are considered. An illustration of the theory of social decision schemes for quantities is presented with data from research on group goal decisions (Hinsz, 1991).     

Microlevel Structuration in Computer-Supported Group Decision Making

The theory of Structuration focuses on how actions by members of social collectives create the structures that enable and constrain future action. Most previous research on Structuration in groups and organizations used qualitative case studies because Structuration is quite complex. This study introduces a method for the study of Structuration in larger samples of groups or organizations. A category system for the identification of structuring moves is described, along with several methods for characterizing short- and long-term trends in Structuration processes. The method is used to study how groups incorporate a computerized group decision support system (GDSS) into their decision processes. GDSSs are part of a class of new computer and communication technologies designed to help groups improve their meetings and make better decisions. Because GDSSs must be used by a group rather than an individual, social processes are critical in determining their effects on group outcomes. GDSSs influence groups by structuring their activities, and structurational processes are critical mediators of the impacts of GDSSs on group decision making. The study focused on the effects of restrictiveness of GDSS technology on Structuration processes and, in turn, on the relation of Structuration to a key group outcome, consensus change. The results suggest that two major types of structuring processes occur in computer-supported groups and that the nature of structuration is related to degree of consensus change.     

Confidence in Dyadic Decision Making: The Role of Individual Differences

Groups typically express more confidence than individuals, yet how individual‐level confidence combines during collaborative decision tasks is not well understood. We prescreened 686 community members using a novel confidence measure (a true/false trivia test) intentionally designed to be difficult (accuracy rates were not significantly better than chance) and randomly assigned 72 individuals to collaborate on a matched version of the same test in dyads composed of two low‐confidence individuals, two high‐confidence individuals, or one of each (“mixed”). Consistent with past research, we found that the confidence expressed by dyads was higher than the confidence expressed by individuals; importantly, however, this pattern varied markedly by dyad type, with low‐confidence dyads showing the largest increase, mixed dyads showing a moderate increase, and high‐confidence dyads showing no increase—despite the fact that all dyads showed similarly low accuracy (about 55%). These results highlight the conditions under which groups express greater confidence than individuals and offer insights for the composition of collaborative decision‐making teams. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.