Toward quality criteria for collective judgments

While most organizational and social decision making is done in a group or collective mode, there are few guides or evaluative criteria for judging when a high-quality outcome has been reached. Most past studies of group decision making have been conducted in laboratories using student subjects and factual problems with correct answers as means for judging outcome quality. Such proxies are rough approximations at best of real-world conditions where value differences can be intense and problems have no correct or best answer. Drawing upon the existing literature, evaluative criteria are proposed including process, content, and outcome concerns. An instrument based upon these criteria is then applied retrospectively to six cases of ad hoc collective decision making. Using dimensional analyses, a set of more detailed evaluative factors is derived from actual participant responses. The results provide some insights into the nature of high-quality collective judgments as well as the most effective procedures for their achievement.     

Lives of women who became autonomous

We examine the lives and growth processes of women who have achieved considerable development of personality. Subjects of study are seven women in a longitudinal sample who, at ages 42-45, are classified by the Loevinger Sentence Completion Test at the highest ego-levels. As a way of describing their lives, all seven are analyzed in terms of Levinson's model of male development, one case is presented in terms of Gilligan's model of female development, another in terms of Loevinger's general model, and linkages among theories are observed. Characteristics of Loevinger's autonomous stage are illustrated and the extent to which they are gender-related is discussed. Findings show that women with very different personalities, problems, and ways of life can attain a high level of ego-development; that their lives tend not to have been orthodox or easy; and that theories of adult development are useful but uneven in application.     

Nothing concentrates the mind: thoughts of death improve recall

It seems likely that awareness of one’s mortality is in some respects advantageous (e.g., because it helps individuals forestall death), but little research has explored the psychological mechanisms that might confer such an advantage. Recent research has shown that processing stimuli in terms of survival relevance enhances memory relative to a host of deep-processing conditions, so it is plausible that human memory has been selected to operate more efficiently when death thoughts (e.g., survival concerns) are activated. If so, then the mortality salience as a general psychological state should be sufficient to increase recall; the present experiments show this to be the case. The enhancing effect of mortality salience on recall occurred for both incidental and intentional learning tasks, relative to a variety of comparison conditions, and did not appear to be mediated by affect or arousal. Follow-up analyses revealed the effect to be mediated by the complexity of participants’ elaborations about mortality. Potential theoretical implications are discussed.