Motivation Styles to Speak Out, Decision Rules, and Group Size as Determinants of Group Decision Making: Simulation of Meetings

2006 ◽  
pp. 149-158 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nireka Adachi ◽  
Masayori Ishikawa ◽  
Koichi E. Okamoto
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Group Size ◽  
Group Decision Making ◽  
Group Decision ◽  
Decision Rules

Decision rules, escalation of commitment and sensitivity to framing in group decision-making

2016 ◽  
Vol 54 (7) ◽  
pp. 1649-1668 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petru Lucian Curseu ◽  
Sandra G. L. Schruijer ◽  
Oana Catalina Fodor
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Rule ◽  
Group Decision Making ◽  
Group Decision ◽  
Decision Rules ◽  
Escalation Of Commitment ◽  
Group Level ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Collaborative Decision

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to test the influence of collaborative and consultative decision rules on groups’ sensitivity to framing effect (FE) and escalation of commitment (EOC). Design/methodology/approach – In an experimental study (using a sample of 233 professionals with project management experience), the authors test the effects of collaborative and consultative decision rules on groups’ sensitivity to EOC and FE. The authors use four group decision-making tasks to evaluate decision consistency across gain/loss framed decision situations and six decision tasks to evaluate EOC for money as well as time as resources previously invested in the initial decisions. Findings – The results show that the collaborative decision rule increases sensitivity to EOC when financial resources are involved and decreases sensitivity to EOC when time is of essence. Moreover, the authors show that the collaborative decision rule decreases sensitivity to FE in group decision making. Research limitations/implications – The results have important implications for group rationality as an emergent group level competence by extending the insights concerning the impact of decision rules on emergent group level cognitive competencies. Due to the experimental nature of the design, the authors can probe the causal relations between the investigated variables, yet the authors cannot generalize the results to other settings. Practical implications – Managers can use the insights of this study in order to optimize the functioning of decision-making groups and to reduce their sensitivity to FEs and EOC. Originality/value – The study extends the research on group rationality and it is one of the few experimental attempts used to understand the role of decision rules on emergent group level rationality.

Group Decision Model Based on Ordered Weighted Distance to Aid Decisions on Logistics

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (02) ◽  
pp. 233-254 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jose Leao E Silva Filho ◽  
Danielle Costa Morais
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Group Decision Making ◽  
Decision Model ◽  
Group Decision ◽  
Decision Rules ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Weighted Distance ◽  
Model Based ◽  
Decision Making Model

This paper presents a group decision-making model using a distance aggregator based on Ordered Weighted Distance (OWD) which offers a solution that can reduce disagreement between decision makers (DMs). This paper discusses decision rules and sets out measures to evaluate compensatory effects that have a bearing on DMs’ opinions. The model uses formulations of distances to reveal the differences in opinion among DMs and discusses the meanings of distance and the information presented by each DM. Finally, a case study of a logistics problem is used to illustrate how the model is applied.

Enhancement of Dominant Risk Tendencies in Group Discussion

1972 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 615-623 ◽  
Author(s):  
David G. Myers ◽  
Sidney J. Arenson
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Group Size ◽  
Group Decision Making ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
Present Experiment ◽  
Group Decision ◽  
Group Discussion ◽  
Past Research ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Decision Making Models

Much recent research indicates that discussion predictably affects responses to choice-dilemma items. In the present experiment, 12 choice-dilemma items were discussed to consensus by 40 female groups of varying size (2, 3, 5, or 7 members). Group size did not significantly affect shift scores. Over all groups, the mean of initial risk taking on an item was an excellent predictor of the mean amount of shift that item elicited ( r = –.89), a finding consistent with certain models of group decision making as well as with the idea that discussion arguments enhance dominant values. Further analyses of the present and past research indicated that the group decision making models could not account for the observed shifts.

Twelve (not so) angry men

2011 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. 835-843 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bridget M. Waller ◽  
Lorraine Hope ◽  
Nina Burrowes ◽  
Edward R. Morrison
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Group Size ◽  
Group Decision Making ◽  
Group Decision ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Spontaneous Formation ◽  
Mock Jury ◽  
Large Groups

Individuals in large groups do not always contribute equally to group decision making. This may be due to constraints on conversational group size, as when a group is comprised of more than 4 people, it spontaneously fissions into smaller groups within which conversations take place. Thus, if conversations are attempted in larger groups, some individuals will not be part of the spontaneously forming discursive subgroup and, consequently, may not contribute to group decision making. Here, using a mock jury paradigm, the effect of hierarchically subdividing groups to mimic the spontaneous formation of optimally sized conversational groups (while maintaining an overarching group size of 12) was tested. Individuals in the subdivided condition reported greater equality of contribution to the decision-making process than individuals in the control condition, and experienced less inhibition from participation due to the activities of others.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document