Collective efficacy and vigilant problem solving in group decision making: A non-linear model

2005 ◽  
Vol 96 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Tasa ◽  
Glen Whyte
1984 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael R. Callaway ◽  
James K Esser

Janis' (1972) groupthink formulation was tested in the laboratory by manipulating group cohesiveness and adequacy of decision procedures in a factorial design. Internal analysis, involving redefined cohesiveness categories, provided mixed support for the groupthink hypothesis on measures of decision quality and group processes presumed to underlie the groupthink decisions. Specifically, it was found that: (1) highest quality decisions were produced by groups of intermediate cohesiveness; (2) high cohesive groups without adequate decision procedures (the groupthink condition) tended to make the poorest decisions; and (3) the presence of groupthink was characterized by a lack of disagreement and a high level of confidence in the group's decisions.


Author(s):  
XIAO-JUN YANG ◽  
LUAN ZENG ◽  
RAN ZHANG

Group decision making is an important category of problem solving techniques for complicated problems, among which the Delphi method has been widely applied. In this paper an improved Delphi method based on Cloud model is proposed in order to deal with the fuzziness and uncertainty in experts' subjective judgments. The proposed Cloud Delphi Method (CDM) describes experts' opinions by Cloud model and we aggregate the experts' Cloud opinions by synthetic algorithm and weighted average algorithm. Another key point of CDM is to stabilize and accommodate the individual fuzzy estimates by the defined stability rules rather than having to force them to converge, or reduce. The Cloud opinions and aggregation results can be exhibited in a graphically way leading experts to judge intuitively and it can decrease the number of repetitive surveys and/or interviews. Moreover, it is more scientific and easier to represent experts' opinion base on Cloud model which can combine fuzziness and uncertainty well. A numerical example is examined to demonstrate applicability and implementation process of CDM.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-31
Author(s):  
Harish Garg ◽  
Zeeshan Ali ◽  
Jeonghwan Gwak ◽  
Tahir Mahmood ◽  
Sultan Aljahdali

In this paper, a new decision-making algorithm has been presented in the context of a complex intuitionistic uncertain linguistic set (CIULS) environment. CIULS integrates the concept the complex of a intuitionistic fuzzy set (CIFS) and uncertain linguistic set (ULS) to deal with uncertain and imprecise information in a more proactive manner. To investigate the interrelation between the pairs of CIULSs, we combine the concept of the Heronian mean (HM) and the complex intuitionistic uncertain linguistic (CIUL) to describe some new operators, namely, CIUL arithmetic HM (CIULAHM), CIUL weighted arithmetic HM (CIULWAHM), CIUL geometric HM (CIULGHM), and CIUL weighted geometric HM (CIULWGHM). The main advantage of these suggested operators is that they considered the interaction between pairs of objects during the formulation process. Also, a number of distinct brief cases and properties of the operators are analyzed. In addition, based on these operators, we have stated a MAGDM (“multiattribute group decision-making”) problem-solving algorithm. The consistency of the algorithm is illustrated by a computational example that compares the effects of the algorithm with a number of well-known existing methods.


1980 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 951-956
Author(s):  
T. M. Schwartz ◽  
V. J. Wullwick ◽  
H. J. Shapiro

To assess the impact of self-esteem on group decision making 270 students in business were assigned to groups of 3 by sex, numerical ability, and self-esteem on the Tennessee Self-concept Scale. For scores on a ‘common-target’ game there was no correlation between sex and problem-solving ability, which however showed low rs with self-concept. Medium self-concept was associated with greater success than high or low self-concept.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andy E Williams

This paper addresses the question of how current group decision-making systems, including collective intelligence algorithms, might be constrained in ways that prevent them from achieving general problem solving ability. And as a result of those constraints, how some collective issues that pose existential risks such as poverty, the environmental degradation that has linked to climate change, or other sustainable development goals, might not be reliably solvable with current decision-making systems. This paper then addresses the question that assuming specific categories of such existential problems are not currently solvable with any existing group decision-systems, how can decision-systems increase the general problem solving ability of groups so that such issues can reliably be solved? In particular, how might a General Collective Intelligence, defined here to be a system of group decision-making with general problem solving ability, facilitate this increase in group problem-solving ability? The paper then presents some boundary conditions that a framework for modeling general problem solving in groups suggests must be satisfied by any model of General Collective Intelligence. When generalized to apply to all group decision-making, any such constraints on group intelligence, and any such system of General Collective Intelligence capable of removing those constraints, are then applicable to any process that utilizes group problem solving, from design, to manufacturing or any other life-cycle processes of any product or service, or whether research in any field from the arts to the basic sciences. For this reason these questions are important to a wide variety of academic disciplines. And because many of the issues impacted represent existential risks to human civilization, these questions may also be important by to all by definition.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document