IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v151y2019icp104-117.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Thin slices of workgroups

Author

Listed:
  • Satterstrom, Patricia
  • Polzer, Jeffrey T.
  • Kwan, Lisa B.
  • Hauser, Oliver P.
  • Wiruchnipawan, Wannawiruch
  • Burke, Marina

Abstract

In this paper, we explore whether perceivers can accurately assess the effectiveness of groups, how perceivers use group properties to inform their judgement, and the contextual and individual differences that allow some perceivers to be more accurate. Across seven studies, we present consistent evidence that perceivers can judge workgroup effectiveness in videos of different lengths—60, 30, and 10 s—and in 10-second silent videos and 10-second audio clips. We find that perceptions of collective properties of groups, including cohesion, affective trust, and cognitive trust partially mediate perceivers’ ability to accurately judge groups. Furthermore, increased attentional focus improves perceivers’ ability to judge group effectiveness. Finally, we find that perceivers with higher levels of social sensitivity are more accurate at judging group effectiveness. We discuss the implications of these findings for the groups literature and social perception literature.

Suggested Citation

  • Satterstrom, Patricia & Polzer, Jeffrey T. & Kwan, Lisa B. & Hauser, Oliver P. & Wiruchnipawan, Wannawiruch & Burke, Marina, 2019. "Thin slices of workgroups," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 104-117.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:151:y:2019:i:c:p:104-117
    DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.12.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597817302650
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.12.007?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ma-Kellams, Christine & Lerner, Jennifer S., 2016. "Trust Your Gut or Think Carefully? Examining Whether an Intuitive versus a Systematic Mode of Thought Produces Greater Empathic Accuracy," Working Paper Series 16-017, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    2. David Engel & Anita Williams Woolley & Lisa X Jing & Christopher F Chabris & Thomas W Malone, 2014. "Reading the Mind in the Eyes or Reading between the Lines? Theory of Mind Predicts Collective Intelligence Equally Well Online and Face-To-Face," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(12), pages 1-16, December.
    3. Marianne Bertrand & Esther Duflo & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2004. "How Much Should We Trust Differences-In-Differences Estimates?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(1), pages 249-275.
    4. Hsee, Christopher K., 1996. "The Evaluability Hypothesis: An Explanation for Preference Reversals between Joint and Separate Evaluations of Alternatives," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 247-257, September.
    5. Clingingsmith, David & Shane, Scott, 2017. "Training Aspiring Entrepreneurs to Pitch Experienced Investors: Evidence from a Field Experiment in the United States," SocArXiv yzpvf, Center for Open Science.
    6. Littlepage, Glenn & Robison, William & Reddington, Kelly, 1997. "Effects of Task Experience and Group Experience on Group Performance, Member Ability, and Recognition of Expertise," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 133-147, February.
    7. Shane Frederick, 2005. "Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 25-42, Fall.
    8. Ma-Kellams, Christine & Lerner, Jennifer, 2016. "Trust your gut or think carefully? Examining whether an intuitive, versus a systematic, mode of thought produces greater empathic accuracy," Scholarly Articles 37093806, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    9. Dane, Erik & Rockmann, Kevin W. & Pratt, Michael G., 2012. "When should I trust my gut? Linking domain expertise to intuitive decision-making effectiveness," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 119(2), pages 187-194.
    10. Corinne Bendersky & Nicholas A. Hays, 2012. "Status Conflict in Groups," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(2), pages 323-340, April.
    11. Tsay, Chia-Jung, 2014. "The vision heuristic: Judging music ensembles by sight alone," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 24-33.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mobasseri, Sanaz & Stein, Daniel H. & Carney, Dana R., 2022. "The accurate judgment of social network characteristics in the lab and field using thin slices of the behavioral stream," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rassenti, Stephen & Espin, Antonio M. & Kujal, Praveen, 2017. "Humans’ (incorrect) distrust of reflective decisions," CEPR Discussion Papers 11949, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. Antonio Cabrales & Antonio M. Espín & Praveen Kujal & Stephen Rassenti, 2017. "Humans’ (incorrect) distrust of reflective decisions," Working Papers 17-05, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    3. Zakaria Babutsidze & Nobuyuki Hanaki & Adam Zylbersztejn, 2019. "Digital Communication and Swift Trust," Post-Print halshs-02409314, HAL.
    4. A. Peter McGraw & Eldar Shafir & Alexander Todorov, 2010. "Valuing Money and Things: Why a $20 Item Can Be Worth More and Less Than $20," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(5), pages 816-830, May.
    5. Adongo, Charles A. & Taale, Francis & Adam, Issahaku, 2018. "Tourists' values and empathic attitude toward sustainable development in tourism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 251-263.
    6. Mark Schneider & Cary Deck & Mikhael Shor & Tibor Besedeš & Sudipta Sarangi, 2019. "Optimizing Choice Architectures," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 16(1), pages 2-30, March.
    7. Michele Graffeo & Nicolao Bonini, 2018. "The interaction between frames and numeracy in the evaluation of price reductions," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 35(1), pages 239-250, April.
    8. André Mata, 2016. "Proportion dominance in valuing lives: The role of deliberative thinking," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 11(5), pages 441-448, September.
    9. repec:cup:judgdm:v:11:y:2016:i:5:p:441-448 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Susan L. Prescott & Alan C. Logan, 2016. "Transforming Life: A Broad View of the Developmental Origins of Health and Disease Concept from an Ecological Justice Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-44, November.
    11. Gould, Stephen J. & Kramer, Thomas, 2009. ""What's it Worth to Me?" Three interpretive studies of the relative roles of task-oriented and reflexive processes in separate versus joint value construction," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 840-858, December.
    12. Schneider, Mark & Coulter, Robin A., 2015. "A Dual Process Evaluability Framework for decision anomalies," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 183-198.
    13. Wright, Austin L. & Sonin, Konstantin & Driscoll, Jesse & Wilson, Jarnickae, 2020. "Poverty and economic dislocation reduce compliance with COVID-19 shelter-in-place protocols," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 544-554.
    14. Iacovone, Leonardo & Ferro, Esteban & Pereira-López, Mariana & Zavacka, Veronika, 2019. "Banking crises and exports: Lessons from the past," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 192-204.
    15. Marco Colagrossi & Claudio Deiana & Andrea Geraci & Ludovica Giua, 2022. "Hang up on stereotypes: Domestic violence and an anti‐abuse helpline campaign," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 40(4), pages 585-611, October.
    16. Donnelly, Grant E. & Simester, Duncan I. & Norton, Michael I., 2021. "The short and long-run impact of empowering customers in corporate social responsibility initiatives," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 616-637.
    17. Abel Brodeur, 2012. "Smoking, Income and Subjective Well-Being: Evidence from Smoking Bans," Working Papers halshs-00664269, HAL.
    18. Leopoldo Fergusson & Carlos Molina, 2020. "Facebook Causes Protests," HiCN Working Papers 323, Households in Conflict Network.
    19. Villas-Boas, Sofia B, 2020. "Reduced Form Evidence on Belief Updating Under Asymmetric Information," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt08c456vk, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    20. Insoo Cho & Peter F. Orazem, 2021. "How endogenous risk preferences and sample selection affect analysis of firm survival," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1309-1332, April.
    21. Dautović, Ernest & Gambacorta, Leonardo & Reghezza, Alessio, 2023. "Supervisory policy stimulus: evidence from the euro area dividend recommendation," Working Paper Series 2796, European Central Bank.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:151:y:2019:i:c:p:104-117. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.