IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v88y2002i2p563-586.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Productive conflict in group decision making: genuine and contrived dissent as strategies to counteract biased information seeking

Author

Listed:
  • Schulz-Hardt, Stefan
  • Jochims, Marc
  • Frey, Dieter

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Schulz-Hardt, Stefan & Jochims, Marc & Frey, Dieter, 2002. "Productive conflict in group decision making: genuine and contrived dissent as strategies to counteract biased information seeking," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 88(2), pages 563-586, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:88:y:2002:i:2:p:563-586
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749-5978(02)00001-8
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Schwenk, Charles R., 1990. "Effects of devil's advocacy and dialectical inquiry on decision making: A meta-analysis," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 161-176, October.
    2. Valacich, Joseph S. & Schwenk, Charles, 1995. "Devil's Advocacy and Dialectical Inquiry Effects on Face-to-Face and Computer-Mediated Group Decision Making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 158-173, August.
    3. Parks, Craig D. & Nelson, Nicole L., 1999. "Discussion and Decision: The Interrelationship between Initial Preference Distribution and Group Discussion Content, , ," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 87-101, October.
    4. Timmermans, Danielle & Vlek, Charles, 1996. "Effects on Decision Quality of Supporting Multi-attribute Evaluation in Groups," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 158-170, November.
    5. Katzenstein, Gary, 1996. "The Debate on Structured Debate: Toward a Unified Theory," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 316-332, June.
    6. Hart, Paul t, 1998. "Preventing Groupthink Revisited: Evaluating and Reforming Groups in Government," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 73(2-3), pages 306-326, February.
    7. Sniezek, Janet A., 1992. "Groups under uncertainty: An examination of confidence in group decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 124-155, June.
    8. Sniezek, Janet A. & Henry, Rebecca A., 1989. "Accuracy and confidence in group judgment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 1-28, February.
    9. Esser, James K., 1998. "Alive and Well after 25 Years: A Review of Groupthink Research," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 73(2-3), pages 116-141, February.
    10. Schwenk, Charles & Valacich, Joseph S., 1994. "Effects of Devil's Advocacy and Dialectical Inquiry on Individuals versus Groups," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 210-222, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Meissner, Philip & Wulf, Torsten, 2017. "The effect of cognitive diversity on the illusion of control bias in strategic decisions: An experimental investigation," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 430-439.
    2. Muqtafi Akhmad & Shuang Chang & Hiroshi Deguchi, 2021. "Closed-mindedness and insulation in groupthink: their effects and the devil’s advocacy as a preventive measure," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 4(2), pages 455-478, November.
    3. Paulus, Paul B., 1998. "Developing Consensus about Groupthink after All These Years," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 73(2-3), pages 362-374, February.
    4. Nemeth, Charlan & Goncalo, Jack, 2004. "Influence and Persuasion in Small Groups," Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Working Paper Series qt9n8060j4, Institute of Industrial Relations, UC Berkeley.
    5. Bonner, Bryan L. & Bolinger, Alexander R., 2013. "Separating the confident from the correct: Leveraging member knowledge in groups to improve decision making and performance," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 122(2), pages 214-221.
    6. Cockrell, Cam & Stone, Dan N., 2011. "Team discourse explains media richness and anonymity effects in audit fraud cue brainstorming," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 225-242.
    7. Thomas Schultze & Anne-Fernandine Rakotoarisoa & Stefan Schulz-Hardt, 2015. "Effects of distance between initial estimates and advice on advice utilization," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 10(2), pages 144-171, March.
    8. Kerr, Norbert L. & Tindale, R. Scott, 2011. "Group-based forecasting?: A social psychological analysis," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 14-40, January.
    9. Kasanen, Eero & Wallenius, Hannele & Wallenius, Jyrki & Zionts, Stanley, 2000. "A study of high-level managerial decision processes, with implications for MCDM research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 120(3), pages 496-510, February.
    10. Hedlund, Jennifer & Ilgen, Daniel R. & Hollenbeck, John R., 1998. "Decision Accuracy in Computer-Mediated versus Face-to-Face Decision-Making Teams," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 30-47, October.
    11. Aramovich, Nicholas P. & Larson, James R., 2013. "Strategic demonstration of problem solutions by groups: The effects of member preferences, confidence, and learning goals," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 36-52.
    12. Rowe, Gene & Wright, George, 1996. "The impact of task characteristics on the performance of structured group forecasting techniques," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 73-89, March.
    13. Whyte, Glen & Sebenius, James K., 1997. "The Effect of Multiple Anchors on Anchoring in Individual and Group Judgment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 74-85, January.
    14. Simon Lam & John Schaubroeck, 2011. "Information sharing and group efficacy influences on communication and decision quality," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 509-528, September.
    15. Budescu, David V. & Rantilla, Adrian K. & Yu, Hsiu-Ting & Karelitz, Tzur M., 2003. "The effects of asymmetry among advisors on the aggregation of their opinions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 178-194, January.
    16. repec:cup:judgdm:v:10:y:2015:i:2:p:144-171 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Ng, K. Yee & Van Dyne, Linn, 2001. "Individualism-Collectivism as a Boundary Condition for Effectiveness of Minority Influence in Decision Making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 198-225, March.
    18. Raven, Bertram H., 1998. "Groupthink, Bay of Pigs, and Watergate Reconsidered," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 73(2-3), pages 352-361, February.
    19. Steffen Keck & Wenjie Tang, 2018. "Gender Composition and Group Confidence Judgment: The Perils of All-Male Groups," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(12), pages 5877-5898, December.
    20. Kerr, Norbert L. & Tindale, R. Scott, 2011. "Group-based forecasting?: A social psychological analysis," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 14-40.
    21. Chernyshenko, Oleksandr S. & Miner, Andrew G. & Baumann, Michael R. & Sniezek, Janet A., 2003. "The impact of information distribution, ownership, and discussion on group member judgment: The differential cue weighting model," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 12-25, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:88:y:2002:i:2:p:563-586. 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.