The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Individual versus group problem solving: An empirical test of a best-member strategy
Open accessAbstract
Abstract It is generally accepted that group performance is a positive function of member ability. However, most research has focused on process losses and gains from poor group dynamics and group creativity, respectively. While the high level of performance by a group's best member is often noted, it is rarely incorporated into the theories and interventions. This study shows that a “best-member strategy” can equal the performance of an interacting group. In such a strategy, the group adopts as its own the individual decision of the member it identifies as “best.” This decision rule is no more risky than a group decision as measured by outcome variance, and the ability to identify expertise is independent of individual task skill. Furthermore, the often hypothesized error correction mechanism of interacting groups is found not to rectify large errors more effectively than noninteracting groups, and the quality of emergent solutions is no better than that of nonemergents. The subjects are 158 managers and graduate students working in 28 groups. The task is the NASA moon problem.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Toward a theory of organizational creativity
Woodman, R. W., Sawyer, J. E., & Griffin, R. W. (1993) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258761 · Cited by 4,399
Power in Top Management Teams: Dimensions, Measurement, and Validation
Finkelstein, S. (1992) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/256485 · Cited by 2,389
Experimental research in financial accounting
Libby, R., Bloomfield, R., & Nelson, M. W. (2002) · Accounting, Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/s0361-3682(01)00011-3 · Cited by 1,201
Climate‐Science Communication and the Measurement Problem
Kahan, D. M. (2015) · Political Psychology · doi:10.1111/pops.12244 · Cited by 559
Strategies for revising judgment: How (and how well) people use others’ opinions.
Soll, J. B., & Larrick, R. P. (2009) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition · doi:10.1037/a0015145 · Cited by 416
Metadata
- Authors
- Yetton, P. W., & Bottger, P. C.
- Venue
- Organizational Behavior and Human Performance
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1982-06
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 307-321
- ISSN
- 0030-5073 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2021054244
- Cited by
- 170
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Individual versus group problem solving: An empirical test of a best-member strategy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/0030-5073(82)90248-3
- The paper
- Yetton, P. W., & Bottger, P. C. (1982). Individual versus group problem solving: An empirical test of a best-member strategy. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(82)90248-3
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.