The DOI matches its Crossref record; 15 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Pooling of Unshared Information in Group Decision Making: Biased Information Sampling During Discussion
Abstract
Decision-making groups can potentially benefit from pooling members' information, particularly when members individually have partial and biased information but collectively can compose an unbiased characterization of the decision alternatives. The proposed biased sampling model of group discussion, however, suggests that group members often fail to effectively pool their information because discussion tends to be dominated by (a) information that members hold in common before discussion and (b) information that supports members' existent preferences. In a political caucus simulation, group members individually read candidate descriptions that contained partial information biased against the most favorable candidate and then discussed the candidates as a group. Even though groups could have produced unbiased composites of the candidates through discussion, they decided in favor of the candidate initially preferred by a plurality rather than the most favorable candidate. Group members' pre- and postdiscussion recall of candidate attributes indicated that discussion tended to perpetuate, not to correct, members' distorted pictures of the candidates.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“This bias could be due to people’s preference to discuss shared information, relative to unshared information (Stasser & Titus, 1985).”
From Stories in Action. (2022) · cites this paper as Stasser & Titus, 1985
Citations
Cites
(1975) · PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) · Cited by 36,737
Janis, I. L. (1972) · Cited by 2,382
Group process and productivity
Steiner, I. D. (1972) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 2,106
The group polarization phenomenon.
Myers, D. G., & Lamm, H. (1976) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.83.4.602 · Cited by 1,102
Paulus, P. B. (1981) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 857
Fishbein, M. (1980) · Lawrence Erlbaum Associates eBooks · Cited by 760
Group decision and social interaction: A theory of social decision schemes.
Davis, J. H. (1973) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0033951 · Cited by 685
Persuasive argumentation and social comparison as determinants of attitude polarization
Burnstein, E., & Vinokur, A. (1977) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/0022-1031(77)90002-6 · Cited by 351
Small Group Decision Making: Communication and the Group Process
Ellis, D. G., & Fisher, B. A. (1974) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 335
Group decision making and social influence: A social interaction sequence model.
Stasser, G. L., & Davis, J. H. (1981) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.88.6.523 · Cited by 156
Self-citationSocial combination models, persuasive arguments theory, social comparison theory, and choice shift.
Laughlin, P. R., & Earley, P. C. (1982) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.42.2.273 · Cited by 103
An information integration analysis of attitude change in group discussion.
Anderson, N. H., & Graesser, C. C. (1976) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.34.2.210 · Cited by 80
Toward a general model of small group productivity.
Shiflett, S. C. (1979) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.1.67 · Cited by 77
Valence in the adoption of solutions by problem-solving groups: Concept, method, and results.
Hoffman, L. R., & Maier, N. R. F. (1964) · Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0047614 · Cited by 61
Group dynamics and individual performances: Pseudogroup and quasi-F analyses.
Myers, J. L., DiCecco, J. V., & Lorch, R. F. (1981) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.40.1.86 · Cited by 40
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Jehn, K. A., Northcraft, G. B., & Neale, M. A. (1999) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2667054 · Cited by 3,359
What's the difference? diversity constructs as separation, variety, or disparity in organizations
Harrison, D. A., & Klein, K. J. (2007) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2007.26586096 · Cited by 3,297
Investor Psychology and Asset Pricing
Hirshleifer, D. A. (2001) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.1111/0022-1082.00379 · Cited by 2,430
Judgment in Managerial Decision Making
Bazerman, M. H. (1986) · Digital Commons - USU (Utah State University) · Cited by 2,250
Managing Knowledge in Organizations: An Integrative Framework and Review of Emerging Themes
Argote, L., McEvily, B., & Reagans, R. E. (2003) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.49.4.571.14424 · Cited by 2,092
Metadata
- Authors
- Stasser, G., & Titus, W.
- Affiliations
- Miami University (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
- Published
- 1985-06
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1467-1478
- ISSN
- 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1315
- OpenAlex
- W2153691814
- Cited by
- 1,850
- References
- 16
- Citations by year
- 2026: 38 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 41 · 2023: 98 · 2022: 69 · 2021: 82 · 2020: 61 · 2019: 66 · 2018: 73 · 2017: 69 · 2016: 77 · 2015: 81 · 2014: 91 · 2013: 79 · 2012: 110
- FWCI
- 14.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Keywords
- group decision making, information pooling, group discussion, incomplete information, biased information, candidate evaluation
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
