Cited by 1,428Team Dynamics and PerformanceInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsSocial and Intergroup Psychology

The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processors.

Hinsz, Verlin B., Tindale, R. Scott, Vollrath, David A.·1997·Psychological Bulletin

Abstract

A selective review of research highlights the emerging view of groups as information processors. In this review, the authors include research on processing objectives, attention, encoding, storage, retrieval, processing, response, feedback, and learning in small interacting task groups. The groups as information processors perspective underscores several characteristic dimensions of variability in group performance of cognitive tasks, namely, commonality-uniqueness of information, convergence-diversity of ideas, accentuation-attenuation of cognitive processes, and belongingness-distinctiveness of members. A combination of contributions framework provides an additional conceptualization of information processing in groups. The authors also address implications, caveats, and questions for future research and theory regarding groups as information processors.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.43

Cites

219 of 219 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Teams that elaborate on information focus attention on the task at hand rather than on the self.

    “With regard to diagnosing information elaboration, research has shown that teams that elaborate on information focus attention on the task at hand rather than on the self (Hinsz et al., 1997).”

    From Leading diversity: Towards a theory of functional leadership in diverse teams. (2020) · cites this paper as Hinsz et al., 1997

  • Collaborative learners can be considered as a single information processing system consisting of multiple limited working memories which can create a larger, more effective, collective working space.

    “Collaborative learners can be considered as a single information processing system (Hinsz et al. 1997;Tindale and Kameda 2000;Ickes and Gonzalez 1994), consisting of multiple, limited working memories which can create a larger, more effective, collective working space.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hinsz, V. B., Tindale, R. S., & Vollrath, D. A.
Affiliations
North Dakota State University (US)
Venue
Psychological Bulletin
Published
1997
Volume
121
Issue
1
Pages
43-64
ISSN
  • 0033-2909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1455
OpenAlex
W2029057170
Cited by
1,428
References
219
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 55 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 52 · 2021: 48 · 2020: 56 · 2019: 78 · 2018: 59 · 2017: 46 · 2016: 62 · 2015: 56 · 2014: 60 · 2013: 68 · 2012: 109
FWCI
37.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Bulletin (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
group cognition, small group interaction, attention, encoding and retrieval, group learning, feedback
MeSH terms
Attention, Cognition, Group Processes, Humans, Mental Processes, Problem Solving, Mental Recall, Social Identification

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