Cited by 16Team Dynamics and PerformanceClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic SkillsInterprofessional Education and Collaboration

GROUPTHINK THEORY AND RESEARCH: IMPLICATIONS FOR DECISION MAKING IN GERIATRIC HEALTH CARE TEAMS

Heinemann, Gloria D., Farrell, Michael P., Schmitt, Madeline H.·1994·Educational Gerontology

Abstract

The team approach to geriatric care does not automatically result in appropriate decision making with regard to elderly patients with multiple chronic problems and complicated, overlapping needs. In this article, Janis's (1972, 1982) group‐think theory and tests of facets of the theory are examined. A modified theory is then applied to geriatric health care teams using a case scenario. Suggestions for minimizing the conditions that lead to groupthink and the resultant poor decisions are made. Health care teams need to develop strategies to enhance group cohesiveness and open, democratic leadership and to minimize time constraints and group insulation; rules and procedures for discussing options and making decisions through consensus should be developed and understood by all team members.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/0360127940200106

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Heinemann, G. D., Farrell, M. P., & Schmitt, M. H.
Affiliations
  • United States Department of Veterans Affairs (US)
  • University at Buffalo, State University of New York (US)
  • University of Rochester (US)
Venue
Educational Gerontology
Published
1994-01
Volume
20
Issue
1
Pages
71-85
ISSN
  • 0360-1277 (ISSN-L)
  • 1521-0472
OpenAlex
W2515227134
Cited by
16
References
23
Citations by year
2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Educational Gerontology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Interprofessional Education and Collaboration
Keywords
groupthink, decision-making, team decision-making, group cohesion, democratic leadership, consensus building, time constraints, Janis

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