The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Perception of Performance in Group Brainstorming: The Illusion of Group Productivity
Abstract
Research has shown that individuals produce fewer ideas in interactive brainstorming groups than when brainstorming alone. However, group brainstorming remains a popular technique in organizations and industry. One basis for this popularity may be the perceived productivity of group brainstorming. A survey of expected performance in group brainstorming revealed that most individuals believed they would generate more ideas in groups than alone. Individuals who, in a second experiment, actually performed in brainstorming groups also perceived their performance more favorably than individuals who brainstormed alone. The results of a third experiment indicate that the illusion of group productivity may derive in part from the opportunity for social comparison that is available in group brainstorming. It also appears that individuals tend to take credit for a disproportionate amount of the brainstorming activity in groups.
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
PopBlends: Strategies for Conceptual Blending with Large Language Models
Wang, S., Petridis, S., Kwon, T., Ma, X., & Chilton, L. B. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3580948 · Cited by 64
Metadata
- Authors
- Paulus, P. B., Dzindolet, M. T., Poletes, G., & Camacho, L. M.
- Venue
- Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1993-02
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 78-89
- ISSN
- 0146-1672 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7433
- OpenAlex
- W2141117502
- Cited by
- 273
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 14.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Perception of Performance in Group Brainstorming: The Illusion of Group Productivity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0146167293191009
- The paper
- Paulus, P. B., Dzindolet, M. T., Poletes, G., & Camacho, L. M. (1993). Perception of Performance in Group Brainstorming: The Illusion of Group Productivity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167293191009
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.
