The Value of Task Conflict to Group Decisions

PETER J. BOYLE; DENNIS HANLON; J. EDWARD RUSSO

首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Behavioral Decision Making >The Value of Task Conflict to Group Decisions

【24h】

The Value of Task Conflict to Group Decisions

机译：任务冲突对群体决策的价值

获取原文

获取原文并翻译 | 示例

掌桥外文数据库（机构版） >>

开具论文收录证明 >>

文献代查 >>

页面导航

摘要
著录项
相似文献
相关主题

摘要

We tested the ability of task conflict to improve the quality of decisions made by four-person groups. In a choice between two entrepreneurial investments, conflict was created by endowing group members with a preference for either one investment or the other. Because the decision was subjective, decision quality was necessarily judged by a process criterion, the reduction in the biased evaluation of new information to support the leading alternative. Groups in which conflict was installed exhibited less bias than individuals, who themselves exhibited less bias than groups without such conflict. Regardless of whether conflict was installed, groups that reached an early consensus exhibited the greatest information bias, while groups that experienced sustained conflict exhibited the least. Before achieving consensus, information bias was not significantly different from zero, but then rose steadily after that agreement. This result identifies one specific mechanism by which conflict can improve the process of group decisions.

机译：我们测试了任务冲突以提高四人小组决策质量的能力。在两个企业投资之间进行选择时，冲突是由赋予团队成员偏爱一项投资或另一项投资而产生的。因为决策是主观的，所以决策质量必须由流程标准来判断，减少对新信息的偏见评估以支持领先的替代方法。与没有冲突的团体相比，发生冲突的团体比个人的偏见要小。无论是否设置了冲突，早日达成共识的小组的信息偏见最大，而经历持续冲突的小组的信息偏见最少。在达成共识之前，信息偏差与零并没有显着差异，但是在达成一致之后稳步上升。该结果确定了一种可以通过冲突改善群体决策过程的特定机制。

著录项

来源
《Journal of Behavioral Decision Making》 |2012年第3期|p.217-227|共11页
作者
PETER J. BOYLE; DENNIS HANLON; J. EDWARD RUSSO;
展开▼
作者单位

College of Business, Central Washington University, USA,Peter J. Boyle, College of Business, Central Washington University, 20000 68th Avenue West, Lynnwood, WA 98036, USA;

Faculty of Business, Memorial University, Canada;

Johnson Graduate School of Management, Cornell University, USA;

展开▼
收录信息
原文格式 PDF
正文语种 eng
中图分类
关键词
conflict; decision making; groups; information distortion;

机译：冲突;做决定;组;信息失真;

相似文献

外文文献
中文文献
专利

1. Task conflict in the Stroop task: When Stroop interference decreases as Stroop facilitation increases in a low task conflict context [J] . Benjamin A. Parris Frontiers in Psychology . 2014,第4期

机译：Stroop任务中的任务冲突：当在低任务冲突情况下Stroop干扰随着Stroop便利性的增加而减少时
2. Multicriteria decision‐making techniques for avoiding similar task scheduling conflict in cloud computing [J] . Nayak Suvendu Chandan, Parida Sasrnita, Tripathy Chitaranjan, International journal of communication systems . 2020,第13期

机译：用于避免云计算中类似的任务调度冲突的多轨道决策技术
3. Conflict Resolution as Near-Threshold Decision-Making: A Spiking Neural Circuit Model with Two-Stage Competition for Antisaccadic Task [J] . Chung-Chuan Lo, Xiao-Jing Wang PLoS Computational Biology . 2016,第8期

机译：作为近阈值决策的冲突解决：具有反竞争任务的两阶段竞争的尖刺神经回路模型
4. The Moderating Effect of Cognitive Capability on Task Conflict: A Longitudinal Study of Task Conflict and Team Performance in Student Software Development Teams [C] . Jun He Americas Conference on Information Systems . 2007

机译：认知能力对任务冲突的调节效应：学生软件开发团队任务冲突和团队绩效的纵向研究
5. Post-decisional Conflict in Selecting Cancer Treatments: Perception of Information Disclosure May Influence Decisional Conflict, Decisional Regret, and Self-acceptance in Bereaved Parents of Children with Cancer [D] . Sperandeo, Danielle De Santis. 2019

机译：选择癌症治疗后的果断后冲突：信息披露的看法可能会影响癌症患儿妇女残疾父母的毁灭性冲突，果断遗憾和自我接受
6. Task conflict in the Stroop task: When Stroop interference decreases as Stroop facilitation increases in a low task conflict context [O] . Benjamin A. Parris 2014

机译：Stroop任务中的任务冲突：当在低任务冲突情况下Stroop干扰随着Stroop便利性的增加而减少时
7. ACC/AHA/NASPE 2002 Guideline Update for Implantation of Cardiac Pacemakers and Antiarrhythmia Devices—Summary Article A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/NASPE Committee to Update the 1998 Pacemaker Guidelines) 11This document was approved by the American College of Cardiology Foundation Board of Trustees in September 2002, the American Heart Association Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee in August 2002, and the North American Society for Pacing and Electrophysiology in August 2002.22The ACC/AHA Task Force on Practice Guidelines makes every effort to avoid any actual or potential conflicts of interest that might arise as a result of an outside relationship or personal interest of a member of the writing panel. Specifically, all members of the writing panel are asked to provide disclosure statements of all such relationships that might be perceived as real or potential conflicts of interest. These statements are reviewed by the parent task force, reported orally to all members of the writing panel at the first meeting, and updated as changes occur. The conflict of interest information for the writing committee members is posted on the ACC, AHA, and NASPE Web sites with the full-length version of the update.33When citing this document, the ACC, the AHA, and NASPE would appreciate the following citation format: Gregoratos G, Abrams J, Epstein AE, Freedman RA, Hayes DL, Hlatky MA, Kerber RE, Naccarelli GV, Schoenfeld MH, Silka MJ, Winters SL. ACC/AHA/NASPE 2002 Guideline Update for Implantation of Cardiac Pacemakers and Antiarrhythmia Devices—Summary Article: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/NASPE Committee to Update the 1998 Pacemaker Guidelines). J Am Coll Cardiol2002;40:1703–19.44Copies: This document is available on the World Wide Web sites of the ACC (www.acc.org) and the AHA (www.americanheart.org). A single copy of the complete guidelines is available by calling 800-253-4636 (US only) or writing the American College of Cardiology, Resource Center, 9111 Old Georgetown Road, Bethesda, MD 20814-1699 (ask for No. 71-0237). To obtain a copy of the Summary Article, ask for reprint No. 71-0236. To purchase additional reprints (specify version and reprint number): up to 999 copies, call 800-611-6083 (US only) or fax 413-665-2671; 1000 or more copies, call 410-528-4426, fax 410-528-4264, or e-mail kbradle@lww.com.55(J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;40:1703–19.)66©2002 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation and the American Heart Association, Inc. [O] . Gregoratos Gabriel, Abrams Jonathan, Epstein Andrew E, 2002

机译：ACC / AHA / NASPE 2002心脏起搏器和抗心律失常装置植入指南更新-总结文章美国心脏病学会/美国心脏协会实践指南工作组的报告（ACC / AHA / NASPE委员会将更新1998年起搏器指南） 11该文件于2002年9月获得美国心脏病学会基金会董事会的批准，于2002年8月获得美国心脏协会科学咨询和协调委员会的批准，并于2002年8月获得北美起搏和电生理学会的批准。22ACC / AHA工作组《实践指南》将尽一切努力避免由于写作小组成员的外部关系或个人利益而引起的任何实际或潜在的利益冲突。具体来说，要求写作小组的所有成员提供所有可能被视为实际或潜在利益冲突的关系的披露声明。这些声明由上级工作组审核，在第一次会议上口头报告给写作小组的所有成员，并在发生变化时进行更新。撰写委员会成员的利益冲突信息已发布在更新的完整版本的ACC，AHA和NASPE网站上。33当引用本文档时，ACC，AHA和NASPE将不胜感激。格式：Gregoratos G，Abrams J，Epstein AE，Freedman RA，Hayes DL，Hlatky MA，Kerber RE，Naccarelli GV，Schoenfeld MH，Silka MJ，Winters SL。 ACC / AHA / NASPE 2002心脏起搏器和抗心律失常装置植入指南更新-总结文章：美国心脏病学会/美国心脏协会实践指南工作组的报告（ACC / AHA / NASPE委员会更新了1998年起搏器指南）。 J Am Coll Cardiol2002； 40：1703–19.44复制：此文档可在ACC（www.acc.org）和AHA（www.americanheart.org）的万维网站点上找到。您可以致电800-253-4636（仅限美国）或写信给美国心脏病学会资源中心，地址为9111 Old Georgetown Road，Bethesda，MD 20814-1699，获得一份完整的指南（请致电71-0237））。要获得摘要文章的副本，请索要第71-0236号转载。要购买其他重印本（指定版本和重印本号码）：最多999份，请致电800-611-6083（仅限美国）或传真413-665-2671；否则，请重新发送。 1000份或更多，请致电410-528-4426，传真410-528-4264或发送电子邮件至kbradle@lww.com.55（J Am Coll Cardiol 2002； 40：1703–19。）66©2002美国心脏病学基金会基金会和美国心脏协会有限公司

The Value of Task Conflict to Group Decisions

摘要

著录项

相似文献

相关主题

期刊订阅