Information acquisition bias during the preparation of group discussion: A Comparison of Prospective Minority and Majority Members

Small Group Research

Volumn 34, Issue 5, 2003, Pages 557-574

  Van Hiel, Alain ^a   Franssen, Vicky ^b  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

^b NONE

Author keywords

Bias; Group discussion; Information acquisition; Majority influence; Minority influence

Indexed keywords

EID: 0141431009     PISSN: 10464964     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/104649640255377     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Asch, S. E. (1956). Studies of independence and conformity: A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs, 7(9, Whole No. 416).
2. Bassili, J. N., & Provencal, A. (1988). Perceiving minorities: A factor-analytic approach. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 14, 5-15.
3. Beersma, B., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2002). Integrative and distributive negotiation in small groups: Effects of task structure, decision rule, and social motive. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 87, 227-252.
4. David, B., & Turner, J. C. (1996). Studies in self-categorization and minority conversion: Is being a member of the out-group an advantage? British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 179-199.
5. De Dreu, C. K. W., & De Vries, N. K. (1996). Differential processing and attitude change following majority versus minority arguments. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 77-90.
6. Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 629-636.
7. Festinger, L. A. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117-140.
8. French, J., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150-167). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
9. Frey, D. (1986). Recent research on selective exposure to information. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 41-80). London: Academic Press.
10. Giebels, E., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Van de Vliert, E. (2000). Interdependence in negotiation: Effects of exit options and social motive on distributive and integrative negotiation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 255-272.
11. Hackman, J. R. (1987). The design of work teams. In J. Lorsch (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior (pp. 315-342). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
12. Hackman, J. R., & Morris, C. G. (1975). Group tasks, group interaction process, and group performance strategies: A review and proposed integration. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 45-99). London: Academic Press.
13. Levine, J. M., & Russo, E. M. (1995). Impact of anticipated interaction on information acquisition. Social Cognition, 13, 293-317.
14. Mackie, D. M. (1987). Systematic and nonsystematic processing of majority and minority persuasive communications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 41-52.
15. Mannix, E. A. (1993). Organizations as resource dilemmas: The effects of power balance on group decision-making. Organization Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 55, 1-22.
16. McLeod, P. L., Baron, R. S., Marti, M. W., & Yoon, K. (1997). The eyes have it: Minority influence in face-to-face and computer-mediated group discussion. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 706-718.
17. Meyers, R. A., Brashers, D. E., & Hanner, J. (2000). Minority-majority influence: Identifying argumentative patterns and predicting argument-outcome links. Journal of Communication, 50, 3-30.
18. Miller, C. E. (1989). The social psychological effects of group decision rules. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.), Psychology of group influence (pp. 327-356). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
19. Moscovici, S. (1980). Towards a theory of conversion behavior. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 209-239). London: Academic Press.
20. Moscovici, S. (1985). Social influence and conformity. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (3rd ed., pp. 347-412). New York: Random House.
21. Moscovici, S., & Mugny, G. (1983). Minority influence. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.), Basic group processes (pp. 41-64). New York/Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
22. Mucchi-Faina, A., Maass, A., & Volpato, C. (1991). Social influence: The role of originality. European Journal of Social Psychology, 24, 183-197.
23. Nemeth, C. J. (1994). The value of minority dissent. In S. Moscovici, A. Mucchi-Faina, & A. Maass (Eds.), Minority influence (pp. 3-15). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
24. Nemeth, C. J. (1995). Dissent as driving cognition, attitudes, and judgments. Social Cognition, 13, 273-291.
25. Nemeth, C. J., & Rogers, J. (1996). Dissent and the search for information. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 67-76.
26. Paicheler, G. (1976). Norms and attitude change I: Polarization and styles of behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 6, 405-427.
27. Polzer, J. T., Mannix, E. A., & Neale, M. A. (1998). Interest alignment and coalition in multiparty negotiation. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 42-54.
28. Schachter, S. (1951). Deviation, rejection, and communication. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 46, 190-208.
29. Schulz-Hardt, S., Frey, D., Lutghens C., & Moscovici, S. (2000). Biased information search in group decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 655-669.
30. Smith, C. M., Tindale, R. S., & Dugoni, B. L. (1996). Minority and majority influence in freely interacting groups: Qualitative versus quantitative differences. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 137-149.
31. Spears, R., Lea, M., Corneliessen, R. A., Postmes, T., & Ter Haar, W. (2002). Computer-mediated communication as a channel for social resistance: The strategic side of SIDE. Small Group Research, 33, 555-574.
32. Stasser, G., & Stewart, D. D. (1992). Discovery of hidden profiles by decision making groups: Solving a problem versus making a judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 426-434.
33. Steiner, I. D. (1972). Group process and productivity. New York: Academic Press.
34. Stewart, D. D., & Stasser, G. (1998). The sampling of critical, unshared information in decision-making groups: The role of an informed minority. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 95-113.
35. Tanford, S., & Penrod, S. (1984). Social influence model: A formal integration of research on majority and minority influence processes. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 189-225.
36. Tetlock, P. E. (1984). Cognitive style and political belief systems in the British House of Commons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 365-375.
37. Van Hiel, A. (1998). Gebruik van informatie tijdens groepsgesprekken: Een vergelijking tussen "effectieve minderheden" en "effectieve meerderheden" [The exchange of shared and unshared information during group discussion: A comparison of "effective minorities" and "effective majorities"]. In C. de Dreu, D. van Knippenberg, C. Martijn, & C. Rutte (Eds.), Fundamentele sociale psychologie (Vol. 12, pp. 165-175). Tilburg, The Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.
38. Van Hiel, A., & Mervielde, I. (2001). Preferences for behavioral style of minority and majority members who anticipate group interaction. Social Behavior and Personality, 29, 701-710.
39. Van Hiel, A., & Mervielde, I. (2002). Effects of ambiguity and need for closure on the acquisition of information. Social Cognition, 20, 380-408.
40. Whitworth, B. P., Gallupe, B., & McQueen, R. (2001). Generating agreement in computer-mediated groups. Small Group Research, 32, 625-665.
41. Wood, W. (2000). Attitude change: Persuasion and social influence. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 539-570.
42. Wood, W., Lundgren, S., Ouellette, J. A., Busceme, S., & Blackstone, T. (1994). Minority influence: A meta-analytic review of social influence processes. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 323-345.
43. Zdaniuk, B., & Levine, J. M. (1996). Anticipated interaction and thought generation: The role of faction size. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 201-218.