A Primer of Social Decision Scheme Theory: Models of Group Influence, Competitive Model-Testing, and Prospective Modeling

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

Volumn 80, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 3-20

  Stasser, Garold ^a  

^a MIAMI UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0141901775     PISSN: 07495978     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/obhd.1999.2851     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Abelson, R. P. (1968). Simulation of social behavior. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 2, pp. 274-356). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
2. Bentler, P. M., & Bonnett, D. G. (1980). Significance testing and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588-606.
3. Davis, J. H. (1969). Group performance. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
4. Davis, J. H. (1973). Group decision and social interaction: A theory of social decision schemes. Psychological Review, 80, 97-125.
5. Davis, J. H., & Kerr, N. L. (1986). Thought experiments and the problem of sparse data in small-group research. In P. Goodman (Ed.), Designing effective work groups (pp. 305-349). New York: Jossey-Bass.
6. Gigone, D., & Hastie, R. (1996). The impact of information on group judgment: A model and computer simulation. In E. H. Witte & J. H. Davis (Eds.), Understanding group behavior: Consensual action by small groups (Vol. I, pp. 221-251). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
7. Gigone, D., & Hastie, R. (1997). Proper analysis of the acuracy of group judgments. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 149-167.
8. Hastie, R. (1988). A computer simulation model of person memory. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 24, 423-447.
9. Hastie, R., & Stasser, G. (in press). Computer simulation methods in social psychology. In H. Reis & C. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social psychology. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.
10. Hays, W. L. (1988). Statistics (4th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
11. Hill, G. W. (1982). Group versus individual performances: Are N + 1 heads better than one? Psychological Bulletin, 91, 517-539.
12. Hinsz, V. B. (1990). Cognitive and consensus processes in group recognition memory performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 705-718.
13. Kerr, N. L., Stasser, G., & Davis, J. H. (1979). Model testing, model fitting, and social decision schemes. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 23, 399-410.
14. Kerr, N. L., Atkins, R. S., Stasser, G., Meek, D., Holt, R. W., & Davis, J. H. (1976). Guilt beyond a reasonable doubt: Effects of concept definition and assigned decision rule. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 282-294.
15. Kerr, N. L., MacCoun, R. J., & Kramer, G. P. (1996). "When are N heads better (or worse) than one?": Biased judgment in individuals versus groups. In E. H. Witte & J. H. Davis (Eds.), Understanding group behavior: Consensual action by small groups (Vol. I, pp. 105-136). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
16. Kerr, N. L., & Watts, B. L. (1982). After division, before decision: Group faction size and predeliberation thinking. Social Psychology Quarterly, 45, 198-205.
17. Laughlin, P. R. (1980). Social combination processes of cooperative problem-solving groups on verbal intellective tasks. In M. Fishbein (Ed.), Progress in social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 127-155). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
18. Laughlin, P. R., & Ellis, A. L. (1986). Demonstrability and social combination processes on mathematical intellective tasks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 177-189.
19. Laughlin, P. R., Kerr, N. L., Munch, M. M., & Haggarty, C. A. (1976). Social decision schemes and the same four-persons on two different intellective tasks. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 80-88.
20. Lorge, I., & Solomon, H. (1962). Group and individual behavior in free-recall verbal learning. In J. H. Criswell, H. Solomon, & P. Suppes (Eds.), Mathematical methods in small group processes (pp. 221-231). Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. Press.
21. MacCoun, R. J., & Kerr, N. L. (1988). Asymmetric influence in mock jury deliberation: Jurors' bias for leniency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 21-33.
22. Ostrom, T. M. (1988). Computer simulation: The third symbol system. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 24, 381-392.
23. Shaw, M. E. (1932). Comparison of individuals and small groups in the rational solution of complex problems. American Journal of Psychology, 44, 491-504.
24. Shaw, M. E. (1976). Group dynamics: The psychology of small group behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill.
25. Stasser, G. (1988). Computer simulation as a research tool: The DISCUSS model of group decision making. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 24, 393-422.
26. Stasser, G. (1990). Computer simulation of social interaction. In C. Hendrick & M. S. Clark (Eds.), Research methods in personality and social psychology (Vol. 11, pp. 120-141). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
27. Stasser, G., Kerr, N. L., & Bray, R. M. (1982). The social psychology of jury deliberation: Structure, process, and product. In N. L. Kerr & R. M. Bray (Eds.), The psychology of the courtroom. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
28. Stasser, G., Kerr, N. L., & Davis, J. H. (1989). Influence processes and consensus models in decision-making groups. In P. Paulus (Ed.), Psychology of group influence (2nd ed., pp. 279-326). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
29. Stasser, G., & Taylor, L. A. (1991). Speaking turns in face-to-face discussions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 675-684.
30. Steiner, I. D. (1972). Group process and productivity. New York: Academic Press.
31. Tindale, R. S., & Nagao, D. H. (1986). An assessment of the potential utility of "scientific jury selection": A "thought experiment" approach. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 409-425.
32. Tindale, R. S., Smith, C. M., Thomas, L. S., Filkins, J., & Sheffey, S. (1996). Shared representations and asymmetric social influence processes in small groups. In E. H. Witte & J. H. Davis (Eds.), Understanding group behavior: Consensual action by small groups (Vol. I, pp. 81-103). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.