Group Decision Making

Groups, particularly small groups, make most of the major decisions that affect societies

worldwide. From government agencies, to private industry, groups decide the issues that affect

entire populations. Poor decisions can affect a small number of people, or in the case of a health

agency or major corporation, can affect many thousands of lives.

Social psychologist Irving Janis first identified a concept called groupthink after

analyzing several disastrous decisions made by twentieth century American Presidents and their

advisors. He concluded that poor decisions made by a group are often hampered by subtle group

processes, such as the tendency to exclude dissenting information and a predisposition to

favoring initial preferences. Research into the psychology of groups has provided insight into the

process by which a group comes to a particular conclusion, and some of the factors that might

affect the quality of a final outcome. Janice Kelly and Steven Karau identified another important

factor affecting group decisions to be time pressure. Does having a deadline affect a group’s

performance and its ability to make good decisions? In addition to time pressure, Kelly and

Karau believe that initial preferences of members may also influence the group’s interaction and

the outcome of the final decision.

These same researchers previously developed what they call the Attentional Focus

Model of group performance. The model combines earlier research on individual decision

making, and current research on group decision making, when under time pressure. It also

examines group interaction and how performance is affected by deadlines. The theory is that

time pressure will influence a group to focus on the more important elements of the task at hand
 Droskinis 2

and ignore less relevant information. In other words, under a deadline the group will be more

focused and task oriented.

Kelly and Karau’s latest study1 of time pressure and initial preferences resulted in their

paper entitled “Group Decision Making: The effects of initial preferences and time pressure.”

For the study 213 college students, approximately half male and half female, were recruited to

participate in a management simulation to decide which of two cholesterol-reducing drugs

should be marketed. The volunteers worked in randomly-assigned, same-sex groups of three,

three groups at a time. Each group received the total amount of information (30 pre-chosen facts)

about both drugs, but initial preferences for Drug 1 or Drug 2 (independent variable) were

manipulated by varying the amount of shared information (given to all three members of a

group) and unshared information (given to only one member of the group). In both cases where

unshared information was distributed, the information was very relevant to making the correct

choice. In one group, all members received all information available which strongly favored

Drug 2 (correct preference condition). In theory this group should select Drug 2. In the other two

groups, all members received half of the information, and one member only received the other

half. The distribution of shared and unshared information was different in the two groups,

creating an initial preference that disagreed mildly with the overall information (weak preference

condition) in one group, or an initial preference that strongly disagreed with the overall

information (strong preference condition) in the other group. The sum total of information to all

groups favored Drug 2, however by varying the distribution of shared and unshared information,

initial preferences were otherwise influenced. The only way the two groups provided with shared

1
Kelly, Janice R., and Karau, Steven J. “Group Decision Making: The Effects of Initial Preferences and Time
Pressure.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 25 (1999): 1342-54.

2
 Droskinis 3

and unshared facts would choose Drug 2 was if the two groups having unshared information

would discuss all information, including that which only one member received.

In group A all members were given the same information, thus initial preference will be

strongly biased in favor of Drug 2. In group B, where initial preference was strongly against

Drug 2, it was very important for the members to discuss all information. In group C, where

initial preference was mildly against Drug 2, it was less important for all the information to be

discussed. Only group A, whose initial preference was influenced to favor Drug 2, would be

likely to require less discussion to come to the correct decision to select Drug 2. For the other

two groups, excellent communication skills and sharing were more important in order to make

the correct choice.

In addition to inducing different initial preferences by varying the distribution of total

facts, two levels of time pressure are tested. Each group is told that the president of the company

has called a surprise meeting in an hour and a half and they only have that amount of time to

come to a decision about the two drugs. These groups were told that not only was making the

correct decision important, but it was also important to make it quickly. The no time pressure

groups were told they could take as much time as they needed to make a choice they were happy

with. To eliminate rushing through the materials, all groups were told that the sessions would last

an hour and a half. However in the time pressure group, one member used a stop watch to track

how long it took to come to a decision.

The following hypotheses were postulated:

• Groups work faster under time pressure, and can discuss more facts per minute.

• Group discussions focus on more relevant information, and generally ignore less

relevant information.

3
 Droskinis 4

• Time pressure will enhance focusing on relevant information.

• Initial preferences will be pertinent to the discussions in the various groups. In

other words, the correct preference group will discuss Drug 2 more, the strong

incorrect preference group will discuss Drug 1 more, and the weak incorrect

preference group will discuss both more or less equally.

• Time pressure increases the tendency for groups to be biased in favor of initial

preferences.

• Strong incorrect preference groups focus less on shared information than weak

incorrect preference groups.

• Correct preference groups most likely select Drug 2, strong incorrect preference

groups are least likely to select Drug 2, and weak incorrect preference groups can

go either way.

• Time pressure enhances decision quality in correct preference conditions, but

reduces it in the two unshared conditions. Time pressure will exert more negative

influence on strong incorrect preference groups.

• Regardless of the conditions, if discussion focuses more on Drug 2, the group will

more likely select Drug 2.

The groups were seated at a square table, with one edge of the table against a mirror, and

each member seated on one of the other three sides of the table. The groups were given ten

minutes to read information on the study, and also background information about cholesterol.

The groups were then given their fact sheets, at which time a barrier was erected between them

to discourage sharing of information before group discussion time. They were told that all

information was accurate, that each member might have only some of the total amount of

4
 Droskinis 5

information, and that they had only ten minutes to study the facts. Once it was time for group

discussion, the fact sheets were removed, and the members were asked to make a list of the most

relevant information they could remember. For group discussions, each group was given either as

much time as needed, or was told that they had to make a decision as quickly as possible.

Sessions were videotaped and coded against a master list of all facts. Facts were coded as

positive, negative, or neutral, shared or unshared, and the results were analyzed on a group level.

The following table illustrates the proportions of groups choosing correctly Drug 2:

Properties of Groups and Post Discussion Individuals Choosing the Correct Drug

Time Pressure

Condition Low High

Group Decisions
Correct preference .75 (9/12) .92 (11/12)
Weak incorrect preference .50 (6/12) .36 (4/11)
Strong incorrect preference .15 (2/13) .36 (4/11)
Individual Preferences
Correct preference .75 (27/36) .89 (32/36)
Weak incorrect preference .47 (17/36) .42 (13/33)
Strong incorrect preference .18 (7/39) .45 (15/36)

The overall findings indicate that the correct preference group, those groups in which all

members received all shared information, was more likely to select the correct drug. The strong

incorrect preference group was least likely to select correctly Drug 2, and the weak incorrect

preference group was equally likely to select Drug 1 or Drug 2. The hypotheses made were either

supported or not as follows:

• Time pressure groups did work faster and discuss more facts per minute.

5
 Droskinis 6

• Group discussions were focused on more relevant information, whether positive

or negative, while neutral information was mostly ignored.

• Time pressure did not enhance the groups’ tendency to focus discussions on

relevant information.

• Group discussions did focus more on members’ initial preferences. The strong

incorrect preference group discussed Drug 1 more, and the strong correct

preference group discussed Drug 2 more. The weak incorrect preference group

discussed the two drugs more or less equally.

• Time pressure did not affect whether or not discussions focused on initial

preferences.

• Overall groups discussed shared information more than unshared information. In

the weak incorrect preference group discussions focused more on shared

information, however in the strong incorrect preference group, unshared facts

were as likely to be discussed as shared facts, most likely because the unshared

facts were very important to the final outcome in this group.

• In the correct preference group, where initial preferences were manipulated to

favor Drug 2, the group usually picked Drug 2. Where initial preference was

manipulated against Drug 2 (strong incorrect preference group), Drug 2 was not

usually not selected. The group with the weak incorrect preference was as likely

to select Drug 1 as Drug 2.

• Time pressure was helpful in making the correct choice in the correct preference

group, but negatively impacted the correct choice in both groups with unshared

information.

6
 Droskinis 7

• Regardless of conditions, if a group discusses Drug 2 more, they will more likely

select Drug 2.

The implications of this study for successful decision-making ability in groups is very

important. The research supports the hypothesis that initial preferences weigh very heavily on the

course of the group discussion. In order for a group to make a good decision, it is necessary for

all important facts to be available to all members of the group from the start, whether the facts

are positive or negative. If important information is known by only one member of the group, it

is not likely to be discussed before making the final decision. Lacking salient information, group

members will form initial preferences, preconceived notions, that work against the goal of

making a good decision. If everyone does not have all the facts available to them from the onset,

the discussion will not be properly focused, and the end result will be that a wrong decision

could be made. All members of a group should pool all information before the discussion begins,

deciding which is relevant, and which is not.

Time pressure, although it can help a group to work faster and will enhance the impact of

initial preferences, can be a negative factor. If initial preferences are based on inaccurate or

incomplete information important issues might be excluded from discussions, especially if

known by only one member of the group. Time pressure can also cause members to believe that

their initial preferences are more important than a decision made after considering all the facts. A

quick decision may be important, but it might be the wrong one, unless initial preferences are

based on everyone knowing everything there is to know about the subject being discussed.

In addition to time pressure and initial preferences, the study shows that the ability to

focus on the important information, positive and negative, and screen out irrelevant information

is extremely important to the group interaction process and greatly influences the final outcome.

7
 Droskinis 8

Anything that causes the group to lose focus is detrimental to the results. Also, when group

discussions begin, it is important for the information to be available throughout the discussion.

Some biases, such as the tendency to focus on shared information, might be eased if the group

does not have to rely on their memory, as did the subjects in this experiment.

What does this mean in the real world? First of all, the larger the group discussing an

issue, the more likely it is that an important piece of information will be forgotten or missed, or

dismissed as unimportant. All information that seems relevant, and perhaps even some that

seems irrelevant, should be presented and listed for all group members to evaluate. If additional

information becomes known during the discussion, it should be added to the mix. By limiting the

size of groups making important decisions, the possibility of missing something important is

alleviated. A deadline can be useful in helping a group to discuss all important facts, and stay

focused on the goal of reaching a good decision, but only if all pertinent data is available to all

members of the group before the group discussion commences. If there is any chance that the

data is incomplete or incorrect, a deadline can lead a group to a mistaken decision.

Groupthink in its negative sense can be eliminated or minimized if all the facts regarding

an issue, whether positive or negative or seemingly trivial are laid out for the entire group to

assess. Groupthink can be a good thing, as more minds are helpful in evaluating important issues.

What one member does not think of another might. Under the proper conditions, with all

information shared, and an appropriate deadline issued, important decisions affecting many

members of the population have a better likelihood of being successful and positive.