心理科学进展 ›› 2021, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (3): 549-559.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2021.00549
收稿日期:
2020-06-30
出版日期:
2021-03-15
发布日期:
2021-01-26
通讯作者:
冯成志
E-mail:fengchengzhi@suda.edu.cn
基金资助:
REN Xiaoyun1, DUAN Jinyun2, FENG Chengzhi1()
Received:
2020-06-30
Online:
2021-03-15
Published:
2021-01-26
Contact:
FENG Chengzhi
E-mail:fengchengzhi@suda.edu.cn
摘要:
决策者借助外界的建议通常能够获得更好的决策结果, 但是个体和群体对待建议的态度和行为却不尽相同。基于已有研究, 阐述了个体和群体在建议采纳过程中的特点并分析了造成二者差异的因素, 主要包括二者在面对决策任务和外界建议时的不同表现。此外, 根据群体动力理论, 未来研究可以从群体的动力源因素(凝聚力, 驱动力, 耗散力)来解释和预测群体的建议采纳及其与个体建议采纳的差异, 以期为不同决策情景下决策人员的合理安排和配置提供参考。
中图分类号:
任小云, 段锦云, 冯成志. (2021). 个体采纳与群体采纳:决策过程中的两类建议采纳行为. 心理科学进展 , 29(3), 549-559.
REN Xiaoyun, DUAN Jinyun, FENG Chengzhi. (2021). Individuals vs groups: Advice-taking in decision making. Advances in Psychological Science, 29(3), 549-559.
[1] | 毕鹏程, 席酉民. (2002). 群体决策过程中的群体思维研究. 管理科学学报, 5(1), 28-37. |
[2] | 曾建华, 何贵兵. (2003). 群体决策中的知识构建过程. 心理科学进展, 11(6), 686-691. |
[3] | 陈琳, 田晓明, 段锦云. (2019). 建议采纳的认知机制. 心理科学进展, 27(1), 149-159. |
[4] | 陈婷, 孙晓敏. (2016). 团队决策中的共享信息偏差:基于隐藏文档范式的机制、影响因素探究. 心理科学进展, 24(1), 132-142. |
[5] | 崔志林. (2019). 群体决策中的“沉默螺旋”现象及应对之策. 领导科学, 5, 29-30. |
[6] | 段锦云, 古晓花, 孙露莹. (2016). 外显自尊、内隐自尊及其分离对建议采纳的影响. 心理学报, 48(4), 371-384. |
[7] | 段婧, 刘永芳, 何琪. (2012). 决策者角色及相关变量对风险偏好的影响. 心理学报, 44(3), 369-376. |
[8] | 李武, 席酉民, 成思危. (2002). 群体决策过程组织研究述评. 管理科学学报, 5(2), 58-69. |
[9] | 李跃然, 李纾. (2009). 决策者-建议者系统模型的回顾与前瞻. 心理科学进展, 17(5), 1026-1032. |
[10] | 刘翠翠, 陈彬, 刘磊鑫, 原献学, 汪祚军. (2013). 当局者迷, 旁观者清?自我-他人决策的理性差异及其机制. 心理科学进展, 21(5), 879-885. |
[11] | 刘永芳, 王鹏, 庄锦英, 钟俊, 孙庆洲, 刘毅. (2014). 自我-他人决策差异: 问题、研究与思考. 心理科学进展, 22(4), 580-587. |
[12] | 孙露莹, 陈琳, 段锦云. (2017). 决策过程中的建议采纳: 策略、影响及未来展望. 心理科学进展, 25(1), 169-179. |
[13] | 徐惊蛰, 谢晓非. (2009). 决策过程中的建议采纳. 心理科学进展, 17(5), 1016-1025. |
[14] | 徐惊蛰, 谢晓非. (2011). 解释水平视角下的自己-他人决策差异. 心理学报, 43(1), 11-20. |
[15] | 郑全全, 李宏. (2003). 面对面和计算机群体决策在观点产生上的比较. 心理学报, 35(4), 492-498. |
[16] | 朱月龙, 张开华, 段锦云. (2017). 建议采纳的情绪机制. 心理科学进展, 25(9), 1607-1613. |
[17] | Armstrong J. S. (2006). How to make better forecasts and decisions: Avoid face-to-face meetings. Foresight, 5(5), 3-15. |
[18] | Aurelia, M., & Michael, W. M. (2010). An upside to bicultural identity conflict: Resisting groupthink in cultural ingroups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(6), 1114-1117. |
[19] | Bonaccio, S., & Dalal, R. S. (2006). Advice taking and decision-making: An integrative literature review, and implications for the organizational sciences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101(2), 127-151. |
[20] | Bonner, B. L., & Cadman, B. D. (2014). Group judgment and advice-taking: The social context underlying CEO compensation decisions. Group Dynamics Theory Research and Practice, 18(4), 302-317. |
[21] | Delbecq, A. L., & van de Ven, A. H. (1971). A group process model for problem identification and Program planning. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 7(4), 466-492. |
[22] | Desivilya, H. S., & Yagil, D. (2005). The role of emotions in conflict management: The case of work teams. International Journal of Conflict Management, 16, 55-69. |
[23] | de Wit, F. R. C., Greer, L. L., & Jehn, K. A. (2012). The paradox of intragroup conflict: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(2), 360-390. |
[24] | de Wit, F. R. C., Scheepers, D., Ellemers, N., Sassenberg, K., & Scholl, A. (2017). Whether power holders construe their power as responsibility or opportunity influences their tendency to take advice from others. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38(7), 923-949. |
[25] | Duan, J. Y., Xia, X. T., & van Swol, L. M., (2018). Emoticons' influence on advice taking. Computers in Human Behavior, 79, 53-58. |
[26] |
Effron, D. A., & Knowles, E. D. (2015). Entitativity and intergroup bias: How belonging to a cohesive group allows people to express their prejudices. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108(2), 234-253.
URL pmid: 25603374 |
[27] | Emich, K. J. (2012). How expectancy motivation influences information exchange in small groups. Small Group Research, 43(3), 275-294. |
[28] | Gino, F., & Moore, D. A. (2007). Effects of task difficulty on use of advice. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 20(1), 21-35. |
[29] | Goncalo, J. A., Polman, E., & Maslach, C. (2010). Can confidence come too soon? Collective efficacy, conflict and group performance over time. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 113(1), 13-24. |
[30] | Harvey, N., Harries, C., & Fischer, I. (2000). Using advice and assessing its quality. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 81(2), 252-273. |
[31] | Hogarth R. M. (1978). A note on aggregating opinions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 21(1), 40-46. |
[32] | Hütter, M., & Fiedler, K. (2019). Advice taking under uncertainty: The impact of genuine advice versus arbitrary anchors on judgment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 85, 103829. |
[33] | Jans, L., Leach, C. W., Garcia, R. L., & Postmes, T. (2015). The development of group influence on in-group identification: A multilevel approach. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 18(2), 190-209. |
[34] | Kane, A. A., Argote, L., & Levine, J. M. (2005). Knowledge transfer between groups via personnel rotation: Effects of social identity and knowledge quality. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 96(1), 56-71. |
[35] |
Kappes, A., Harvey, A. H., Lohrenz, T., Montague, P. R., & Sharot, T. (2020). Confirmation bias in the utilization of others’ opinion strength . Nature Neuroscience, 23, 130-137.
URL pmid: 31844311 |
[36] |
Kenny, D. A., Mannetti, L., Pierro, A., Livi, S., & Kashy, D. A. (2002). The statistical analysis of data from small groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(1), 126-137.
URL pmid: 12088122 |
[37] | Kerr, N. L., & Tindale, R. S. (2004). Group performance and decision making. Annual Review of Psychology, 55(1), 623-655. |
[38] | Kim, H. Y., Lee, Y. S., & Jun, D. B. (2019). Individual and group advice taking in judgmental forecasting: Is group forecasting superior to individual forecasting? Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 33(3), 287-303. |
[39] | Koehler, D. J., & Beauregard, T. A. (2006). Illusion of confirmation from exposure to another's hypothesis. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 19(1), 61-78. |
[40] | Kray L. J. (2000). Contingent weighting in self-other decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 83(1), 82-106. |
[41] | Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics: ii. Channels of group life; Social planning and action research. Human Relations, 1(2), 143-153. |
[42] |
Mannes, A. E., Soll, J. B., & Larrick, R. P. (2014). The wisdom of select crowds. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107(2), 276-299.
URL pmid: 25090129 |
[43] | Mcgarty, C., Turner, J. C., Oakes, P. J., & Haslam, S. A. (1993). The creation of uncertainty in the influence process: The roles of stimulus information and disagreement with similar others. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23(1), 17-38. |
[44] |
Minson, J. A., Liberman, V., & Ross, L. (2011). Two to tango: Effects of collaboration and disagreement on dyadic judgment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(10), 1325-1338.
URL pmid: 21632960 |
[45] | Minson, J. A., & Mueller, J. S. (2012). The cost of collaboration: Why joint decision making exacerbates rejection of outside information. Psychological Science, 23(3), 219-224. |
[46] | Minson, J. A., & Mueller, J. S. (2013). Groups weight outside information less than individuals do, although they shouldn’t: Response to Schultze, Mojzisch, and Schulz- Hardt (2013). Psychological Science, 24(7), 1373-1374. |
[47] | Minson, J. A., Mueller, J. S., & Larrick, R. P. (2018). The contingent wisdom of dyads: When discussion enhances vs. undermines the accuracy of collaborative judgments. Management Science, 64(9), 4177-4192. |
[48] | Nijstad, B. A., & de Dreu, C. K. (2012). Motivated information processing in organizational teams: Progress, puzzles, and prospects. Research in Organizational Behavior, 32, 87-111. |
[49] | Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Cihangir, S. (2001). Quality of decision making and group norms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(6), 918-930. |
[50] | Rader, C. A., Larrick, R. P., & Soll, J. B. (2017). Advice as a form of social influence: Informational motives and the consequences for accuracy. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 11(8), e12329. |
[51] | Rader, C. A., Soll, J. B., & Larrick, R. P. (2015). Pushing away from representative advice: Advice taking, anchoring, and adjustment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 130, 26-43. |
[52] | Scholten, L., van Knippenberg, D., Nijstad, B. A., & de Dreu, C. K. W. (2007). Motivated information processing and group decision-making: Effects of process accountability on information processing and decision quality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43(4), 539-552. |
[53] | Schultze, T., Gerlach, T. M., & Rittich, J. C. (2018). Some people heed advice less than others: Agency (but not communion) predicts advice taking. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 31(3), 430-445. |
[54] |
Schultze, T., Mojzisch, A., & Schulz-Hardt, S. (2013). Groups weight outside information less because they should: Reply to Minson and Mueller (2012). Psychological Science, 24(7), 1373-1374.
URL pmid: 23640063 |
[55] | Schultze, T., Mojzisch, A., & Schulz-Hardt, S. (2017). On the inability to ignore useless advice: A case for anchoring in the judge-advisor-system. Experimental Psychology, 64(3), 170-183. |
[56] | Schultze, T., Mojzisch, A., & Schulz-Hardt, S. (2019). Why dyads heed advice less than individuals do. Judgment and Decision Making, 14(3), 349-363. |
[57] | Schultze, T., Rakotoarisoa, A.-F., & Schulz-Hardt, S. (2015). Effects of distance between initial estimates and advice on advice utilization. Judgment and Decision Making, 10(2), 144-171. |
[58] | Schulze, C., & Newell, B. R. (2016). More heads choose better than one: Group decision making can eliminate probability matching. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 23(3), 907-914. |
[59] | See, K. E., Morrison, E. W., Rothman, N. B., & Soll, J. B. (2011). The detrimental effects of power on confidence, advice taking, and accuracy. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 116(2), 272-285. |
[60] |
Simmons, J. P., Leboeuf, R. A., & Nelson, L. D. (2010). The effect of accuracy motivation on anchoring and adjustment: Do people adjust from provided anchors? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(6), 917-932.
URL pmid: 21114351 |
[61] | Smith, C. M., Tindale, R. S., & Anderson, E. M. (2001). The impact of shared representations on minority influence in freely interacting groups. In C. K. W. de Dreu & N. K. de Vries (Eds.), Group consensus and minority influence: Implications for innovation(pp. 183-200). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers. |
[62] | Sniezek, J. A., & Buckley, T. (1995). Cueing and cognitive conflict in judge-advisor decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62(2), 159-174. |
[63] | Sniezek, J. A., & van Swol, L. M. (2001). Trust, confidence, and expertise in a judge-advisor system. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 84(2), 288-307. |
[64] | Stern, A., Schultze, T., & Schulz-Hardt, S. (2017). How much group is necessary? Group-to-individual transfer in estimation tasks. Collabra: Psychology, 3(1), 1-17. |
[65] | Stewart, T. R., Mumpower, J. L., & Holzworth, R. J. (2012). Learning to make selection and detection decisions: The roles of base rate and feedback. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 25(5), 522-533. |
[66] | Stone, E. R., Choi, Y. S., de Bruin, W. B., & Mandel, D. R. (2013). I can take the risk, but you should be safe: Self-other differences in situations involving physical safety. Judgment and Decision Making, 8(3), 250-267. |
[67] | Stone, E. R., Yates, A. J., & Caruthers, A. S. (2002). Risk taking in decision making for others versus the self. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(9), 1797-1824. |
[68] | Super, J. F., Li, P., Ishqaidef, G., & Guthrie, J. P. (2016). Group rewards, group composition and information sharing: A motivated information processing perspective. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 134, 31-44. |
[69] | Toma, C., Vasiljevic, D., Oberlé, D., & Butera, F. (2013). Assigned experts with competitive goals withhold information in group decision making. British Journal of Social Psychology, 52(1), 161-172. |
[70] | Tost, L. P., Gino, F., & Larrick, R. P. (2012). Power, competitiveness, and advice taking: Why the powerful don’t listen. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117(1), 53-65. |
[71] |
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117(2), 440-463.
URL pmid: 20438233 |
[72] | Tzioti, S. C., Wierenga, B., & van Osselaer, S. M. J., (2014). The effect of intuitive advice justification on advice taking. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 27(1), 66-77. |
[73] |
Waytz, A., & Liane, Y. (2016). The group-member mind trade-off: Attributing mind to groups versus group members. Psychological Science, 23(1), 77-85.
URL pmid: 22157677 |
[74] | Xu, E., Huang, X., Ouyang, K., Liu, W., & Hu, S. (2019). Tactics of speaking up: The roles of issue importance, perceived managerial openness, and managers’ positive mood. Human Resource Management, 59(3), 1-15. |
[75] | Yaniv, I. (2004). Receiving other people’s advice: Influence and benefit. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 93(1), 1-13. |
[76] | Yaniv, I., & Choshen-Hillel, S. (2012). Exploiting the wisdom of others to make better decisions: Suspending judgment reduces egocentrism and increases accuracy. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 25(5), 427-434. |
[77] |
Yaniv, I., & Kleinberger, E. (2000). Advice taking in decision making: Egocentric discounting and reputation formation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 83(2), 260-281.
URL pmid: 11056071 |
[78] |
Zaleskiewicz, T., & Gasiorowska, A. (2018). Tell me what I wanted to hear: Confirmation effect in lay evaluations of financial expert authority. Applied Psychology, 67(4), 686-722.
doi: 10.1111/apps.v67.4 URL |
[79] |
Zarnoth, P., & Sniezek, J. A. (1997). The social influence of confidence in group decision making. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33(4), 345-366.
doi: 10.1006/jesp.1997.1326 URL pmid: 9247369 |
[1] | 杨智超, 王艇. 消费决策中的零:零价格效应和零比较效应[J]. 心理科学进展, 2023, 31(3): 492-506. |
[2] | 谢才凤, 邬家骅, 许丽颖, 喻丰, 张语嫣, 谢莹莹. 算法决策趋避的过程动机理论[J]. 心理科学进展, 2023, 31(1): 60-77. |
[3] | 林浇敏, 李爱梅, 周雅然, 何军红, 周蕾. 眼动操纵技术在决策研究中的应用前景:改变决策行为[J]. 心理科学进展, 2022, 30(8): 1794-1803. |
[4] | 杜棠艳, 胡小勇, 杨静, 李兰玉, 王甜甜. 低社会经济地位与跨期决策:威胁视角下的心理转变机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2022, 30(8): 1894-1904. |
[5] | 钟越, 车敬上, 刘楠, 安薪如, 李爱梅, 周国林. 压力下一搏:压力如何影响个体风险寻求[J]. 心理科学进展, 2022, 30(6): 1303-1316. |
[6] | 邓尧, 王梦梦, 饶恒毅. 风险决策研究中的仿真气球冒险任务[J]. 心理科学进展, 2022, 30(6): 1377-1392. |
[7] | 蒋路远, 曹李梅, 秦昕, 谭玲, 陈晨, 彭小斐. 人工智能决策的公平感知[J]. 心理科学进展, 2022, 30(5): 1078-1092. |
[8] | 张语嫣, 许丽颖, 喻丰, 丁晓军, 邬家骅, 赵靓. 算法拒绝的三维动机理论[J]. 心理科学进展, 2022, 30(5): 1093-1105. |
[9] | 毕翠华, 齐怀远. 时间感知在跨期决策中的作用——时间决策模型的新探索[J]. 心理科学进展, 2022, 30(5): 1106-1118. |
[10] | 任赫, 黄颖诗, 陈平. 计算机化分类测验终止规则的类别、特点及应用[J]. 心理科学进展, 2022, 30(5): 1168-1182. |
[11] | 张姝玥, 黄骏青, 赵峰, 徐科朋. 社会排斥影响跨期决策的心理机制探讨[J]. 心理科学进展, 2022, 30(3): 486-498. |
[12] | 何贵兵, 陈诚, 何泽桐, 崔力丹, 陆嘉琦, 宣泓舟, 林琳. 智能组织中的人机协同决策:基于人机内部兼容性的研究探索[J]. 心理科学进展, 2022, 30(12): 2619-2627. |
[13] | 孙海龙, 安薪如, 李爱梅, 赖慧燕, 李泽虹. 动机冲突影响混合跨期决策:趋近-回避动机理论视角[J]. 心理科学进展, 2022, 30(12): 2628-2638. |
[14] | 栾墨, 吴霜. 消费决策过程如何彰显社会地位?基于最优化决策策略的视角[J]. 心理科学进展, 2022, 30(10): 2194-2205. |
[15] | 柳王娟, 定险峰, 程晓荣, 范炤. 序列依赖效应——一种全新的“历史效应”[J]. 心理科学进展, 2022, 30(10): 2228-2239. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||