IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Strategic demonstration of problem solutions by groups: The effects of member preferences, confidence, and learning goals

Listed author(s):
  • Aramovich, Nicholas P.
  • Larson, James R.
Registered author(s):

    Research indicates that groups perform best, and their members learn the most, when they solve problems with demonstrably correct solutions. These outcomes are often attributed to correct members demonstrating to incorrect members how to solve such problems. However, because few studies have directly observed group interaction (Moreland, Swanenburg, Flagg, & Fetterman, 2010), the extent to which correct members actually demonstrate problem solutions remains unclear. Assuming that groups are strategic and desire to solve problems both accurately and efficiently, we predicted that initially correct minorities would be more likely than initially correct majorities to demonstrate problem solutions. Results from two studies support this prediction, in the form of member behavioral intentions (Study 1) and observed group interaction processes (Study 2). Study 1 also highlights the role of confidence in this effect, while Study 2 reveals that demonstration is overall more likely when groups have a goal that encourages member learning.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.

    Volume (Year): 122 (2013)
    Issue (Month): 1 ()
    Pages: 36-52

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:122:y:2013:i:1:p:36-52
    DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.04.001
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    in new window

    1. Littlepage, Glenn & Robison, William & Reddington, Kelly, 1997. "Effects of Task Experience and Group Experience on Group Performance, Member Ability, and Recognition of Expertise," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 133-147, February.
    2. Parks, Craig D. & Nelson, Nicole L., 1999. "Discussion and Decision: The Interrelationship between Initial Preference Distribution and Group Discussion Content, , ," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 87-101, October.
    3. Laughlin, Patrick R., 1999. "Collective Induction: Twelve Postulates," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 50-69, October.
    4. Laughlin, Patrick R. & Bonner, Bryan L. & Miner, Andrew G., 2002. "Groups perform better than the best individuals on Letters-to-Numbers problems," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 88(2), pages 605-620, July.
    5. Tannenbaum, Scott I. & Mathieu, John E. & Salas, Eduardo & Cohen, Debra, 2012. "Teams Are Changing: Are Research and Practice Evolving Fast Enough?," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(01), pages 2-24, March.
    6. Kyle Lewis, 2004. "Knowledge and Performance in Knowledge-Worker Teams: A Longitudinal Study of Transactive Memory Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(11), pages 1519-1533, November.
    7. Sniezek, Janet A., 1992. "Groups under uncertainty: An examination of confidence in group decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 124-155, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:122:y:2013:i:1:p:36-52. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.