IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v57y2019icp86-94.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Addressing the influence of groupthink during ideation concerned with new applications of technology in society

Author

Listed:
  • Fox, Stephen

Abstract

As well as physical technology in society and digital technology in society, there is also technology in society within the non-conscious human mind. In particular, unconscious preference for least cognitive effort and subconscious preference for least social resistance can coincide in groupthink about technology in society, which include fads, hype, lock-ins, path dependencies and success traps. Ideation concerned with new applications of technology in society is often constrained by groupthink. In this paper, an exploratory study addressing the influence of these constraints on ideation is reported. The study involved use of nine science-based techniques across the “preparation-incubation-illumination-verification” model of ideation. Findings indicate that the constraining influence of groupthink can be reduced, but much work may be required to do so. Hence, it can be anticipated that technology in society within the non-conscious human mind will continue to exert influence over new applications of physical and virtual technology in society.

Suggested Citation

  • Fox, Stephen, 2019. "Addressing the influence of groupthink during ideation concerned with new applications of technology in society," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 86-94.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:57:y:2019:i:c:p:86-94
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.12.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X18300058
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.12.009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David T. Dearman & Michael D. Shields, 2005. "Avoiding Accounting Fixation: Determinants of Cognitive Adaptation to Differences in Accounting Method," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(2), pages 351-384, June.
    2. Fox, Stephen, 2013. "The innovation big picture: Including effectiveness dependencies, efficiency dependencies, and potential negative effects within the framing of new technologies," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 306-314.
    3. Baker, Malcolm & Coval, Joshua & Stein, Jeremy C., 2007. "Corporate financing decisions when investors take the path of least resistance," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 266-298, May.
    4. Daniel Kahneman & Jack L. Knetsch & Richard H. Thaler, 1991. "Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 193-206, Winter.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Heister, Stanton & Yuthas, Kristi, 2020. "The blockchain and how it can influence conceptions of the self," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    2. Jawad Minhas & Stavros Sindakis, 2022. "Implications of Social Cohesion in Entrepreneurial Collaboration: a Systematic Literature Review," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(4), pages 2760-2791, December.
    3. Jawad Minhas & Stavros Sindakis, 2021. "Implications of Social Cohesion in Entrepreneurial Collaboration: a Conceptual Model and Research Propositions," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(4), pages 2016-2031, December.
    4. Sharfa Hassan & Puneet Kaur & Michael Muchiri & Chidiebere Ogbonnaya & Amandeep Dhir, 2023. "Unethical Leadership: Review, Synthesis and Directions for Future Research," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(2), pages 511-550, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stephen Fox, 2016. "Dismantling The Box — Applying Principles For Reducing Preconceptions During Ideation," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(06), pages 1-27, August.
    2. Philippe Fevrier & Sebastien Gay, 2005. "Informed Consent Versus Presumed Consent The Role of the Family in Organ Donations," HEW 0509007, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Wiebke Roß & Jens Weghake, 2018. "Wa(h)re Liebe: Was Online-Dating-Plattformen über zweiseitige Märkte lehren," TUC Working Papers in Economics 0017, Abteilung für Volkswirtschaftslehre, Technische Universität Clausthal (Department of Economics, Technical University Clausthal).
    4. Jose Apesteguia & Miguel Ballester, 2009. "A theory of reference-dependent behavior," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 40(3), pages 427-455, September.
    5. Insoo Cho & Peter F. Orazem, 2021. "How endogenous risk preferences and sample selection affect analysis of firm survival," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1309-1332, April.
    6. Boyce, Christopher & Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Hanley, Nick, 2019. "Personality and economic choices," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 82-100.
    7. Botond Kőszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2006. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(4), pages 1133-1165.
    8. Heavey, Emily & Baxter, Kate & Birks, Yvonne, 2019. "Financial advice for funding later life care: a scoping review of evidence from England," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 91497, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Daniel Agness & Travis Baseler & Sylvain Chassang & Pascaline Dupas & Erik Snowberg, 2022. "Valuing the Time of the Self-Employed," Working Papers 2022-2, Princeton University. Economics Department..
    10. Damgaard, Mette Trier & Nielsen, Helena Skyt, 2018. "Nudging in education," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 313-342.
    11. Silva,Joana C. G. & Morgandi,Matteo & Levin,Victoria, 2016. "Trust in government and support for redistribution," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7675, The World Bank.
    12. Chorvat, Terrence, 2006. "Taxing utility," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 1-16, February.
    13. Karle, Heiko & Schumacher, Heiner & Vølund, Rune, 2023. "Consumer loss aversion and scale-dependent psychological switching costs," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 214-237.
    14. de Jong, Abe & Dutordoir, Marie & Verwijmeren, Patrick, 2011. "Why do convertible issuers simultaneously repurchase stock? An arbitrage-based explanation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 113-129, April.
    15. Paul De Grauwe & Marianna Grimaldi, 2004. "Bubbles and Crashes in a Behavioural Finance Model," CESifo Working Paper Series 1194, CESifo.
    16. Besedes, Tibor & Deck, Cary & Sarangi, Sudipta & Shor, Mikhael, 2012. "Designing a sequential choice architecture to reduce choice overload," MPRA Paper 38173, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Lippens, Louis & Baert, Stijn & Derous, Eva, 2021. "Loss aversion in taste-based employee discrimination: Evidence from a choice experiment," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    18. Keval Amin & Erica Harris, 2022. "The Effect of Investor Sentiment on Nonprofit Donations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 175(2), pages 427-450, January.
    19. Michael Ziegelmeyer & Julius Nick, 2013. "Backing out of private pension provision: lessons from Germany," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 40(3), pages 505-539, August.
    20. Walter Bossert & Yves Sprumont, 2009. "Non‐Deteriorating Choice," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 76(302), pages 337-363, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:57:y:2019:i:c:p:86-94. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.