IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jftint/v12y2020i5p81-d351756.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Adolescent’s Collective Intelligence: Empirical Evidence in Real and Online Classmates Groups

Author

Listed:
  • Enrico Imbimbo

    (Department of Education, Languages, Intercultures, Literatures and Psychology, University of Florence, Via di San Salvi, 12, Building 26, 50135 Florence, Italy
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Federica Stefanelli

    (Department of Education, Languages, Intercultures, Literatures and Psychology, University of Florence, Via di San Salvi, 12, Building 26, 50135 Florence, Italy
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Andrea Guazzini

    (Center for Study of Complex Dynamics (C.S.D.C), University of Florence, Via Sansone, 1, 50019 Sesto Fiorentino, Italy)

Abstract

Humans create teams to be more successful in a large variety of tasks. Groups are characterized by an emergent property called collective intelligence, which leads them to be smarter than single individuals. Previous studies proved that collective intelligence characterizes both real and online environments, focusing on adults’ performances. In this work, we explored which factors promote group success in an offline and online logical task with adolescents. Five hundred and fifty high school students participated in the experiment and faced Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices, first by themselves using the computer, then in a group. Groups interactions could have been computer-mediated or face-to-face, and the participants were randomly assigned to one of the two experimental conditions. Results suggest that groups perform better than singles, regardless of the experimental condition. Among adolescents, online groups performance was negatively affected by participants’ average perception of group cohesion, the difficulty of the problem, and the number of communicative exchanges that occur in the interaction. On the contrary, the factors that improve their performances were the average intelligence of the teammates, their levels of neuroticism, and the group heterogeneity in terms of social abilities. This work contributes to the literature with a comprehensive model of collective intelligence among young people.

Suggested Citation

  • Enrico Imbimbo & Federica Stefanelli & Andrea Guazzini, 2020. "Adolescent’s Collective Intelligence: Empirical Evidence in Real and Online Classmates Groups," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jftint:v:12:y:2020:i:5:p:81-:d:351756
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/12/5/81/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/12/5/81/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Irving Lorge & Herbert Solomon, 1955. "Two models of group behavior in the solution of eureka-type problems," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 20(2), pages 139-148, June.
    2. David Engel & Anita Williams Woolley & Lisa X Jing & Christopher F Chabris & Thomas W Malone, 2014. "Reading the Mind in the Eyes or Reading between the Lines? Theory of Mind Predicts Collective Intelligence Equally Well Online and Face-To-Face," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(12), pages 1-16, December.
    3. Laughlin, Patrick R., 1999. "Collective Induction: Twelve Postulates," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 50-69, October.
    4. Patrick R. Laughlin, 2011. "Group Problem Solving," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 9339.
    5. Francis Heylighen, 1999. "Collective Intelligence and its Implementation on the Web: Algorithms to Develop a Collective Mental Map," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 253-280, October.
    6. Patrick R. Laughlin, 2011. "Basic Concepts In Group Problem Solving," Introductory Chapters, in: Group Problem Solving, Princeton University Press.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Hoffmann, Robert & Chesney, Thomas & Chuah, Swee-Hoon & Kock, Florian & Larner, Jeremy, 2020. "Demonstrability, difficulty and persuasion: An experimental study of advice taking," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    2. Bonner, Bryan L. & Bolinger, Alexander R., 2013. "Separating the confident from the correct: Leveraging member knowledge in groups to improve decision making and performance," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 122(2), pages 214-221.
    3. Runsten, Philip, 2017. "TEAM INTELLIGENCE: THE FOUNDATIONS OF INTELLIGENT ORGANIZATIONS - A Literature Review," SSE Working Paper Series in Business Administration 2017:2, Stockholm School of Economics.
    4. Boris Maciejovsky & David V. Budescu, 2020. "Too Much Trust in Group Decisions: Uncovering Hidden Profiles by Groups and Markets," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(6), pages 1497-1514, November.
    5. Marco Casari & Jingjing Zhang & Christine Jackson, 2016. "Same process, different outcomes: group performance in an acquiring a company experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 19(4), pages 764-791, December.
    6. Bonner, Bryan L. & Sillito, Sheli D. & Baumann, Michael R., 2007. "Collective estimation: Accuracy, expertise, and extroversion as sources of intra-group influence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 103(1), pages 121-133, May.
    7. van Dijk, Frans & Sonnemans, Joep & Bauw, Eddy, 2014. "Judicial error by groups and individuals," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 224-235.
    8. Brosig-Koch, Jeannette & Heinrich, Timo & Helbach, Christoph, 2014. "Does truth win when teams reason strategically?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 123(1), pages 86-89.
    9. Felipe A. Csaszar & J. P. Eggers, 2013. "Organizational Decision Making: An Information Aggregation View," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(10), pages 2257-2277, October.
    10. Jeanette Brosid-Koch & Timo Heinrich & Christoph Helbach, 2013. "Does Truth Win When Teams Reason Strategically?," Ruhr Economic Papers 0396, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universität Dortmund, Universität Duisburg-Essen.
    11. MacCoun, Robert J., 2015. "Balancing evidence and norms in cultural evolution," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 93-104.
    12. Sacha Altay & Marlène Schwartz & Anne-Sophie Hacquin & Aurélien Allard & Stefaan Blancke & Hugo Mercier, 2022. "Scaling up interactive argumentation by providing counterarguments with a chatbot," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(4), pages 579-592, April.
    13. repec:zbw:rwirep:0396 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. 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.
    15. Aramovich, Nicholas P. & Larson, James R., 2013. "Strategic demonstration of problem solutions by groups: The effects of member preferences, confidence, and learning goals," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 36-52.
    16. Richter, Nicole Franziska & Martin, Jonathan & Hansen, Sofie V. & Taras, Vasyl & Alon, Ilan, 2021. "Motivational configurations of cultural intelligence, social integration, and performance in global virtual teams," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 351-367.
    17. Meub, Lukas & Proeger, Till, 2017. "The impact of communication regimes and cognitive abilities on group rationality: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 229-238.
    18. Steffen Keck & Wenjie Tang, 2021. "Elaborating or Aggregating? The Joint Effects of Group Decision-Making Structure and Systematic Errors on the Value of Group Interactions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(7), pages 4287-4309, July.
    19. Davis, James H. & Zarnoth, Paul & Hulbert, Lorne & Chen, Xiao-ping & Parks, Craig & Nam, Kidok, 1997. "The Committee Charge, Framing Interpersonal Agreement, and Consensus Models of Group Quantitative Judgment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 137-157, November.
    20. Oubrich, Mourad & Hakmaoui, Abdelati & Benhayoun, Lamiae & Solberg Söilen, Klaus & Abdulkader, Bisan, 2021. "Impacts of leadership style, organizational design and HRM practices on knowledge hiding: The indirect roles of organizational justice and competitive work environment," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 488-499.
    21. Stephen Fienberg & F. Larntz, 1971. "Some models for individual-group comparisons and group behavior," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 36(4), pages 349-367, December.

    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:gam:jftint:v:12:y:2020:i:5:p:81-:d:351756. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.