IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0175155.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Keeping up appearances: Strategic information exchange by disidentified group members

Author

Listed:
  • Jort de Vreeze
  • Christina Matschke

Abstract

Information exchange is a crucial process in groups, but to date, no one has systematically examined how a group member’s relationship with a group can undermine this process. The current research examined whether disidentified group members (i.e., members who have a negative relationship with their group) strategically undermine the group outcome in information exchange. Disidentification has been found to predict negative group-directed behaviour, but at the same time disidentified members run the risk of being punished or excluded from the group when displaying destructive behaviour. In three studies we expected and found that disidentified group members subtly act against the interest of the group by withholding important private information, while at the same time they keep up appearances by sharing important information that is already known by the other group members. These findings stress the importance of taking a group member’s relationship with a group into account when considering the process of information exchange.

Suggested Citation

  • Jort de Vreeze & Christina Matschke, 2017. "Keeping up appearances: Strategic information exchange by disidentified group members," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(4), pages 1-19, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0175155
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175155
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0175155
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0175155&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0175155?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Steinel, Wolfgang & Utz, Sonja & Koning, Lukas, 2010. "The good, the bad and the ugly thing to do when sharing information: Revealing, concealing and lying depend on social motivation, distribution and importance of information," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 85-96, November.
    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. Super, Janice Francis & Li, Pingshu & Ishqaidef, Ghadir & Guthrie, James P., 2016. "Group rewards, group composition and information sharing: A motivated information processing perspective," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 31-44.
    2. Annika Scholl & Florian Landkammer & Kai Sassenberg, 2019. "When those who know do share: Group goals facilitate information sharing, but social power does not undermine it," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-17, March.
    3. Claudia Toma & Fabrizio Butera, 2015. "Cooperation versus Competition Effects on Information Sharing and Us in Group Decision Making," Working Papers CEB 15-016, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    4. Joseph P. Gaspar & Maurice E. Schweitzer, 2021. "Confident and Cunning: Negotiator Self-Efficacy Promotes Deception in Negotiations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 171(1), pages 139-155, June.
    5. Claudia Toma & Fabrizio Butera, 2015. "Cooperation versus competition effects on information sharing and use in group decision-making," Post-Print CEB, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles, vol. 9(9), pages 455-467, September.
    6. O'Leary, Kevin & Gleasure, Rob & O'Reilly, Philip & Feller, Joseph, 2022. "Introducing the concept of creative ancestry as a means of increasing perceived fairness and satisfaction in online collaboration: An experimental study," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    7. Joel M. Evans & Michael G. Hendron & James B. Oldroyd, 2015. "Withholding the Ace: The Individual- and Unit-Level Performance Effects of Self-Reported and Perceived Knowledge Hoarding," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 494-510, April.
    8. Beersma, Bianca & Homan, Astrid C. & Van Kleef, Gerben A. & De Dreu, Carsten K.W., 2013. "Outcome interdependence shapes the effects of prevention focus on team processes and performance," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 121(2), pages 194-203.
    9. Carsten K. W. Dreu & Tim R. W. Wilde & Femke S. Velden, 2021. "Intergroup Competition Mitigates Effects of Reward Structure on Preference-Consistency Bias and Group Decision Failure," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 885-902, August.
    10. Glikson, Ella & Erez, Miriam, 2020. "The emergence of a communication climate in global virtual teams," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 55(6).
    11. Pereira, Vijay & Mohiya, Mohamed, 2021. "Share or hide? Investigating positive and negative employee intentions and organizational support in the context of knowledge sharing and hiding," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 368-381.
    12. Blankenburg Holm, Desirée & Drogendijk, Rian & Haq, Hammad ul, 2020. "An attention-based view on managing information processing channels in organizations," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(2).
    13. Chang, Jin Wook & Chow, Rosalind M. & Woolley, Anita W., 2017. "Effects of inter-group status on the pursuit of intra-group status," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 1-17.
    14. Joseph P. Gaspar & Redona Methasani & Maurice E. Schweitzer, 2022. "Emotional Intelligence and Deception: A Theoretical Model and Propositions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 177(3), pages 567-584, May.
    15. Mara Olekalns & Carol Kulik & Lin Chew, 2014. "Sweet Little Lies: Social Context and the Use of Deception in Negotiation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 120(1), pages 13-26, March.
    16. Vanessa Dayeh & Ben W. Morrison, 2020. "The Effect of Perceived Competence and Competitive Environment on Team Decision-Making in the Hidden-Profile Paradigm," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(6), pages 1181-1205, December.
    17. Koning, Lukas & Steinel, Wolfgang & Beest, Ilja van & Dijk, Eric van, 2011. "Power and deception in ultimatum bargaining," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 35-42, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0175155. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.