IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0307945.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

High-performing teams: Is collective intelligence the answer?

Author

Listed:
  • Luke I Rowe
  • John Hattie
  • John Munro

Abstract

Background/objectives: The concept of a general factor of collective intelligence, proposed by Woolley et al. in 2010, has spurred interest in understanding collective intelligence within small groups. This study aims to extend this investigation by examining the validity of a general collective intelligence factor, assessing its underlying factor structure, and evaluating its utility in predicting performance on future group problem-solving tasks and academic outcomes. Methods: Employing a correlational study design, we engaged 85 university students in a series of complex cognitive tasks designed to measure collective intelligence through individual, group, and predictive phases. Results: Contrary to the hypothesized single-factor model, our findings favor a two-factor model influenced by Cattell’s theory of crystalized and fluid intelligence. These two factors accounted for substantial variance in group performance outcomes, challenging the prevailing single-factor model. Notably, the predictive validity of these factors on group assignments was statistically significant, with both individual and collective intelligence measures correlating moderately with group assignment scores (rs = .40 to .47, p

Suggested Citation

  • Luke I Rowe & John Hattie & John Munro, 2024. "High-performing teams: Is collective intelligence the answer?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(8), pages 1-23, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0307945
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0307945
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0307945
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0307945&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0307945?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
    ---><---

    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:pone00:0307945. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.