Groupthink in decision making : testing for its existence, effects and prevention
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Groupthink is a theory concerning decision making developed by Janis (1972) on a case study basis. He uses the theory to explain several international fiascoes such as the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba. Highly cohesive, isolated groups operating in stressful circumstances, under highly assertive leaders may support the leader's position in the attempt to maintain group consensus. Experimental research reviewed by the present author is reinterpreted as not supporting the theory. Criticisms concerning the original development of the theory and the possibility of obtaining disconfirming evidence are outlined. The present experiment obtained for subjects 192 staff members from government and corporate organizations. Leadership style, cohesiveness and stress were manipulated to simulate the groupthink conditions. The four-person groups attempted to develop solutions to two current social problems: (1) Canadian immigration, and (2) capital punishment. The sessions were taperecorded and subjects were given post-experimental questionnaires. The questionnaires provided information for manipulation checks and the attempt to observe specific symptoms of groupthink. The audio-tapes were rated by two independent observers for the quality of the decision making discussions. The proposed solutions (in transcript form) were rated for their quality by experts from Immigration and law. Groupthink theory was not supported by the analyses at the various levels. The independent variable manipulations were moderately successful. The results indicated that leadership style played the dominant role in affecting both the group atmosphere and the quality of the decision making. These findings are interpreted as being consistent with earlier research on groupthink theory. It was also found that the time limitations employed in the study influenced the task oriented dimensions of the group processes It was suggested that the role of leadership may be more crucial to group-think theory than is the role of group cohesiveness. However, before reaching a decision on the validity of the groupthink theory based upon the current laboratory research, it is recommended that groupthink be tested in a fashion more appropriate to the level of analysis of the theory.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».