Effects of cognitive diversity on relationship conflict, agreement-seeking behaviour and decision quality: a study of Chinese management teams
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates (a) the effects of cognitive diversity on agreement seeking behaviour and relationship conflict, and (b) effects of agreement-seeking behaviour and relationship conflict on decision quality. Using structured survey instrument, this paper gathered data from 252 senior executives from mainland China and analysed the data using the regression techniques to test the hypotheses. The results support that cognitive diversity is positively related to relationship conflict and negatively related to agreement-seeking behaviour. The results also support the hypotheses that agreement-seeking behaviour is positively related to decision quality and relationship conflict is negatively related to decision quality. Though the study is related to Chinese executives, the findings from the study that cognitive diversity enhances interpersonal conflict and discourages agreement-seeking behaviour contribute to the strategic decision-making literature.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it