scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
ReportDOI

The Problem of Unshared Information in Group Decision-Making: A Summary of Research and the Implications for Command and Control

TL;DR: A detailed review of the literature on the use of unshared and shared information in a group decision-making situation and two conclusions can be drawn: people are not very effective in communicating unshared information groups tend to focus their discussion on information that is already shared, and many group decisions are based on incomplete information.
Abstract: : This report contains a detailed review of the literature on the use of unshared and shared information in a group decision-making situation, and two conclusions can be drawn: (1) People are not very effective in communicating unshared information groups tend to focus their discussion on information that is already shared, with the result that little, if any, unshared information moves into the shared environment, and (2) when unshared information does move into the shared environment, participants tend to ignore or discount this information and not factor it into their decision process in an effective manner. The net result is many group decisions are based on incomplete information, i.e., decisions are made without taking into account information that would be available to the group if they were optimally exchanging and integrating unshared information. Consequently, group decisions may be sub-optimal when critical information is held by individuals and not shared. The preponderance of the literature on group decision-making is based on experimental groups working in a face-to-face environment, and the findings have been attributed to a variety of social and cognitive influences. In contrast, much of modern military command and control decision-making is not predicated on face-to-face groups, but on time/place asynchronous collaboration where the decision process is often distributed over time and location. Proposed is a research program called START (Structure, Tag, And Release Templates) that will develop group consensus on critical decision evaluation categories, parameters, and qualifying values.

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Viewing leadership as involving information management, it is proposed that DL may be linked to higher levels of information exchange and information integration, of both shared and unshared information.
Abstract: Purpose – More studies are beginning to support the role of distributed, as opposed to solo, leadership in team performance, but distributed leadership (DL) has not always been linked to higher performance. It may need to be co‐ordinated, rather than misaligned or fragmented, and may be most effective in teams performing interdependent tasks. DL has not often been linked to team information processing, however; viewing leadership as involving information management, it is proposed that DL may be linked to higher levels of information exchange and information integration, of both shared and unshared information. A series of research propositions are then developed with the purpose of exploring further the role of DL in team decision making, especially in terms of information exchange and information integration processes in Chinese and Western groups.Design/methodology/approach – The paper derives a number of research propositions from the literature on DL and information processing and applies them to dec...

14 citations

Journal Article
TL;DR: An on-line knowledge elicitation technique is proposed where participants assign a variety of cognitive assessments to each retained decision-relevant information item, allowing all participants to access each item and simplifies the process of integrating the arriving information and making quality decisions.
Abstract: : Research has indicated that group decision making participants have difficulty in sharing their uniquely held information and in integrating unique information from other participants. An on-line knowledge elicitation technique is proposed where participants assign a variety of cognitive assessments to each retained decision-relevant information item. These assessments might include source credibility, timeliness, information uncertainty, direction of impact on the related decision criterion as well as overall importance of the information item. The assessments are automatically converted into a small color-coded icon called an Information Object (IOB). The IOB can then be used in place of the text version of the item, much as tactical symbology replaces raw radar video. The display, sharing, manipulation and algorithmic sorting of these IOBs permits all participants to access each item and simplifies the process of integrating the arriving information and making quality decisions. The attached individual information quality assessments also permit a highly focused discussion exchange, reducing the time required for conflict resolution and consensus building.

6 citations


Cites background or result from "The Problem of Unshared Information..."

  • ...2 It is widely assumed that (1) UI is freely shared within the group and (2) as more of this information is made available to the group, the better will be the overall quality of the decision making, i....

    [...]

  • ...Three deficiencies were addressed in this paper: (1) the difficulty group decision makers have in sharing their uniquely held information (2) the difficulty they have in integrating such information into their on-going decision processes if it actually does become available and (3) the difficulty they have in conflict resolution and consensus building,...

    [...]

  • ...3 environment and (2) when unshared information does move into the shared environment, participants tend to ignore or discount this information and not factor it into their decision process in an effective manner....

    [...]

  • ...A click on this bar area will hyperlink to the complete original information item (2) the center bar displays the importance and effect of the item....

    [...]

  • ...This finding of poor group sharing of UI has been replicated in a number of other studies (for a review see Fleming & Kaiwi, 2002) With regard to the integration of shared UI into the decision process, the majority of studies have produced results that indicate that group members discount the UI…...

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper found that families that are more diverse, as measured by both the intra-family generational gap and the relatedness of their members, are more successful at matching wider ranges of survey responses.
Abstract: We take advantage of a naturally occurring experiment in a television game show to study the impact of group characteristics on their ability to select salient solutions in a matching game. The Family Feud features families seeking to earn prizes by matching the results of public opinion surveys on various subjects. Our main result is that, controlling for task difficulty, families that are more diverse, as measured by both the intra-family generational gap and the relatedness of their members, are more successful at matching wider ranges of survey responses. This highlights the importance of member diversity in expanding information and decision frames of reference within a group.

4 citations

01 Jun 2006
TL;DR: The decision support package described here simplifies and quantifies these two processes by supplying an intuitive interface to capture the impact and importance of each information item and then selecting one option based upon some form of cognitive weighting of the entire information pool.
Abstract: : Two of the more subjective processes in decision making involve forming an opinion about each decision-relevant information item (i.e., the impact and importance of that item to any decision option) and then selecting one option based upon some form of cognitive weighting of the entire information pool. The decision support package described here simplifies and quantifies these two processes by supplying an intuitive interface to capture: (1) location of the information item (2) content of the information item (3) quality of the information (4) timeliness of the information (5) decision option impacted (6) nature of that impact and (7) the importance of the item. Using a weighting matrix, the subjective assessments of impact and importance for each information item are converted into single score and then all the information item scores for a particular decision option are summed. The final total scores are used to quantitatively assess the ranking all the various decision options. An exchange module makes all assessments available to all participants, enabling the group to quickly focus on the key differing individual assessments causing any lack of group consensus.

4 citations


Cites methods from "The Problem of Unshared Information..."

  • ...This exchange of IOBs and comments is a very effective methodology for reducing the problems of unshared information in a group decision making task (see Stasser, 1999 or Fleming and Kaiwi, 2002, for a recent review) as well as enhancing conflict resolution and the building of a team consensus....

    [...]

ReportDOI
01 Jan 2005
TL;DR: This work focuses on the issues of what is the minimum information that needs to be exchanged for shared understanding to occur, how do the authors capture that information and how should it best be displayed.
Abstract: : Collaborative command and control environments for team decision making and situation assessment are becoming increasingly more distributed in time and space. Shared understanding among team members with regard to the impact, importance, and quality of relevant information items (e.g., sensor outputs, text documents, images, message traffic, web pages) is a critical element in the selection of an effective course of action. Here, we focus on the issues of (1) what is the minimum information that needs to be exchanged for shared understanding to occur, (2) how do we capture that information and (3) how should it best be displayed? Distributed teams that communicate asynchronously require a knowledge management plug-in tool that will convert, encapsulate, and tag a group member's subjective understanding of a complex information item into an iconic representation that represent various information parameters. These icons are referred to as Information Objects (IOBs) and are automatically generated from an abstraction template completed by a team member for each decision-relevant information item. These IOBs can then easily be electronically exchanged among the team, improving shared understanding, consensus building, and information fusion among group members and significantly reducing the valuable decision time typically consumed by conflict resolution.

3 citations


Cites background from "The Problem of Unshared Information..."

  • ...A more complete review of this literature has been recently reported by Fleming & Kaiwi (2002)....

    [...]

References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A conceptual overview of GDSS based on an information-exchange perspective of decision making is presented, and a multi-dimensional taxonomy of systems is proposed as an organizing framework for research in the area.
Abstract: Technical developments in electronic communication, computing, and decision support, coupled with new interest on the part of organizations to improve meeting effectiveness, are spurring research in the area of group decision support systems GDSS. A GDSS combines communication, computing, and decision support technologies to facilitate formulation and solution of unstructured problems by a group of people. This paper presents a conceptual overview of GDSS based on an information-exchange perspective of decision making, Three levels of systems are described, representing varying degrees of intervention into the decision process. Research on GDSS is conceived as evolving over time from the study of simple "shell" systems, consisting of menus of features available for selection by a group, to consideration of sophisticated rule-based systems that enable a group to pursue highly structured and novel decision paths. A multi-dimensional taxonomy of systems is proposed as an organizing framework for research in the area. Three environmental contingencies are identified as critical to GDSS design: group size, member proximity, and the task confronting the group. Potential impacts of GDSS on group processes and outcomes are discussed, and important constructs in need of study are identified.

2,108 citations


"The Problem of Unshared Information..." refers background in this paper

  • ...As some researchers have noted, groupware systems should have a positive influence on the level of information exchanged (DeSanctis & Gallupe, 1987)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper showed that discussion tends to be dominated by information that members hold in common before discussion and information that supports members' existent preferences, and that discussion tended to perpetuate, not to correct, members' distorted pictures of candidates.
Abstract: Decision-making groups can potentially benefit from pooling members' information, particularly when members individually have partial and biased information but collectively can compose an unbiased characterization of the decision alternatives. The proposed biased sampling model of group discussion, however, suggests that group members often fail to effectively pool their information because discussion tends to be dominated by (a) information that members hold in common before discussion and (b) information that supports members' existent preferences. In a political caucus simulation, group members individually read candidate descriptions that contained partial information biased against the most favorable candidate and then discussed the candidates as a group. Even though groups could have produced unbiased composites of the candidates through discussion, they decided in favor of the candidate initially preferred by a plurality rather than the most favorable candidate. Group members' pre- and postdiscussion recall of candidate attributes indicated that discussion tended to perpetuate, not to correct, members' distorted pictures of the candidates.

1,680 citations


"The Problem of Unshared Information..." refers background in this paper

  • ...The early and classic work in the field is by Stasser and Titus (1985)....

    [...]

  • ...…than SI and generally discounted in one form or another (Dennis, 1996; Dennis et al., 1997; Gigone & Hastie, 1993; Gigone & Hastie, 1997b; Hightower & Sayeed, 1996; Larson et al., 1998b; Lavery et al., 1999; Stasser & Titus, 1985; Stasser et al., 1989; Stewart & Stasser, 1995; Thompson, 1991)....

    [...]

  • ...As an explanation, Stasser and Titus (1985) noted that in the distributed group, a disproportionate of time was spent discussing the SI items, resulting in very few of the UI items ever being brought up for discussion....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper examined the role of group composition and information distribution on group process and decision making in solving a murder mystery and found that all-stranger groups were most likely to identify the correct suspect when information was fully shared, however, all-familiar and 2 familiar/1 stranger groups were more likely to remain unshared when critical clues remained unshared.

832 citations


"The Problem of Unshared Information..." refers background in this paper

  • ...As might be expected, research 7 has shown that as group diversity increases, the level of UI that is shared decreases (Gruenfeld, 1996)....

    [...]

01 Jan 2008
TL;DR: LaRonde as mentioned in this paper analyzes the conflict in Xinjiang and concludes that the Chinese continue to defeat the separatist movement through a strategy that counters Mao's seven fundamentals of revolutionary warfare, concluding that Mao, as well as the communist leaders who followed him, was also successful at waging protracted counterinsurgency.
Abstract: PROTRACED COUNTERINSURGENCY: CHINESE COIN STRATEGY IN XINJIANG by MAJ J. Scott LaRonde, USA, 95 pages. In 1949, following the conclusion of its revolutionary war against the Chinese Nationalist forces, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) peacefully occupied China’s western most province of Xinjiang. For nearly sixty years, the PLA has conducted a counterinsurgency against several, mostly Uyghur-led, separatist movements. Despite periods of significant violence, particularly in the early 1950s and again in the 1990s, the separatist forces have not gained momentum and remained at a level one insurgency. Mao ZeDeng is revered as a master insurgent and the father of Fourth Generation Warfare. Strategists in armies worldwide study his writings on revolutionary and guerilla warfare. This monograph concludes that Mao, as well as the communist leaders who followed him, was also successful at waging protracted counterinsurgency. For nearly sixty years, separatist movements in Xinjiang, Tibet, and Taiwan have all failed. This monograph analyzes the conflict in Xinjiang and concludes that the Chinese continue to defeat the separatist movement in Xinjiang through a strategy that counters Mao’s seven fundamentals of revolutionary warfare.

773 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, a group of participants read a homicide mystery and then met in three-person groups to discuss the case and select the guilty suspect, but each member read a version of the mystery that contained only a subset of the clues that were critical to identifying the correct suspect.

619 citations