Abstract
The individual preference effect supplements the predominant group-level explanations for the failure of groups to solve hidden profiles. Even in the absence of dysfunctional group-level processes, group members tend to stick to their suboptimal initial decision preferences due to preference-consistent evaluation of information. However, previous experiments demonstrating this effect retained two group-level processes, namely (a) social validation of information supporting the group members’ initial preferences and (b) presentation of the additional information in a discussion format. Therefore, it was unclear whether the individual preference effect depends on the co-occurrence of these group-level processes. Here, we report two experiments demonstrating that the individual preference effect is indeed an individual-level phenomenon. Moreover, by a comparison to real interacting groups, we can show that even when all relevant information is exchanged and when no coordination losses occur, almost half of all groups would fail to solve hidden profiles due to the individual preference effect.
Highlights
The individual preference effect supplements the predominant group-level explanations for the failure of groups to solve hidden profiles
This is due to the distribution of shared and unshared information across indi viduals: shared information is available to all group members prior to discussion, whereas unshared information is uniquely held by one member only
A manipulation check showed that the experimental induction of the individual decision preferences was successful overall, with 90% of the participants choosing the candidate implied by their information subsets
Summary
The individual preference effect supplements the predominant group-level explanations for the failure of groups to solve hidden profiles. Previous experiments demonstrating this effect retained two group-level processes, namely (a) social validation of information supporting the group members’ initial preferences and (b) presentation of the additional information in a discussion format. Two group-level processes have been proposed to account for the failure of groups to solve hidden profiles: according to one explanation, groups do not discuss sufficient unshared information for the superiority of the correct solution to become evident (Stasser, 1992). There is evidence that social validation increases the perceived accuracy and relevance of information which, in turn, increases the decisional impact of information (Mojzisch, Schulz-Hardt, Kerschreiter, Brodbeck, & Frey, 2008)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
