Group versus individual performance on tasks requiring ideational proficiency (brainstorming): a review

Lade...
Vorschaubild
Datum
1973
Autor:innen
Herausgeber:innen
Kontakt
ISSN der Zeitschrift
Electronic ISSN
ISBN
Bibliografische Daten
Verlag
Schriftenreihe
Auflagebezeichnung
ArXiv-ID
Internationale Patentnummer
EU-Projektnummer
DFG-Projektnummer
Projekt
Open Access-Veröffentlichung
Sammlungen
Gesperrt bis
Titel in einer weiteren Sprache
Forschungsvorhaben
Organisationseinheiten
Zeitschriftenheft
Publikationstyp
Zeitschriftenartikel
Publikationsstatus
unikn.publication.listelement.citation.prefix.version.undefined
European Journal of Social Psychology. 1973, 3(4), pp. 361-388. Available under: doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2420030402
Zusammenfassung

In the experiments reviewed in this article the subjects are asked to produce ideas that are relevant to a given task request (e.g., possible consequences of a hypothetical event). After describing the specific task material and the performance measures used in the relevant research studies, some analytic background is given by outlining the cognitive resources required in this kind of experimental task and by listing the various factors that may come into play when subjects perform in groups (with discussion) instead of individually. We then review the studies comparing individual and group performance. In all ot these experiments the subjects were asked to work according to the rules of brainstorming, which prescribe that participants refrain from evaluating their ideas. This procedure purportedly results in superior group, relative to individual, performance. However, the empirical evidence clearly indicates that subjects brainstorming in small groups produce fewer ideas than the same number of subjects brainstorming individually. Less clear evidence is available on measures of quality, uniqueness and variety. The discussion considers factors that may be responsible for this inferiority of groups. The role of social inhibition receives particular attention also in terms of suggestions for research. Apart from the group-individual comparison we review the existing research concerning factors that may influence group performance on idea-generation tasks.

Zusammenfassung in einer weiteren Sprache

In den hier referierten Experimenten besteht die Aufgabe der Versuchspersonen darin, Ideen zu produzieren, die in einen vorgegebenen Rahmen fallen, sich aber einer Richtig-Falsch-Beurteilung entziehen (z.B. mögliche Konsequenzen eines hypothetischen Ereignisses). Auf eine Erläuterung des Aufgabenmaterials und der abhängigen Variablen (Leistungsindices), die in den relevanten Untersuchungen benutzt wurden, und der bei diesen Aufgaben erforderlichen kognitiven Ressourcen folgt eine Übersicht über Faktoren, die bei Gruppen- gegenüber Einzelaktivitat wirksam werden können. In den für das letztere Thema relevanten Experimenten bearbeiteten die Versuchspersonen die gestellten Aufgaben nach den Regeln des 'brainstorming', die insbesondere Kritik ausschließen. Durchweg ergab sich, daß Vpn, die in Gruppen (mit Diskussion) arbeiten, weniger Ideen produzieren als die gleiche Anzahl von Vpn, die individuell arbeiten. (Bezüglich der anderen Indices - Qualitat, Einzigartigkeit und Mannigfaltigkeit - sind die Ergebnisse nicht einheitlich). Dieser Befund wird im Hinblick auf zugrundeliegende Faktoren diskutiert, wobei - auch in unseren Vorschlagen für zukünftige Forschungen - die Rolle der sozialen Hemmungen besondere Beachtung erhält. - Neben dem Vergleich von Gruppen- und Einzeltätigkeit werden die Forschungsergebnisse zum allgemeinen Thema der Ideenproduktion in Kleingruppen referiert.

Fachgebiet (DDC)
150 Psychologie
Schlagwörter
Konferenz
Rezension
undefined / . - undefined, undefined
Zitieren
ISO 690LAMM, Helmut, Gisela TROMMSDORFF, 1973. Group versus individual performance on tasks requiring ideational proficiency (brainstorming): a review. In: European Journal of Social Psychology. 1973, 3(4), pp. 361-388. Available under: doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2420030402
BibTex
@article{Lamm1973Group-10925,
  year={1973},
  doi={10.1002/ejsp.2420030402},
  title={Group versus individual performance on tasks requiring ideational proficiency (brainstorming): a review},
  number={4},
  volume={3},
  journal={European Journal of Social Psychology},
  pages={361--388},
  author={Lamm, Helmut and Trommsdorff, Gisela}
}
RDF
<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
    xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
    xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
    xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
    xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > 
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/10925">
    <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/10925/1/Group_versus_individual_performance_on_tasks_1973_KOPS8835.pdf"/>
    <dcterms:title>Group versus individual performance on tasks requiring ideational proficiency (brainstorming): a review</dcterms:title>
    <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
    <dcterms:issued>1973</dcterms:issued>
    <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/"/>
    <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">In the experiments reviewed in this article the subjects are asked to produce ideas that are relevant to a given task request (e.g., possible consequences of a hypothetical event). After describing the specific task material and the performance measures used in the relevant research studies, some analytic background is given by outlining the cognitive resources required in this kind of experimental task and by listing the various factors that may come into play when subjects perform in groups (with discussion) instead of individually. We then review the studies comparing individual and group performance. In all ot these experiments the subjects were asked to work according to the rules of brainstorming, which prescribe that participants refrain from evaluating their ideas. This procedure purportedly results in superior group, relative to individual, performance. However, the empirical evidence clearly indicates that subjects brainstorming in small groups produce fewer ideas than the same number of subjects brainstorming individually. Less clear evidence is available on measures of quality, uniqueness and variety. The discussion considers factors that may be responsible for this inferiority of groups. The role of social inhibition receives particular attention also in terms of suggestions for research. Apart from the group-individual comparison we review the existing research concerning factors that may influence group performance on idea-generation tasks.</dcterms:abstract>
    <bibo:uri rdf:resource="http://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/10925"/>
    <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2011-03-25T09:23:56Z</dcterms:available>
    <dcterms:bibliographicCitation>First publ. in: European Journal of Social Psychology 3 (1973), 4, pp. 361-388</dcterms:bibliographicCitation>
    <dc:contributor>Trommsdorff, Gisela</dc:contributor>
    <dc:creator>Trommsdorff, Gisela</dc:creator>
    <dc:rights>terms-of-use</dc:rights>
    <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
    <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/43"/>
    <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2011-03-25T09:23:56Z</dc:date>
    <dc:contributor>Lamm, Helmut</dc:contributor>
    <dc:creator>Lamm, Helmut</dc:creator>
    <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
    <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/43"/>
    <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/10925/1/Group_versus_individual_performance_on_tasks_1973_KOPS8835.pdf"/>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
Interner Vermerk
xmlui.Submission.submit.DescribeStep.inputForms.label.kops_note_fromSubmitter
Kontakt
URL der Originalveröffentl.
Prüfdatum der URL
Prüfungsdatum der Dissertation
Finanzierungsart
Kommentar zur Publikation
Allianzlizenz
Corresponding Authors der Uni Konstanz vorhanden
Internationale Co-Autor:innen
Universitätsbibliographie
Nein
Begutachtet