Gender Composition and Group Confidence Judgment: The Perils of All-Male Groups

References

• Adams RB, Ferreira D (2009) Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. J. Financial Econom. 94(2):291–309.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson C, Brion S, Moore DA, Kennedy JA (2012) A status-enhancement account of overconfidence. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 103(4):718–735.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson KJ, Leaper C (1998) Emotion talk between same-and mixed-gender friends—Form and function. J. Language Soc. Psych. 17(4):419–448.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Apesteguia J, Azmat G, Iriberri N (2012) The impact of gender composition on team performance and decision making: Evidence from the field. Management Sci. 58(1):78–93.Link, Google Scholar
• Asch SE (1952) Group forces in the modification and distortion of judgments. Social Psychology (Prentice Hall Englewood Cliffs, NJ), 450–501.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baixauli-Soler JS, Belda-Ruiz M, Sanchez-Marin G (2015) Executive stock options, gender diversity in the top management team, and firm risk taking. J. Bus. Res. 68(2):451–463.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barber BM, Odean T (2002) Online investors: Do the slow die first? Rev. Financial Stud. 15(2):455–488.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baron RM, Kenny DA (1986) The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 51(6):1173–1182.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bear JB, Woolley AW (2011) The role of gender in team collaboration and performance. Interdisciplinary Sci. Rev. 36(2):146–153.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ben-David I, Graham JR, Harvey JR (2013) Managerial miscalibration. Quart. J. Econom. 122(3):1547–1584.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bennedsen M, Kongsted HC, Nielsen KM (2008) The causal effect of board size in the performance of small and medium-sized firms. J. Banking Finance 32(6):1098–1109.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berdahl JL, Anderson C (2005) Men, women, and leadership centralization in groups over time. Group Dynam. 9(1):45–57.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Biais B, Hilton D, Mazurier K, Pouget S (2005) Judgmental overconfidence, self-monitoring, and trading performance in an experimental financial market. Rev. Econom. Stud. 72(2):287–312.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boschini A, Muren A, Persson M (2011) Men among men do not take norm enforcement seriously. J. Socio-Econom. 40(5):523–529.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Budescu DV, Du N (2007) Coherence and consistency of investors’ probability judgments. Management Sci. 53(11):1731–1744.Link, Google Scholar
• Clemen RT (1996) Making Hard Decisions: An Introduction to Decision Analysis (PWS-Kent, Boston).Google Scholar
• Cohen J (1992) A power primer. Psych. Bull. 112(1):155–159.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cooke RA, Szumal JL (1994) The impact of group interaction styles on problem-solving effectiveness. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 30(4):415–437.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cumming D, Leung T, Rui O (2015) Gender diversity and securities fraud. Acad. Management J. 58(5):1572–1593.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Davis-Stober CP, Budescu DV, Dana J, Broomell SB (2014) When is a crowd wise? Decision 1(2):79–101.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Deaves R, Luders E, Schröder M (2010) The dynamics of overconfidence: Evidence from stock market forecasters. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 75(3):402–412.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Deutsch M (1949) An experimental study of the effects of cooperation and competition upon group process. Human Relations 2(3):199–231.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dezsö CL, Ross DG (2012) Does female representation in top management improve firm performance? A panel data investigation. Strategic Management J. 33(9):1072–1089.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dufwenberg M, Muren A (2006) Generosity, anonymity, gender. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 61(1):42–49.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eagly AH, Johnson BT (1990) Gender and leadership style: A meta-analysis. Psych. Bull. 108(2):233–256.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edmondson A (1999) Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(2):350–383.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fletcher J (1998) Relational practice: A feminist reconstruction of work. J. Management Inquiry 7(2):163–186.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gaba A, Tsetlin I, Winkler RL (2017) Combining interval forecasts. Decision Anal. 14(1):1–20.Link, Google Scholar
• Gigerenzer G, Hoffrage U, Kleinbolting H (1991) Probabilistic mental models: A Brunswikian theory of confidence. Psych. Rev. 98(4):506–528.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gigone D, Hastie R (1997) The impact of information on small group choice. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 72(1):132–140.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Glaser M, Langer T, Weber M (2013) True overconfidence in interval estimates: Evidence based on a new measure of miscalibration. J. Behav. Decision Making 26(5):405–417.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gneezy U, Niederle M, Rustichini A (2003) Performance in competitive environments: Gender differences. Quart. J. Econom. 118(3):1049–1074.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greenhalgh L, Chapman DI (1998) Negotiator relationships: Construct measurement, and demonstration of their impact on the process and outcomes of negotiation. Group Decision Negotiation 7(6):465–489.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Griskevicius V, Goldstein NJ, Mortensen CR, Cialdini RB, Kenrick DT (2006) Going along versus going alone: When fundamental motives facilitate strategic (non)conformity. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 91(2):281–294.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hackman JR (1987) The design of work teams. Lorcsh J, ed. Handbook of Organizational Behavior (Prentice Hall Englewood Cliffs, NJ), 315–342.Google Scholar
• Hall JA (1978) Gender effects in decoding nonverbal cues. Psych. Bull. 85(4):845–857.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heilman ME (2012) Gender stereotypes and workplace bias. Res. Organ. Behav. 32:113–135.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hinsz VB, Tindale RS, Vollrath DA (1997) The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processors. Psych. Bull. 121(1):43–64.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoogendoorn S, Oosterbeek H, Van Praag M (2013) The impact of gender diversity on the performance of business teams: Evidence from a field experiment. Management Sci. 59(7):1514–1528.Link, Google Scholar
• Hora SC (2004) Probability judgments for continuous quantities: Linear combinations and calibration. Management Sci. 50(5):597–604.Link, Google Scholar
• Jain K, Mukherjee K, Bearden JN, Gaba A (2013) Unpacking the future: A nudge toward wider subjective confidence intervals. Management Sci. 59(9):1970–1987.Link, Google Scholar
• Janis IL (1982) Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes (Wadsworth, Boston).Google Scholar
• Jehn KA, Northcraft GB, Neale MA (1999) Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict and performance in workgroups. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(4):741–763.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jehn KA, Rispens S, Thatcher SM (2010) The effects of conflict asymmetry on work group and individual outcomes. Acad. Management J. 53(3):596–616.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Joecks J, Pull K, Vetter K (2013) Gender diversity in the boardroom and firm performance: What exactly constitutes a critical mass? J. Bus. Ethics 118(1):61–72.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jonsson AC, Allwood CM (2003) Stability and variability in the realism of confidence judgments over time, content domain, and gender. Personality Individual Differences 34(4):559–574.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jose VRR, Winkler RL (2009) Evaluating quantile assessments. Oper. Res. 57(5):1287–1297.Link, Google Scholar
• Juslin P, Winman A, Olsson H (2000) Naive empiricism and dogmatism in confidence research: A critical examination of the hard-easy effect. Psych. Rev. 107(2):384–396.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kanter RM (1977a) Men and Women of the Corporation (Basic Books, New York).Google Scholar
• Kanter RM (1977b) Some effects of proportions on group life: Skewed sex ratios and responses to token women. Am. J. Sociol. 82(5):965–990.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keck S (2014) Group reactions to dishonesty. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 124(1):1–10.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keefer DL, Bodily SE (1983) Three-point approximations for continuous random variables. Management Sci. 29(5):595–609.Link, Google Scholar
• Kennedy C (2003) Gender differences in committee decision-making: Process and outputs in an experimental setting. J. Women Politics Policy 25(3):27–45.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kennedy JA, Anderson C, Moore DA (2013) When overconfidence is revealed to others: Testing the status-enhancement theory of overconfidence. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 122(2):266–279.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kerr NL, MacCoun RJ, Kramer GP (1996) Bias in judgment: Comparing individuals and groups. Psych. Rev. 103(4):687–719.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klayman J, Soll JB, Gonzalez-Vallejo C, Barlas S (1999) Overconfidence: It depends on how, what, and whom you ask. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 79(3):216–247.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kozlowski SW, Bell BS (2003) Work groups and teams in organizations. Borman WC, Ilgen DR, Klimoski RJ, eds., Handbook of Psychology, Vol. 12: Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Wiley, New York), 333–375.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kozlowski SW, Klein KJ (2000) A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent processes. Klein KJ, Kozlowski SW, eds. Multilevel Theory, Research, and Methods in Organizations (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco), 3–90.Google Scholar
• Krishnan HA, Park D (2005) A few good women—On top management teams. J. Bus. Res. 58(12):1712–1720.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Latané B (1981) The psychology of social impact. Amer. Psychologist 36(4):343–356.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laughlin PR, Ellis AL (1986) Demonstrability and social combination processes on mathematical intellective tasks. J. Exp. Soc. Psych. 22(3):177–189.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laughlin PR, Bonner BL, Miner AG (2002) Groups perform better than the best individuals on letters-to-numbers problems. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 88(2):605–620.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leana CR (1985) A partial test of Janis’ groupthink model: Effects of group cohesiveness and leader behavior on defective decision making. J. Management 11(1):5–18.Google Scholar
• Levine JM, Smith E (2013) Group cognition: Collective information search and distribution. Carlston D, ed. Oxford Handbook of Social Cognition (Oxford University Press, New York), 616–633.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lichtenstein S, Fischhoff B (1977) Do those who know more also know more about how much they know? Organ. Behav. Human Perform. 20(2):159–183.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Maciejovsky B, Budescu DV (2007) Collective induction without cooperation? Learning and knowledge transfer in cooperative groups and competitive auctions. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 92(5):854–870.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Maciejovsky B, Sutter M, Budescu DV, Bernau P (2013) Teams make you smarter: How exposure to teams improves individual decisions in probability and reasoning tasks. Management Sci. 59(6):1255–1270.Link, Google Scholar
• Mannes AE, Soll JB, Larrick RP (2014) The wisdom of select crowds. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 107(2):276–299.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mannix E, Neale MA (2005) What differences make a difference? The promise and reality of diverse teams in organizations. Psych. Sci. Public Interest 6(2):31–55.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mast MS (2001) Gender differences and similarities in dominance hierarchies in same-gender groups based on speaking time. Sex Roles 44(9/10):537–556.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McLeod PL, Baron RS, Marti MW, Yoon K (1997) The eyes have it: Minority influence in face-to-face and computer-mediated group discussion. J. Appl. Psych. 82(5):706–718.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miles SA, Watkins MD (2007) The leadership team. Harvard Bus. Rev. 85(4):90–98.Google Scholar
• Minson JA, Mueller JS (2012) The cost of collaboration: Why joint decision making exacerbates rejection of outside information. Psych. Sci. 23(3):219–224.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moore DA, Healy PJ (2008) The trouble with overconfidence. Psych. Rev. 115(2):502–517.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nemeth CJ (1986) Differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psych. Rev. 93(1):23–32.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Odean T (1998) Volume, volatility, price, and profit when all traders are above average. J. Finance 53(6):1887–1934.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Park S, Budescu DV (2015) Aggregating multiple probability intervals to improve calibration. Judgment Decision Making 10(2):130–143.Google Scholar
• Pearson ES, Tukey JW (1965) Approximate means and standard deviations based on distances between percentage points of frequency curves. Biometrika 52(3–4):533–546.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Phillips KW, Loyd DL (2006) When surface and deep-level diversity collide: The effects on dissenting group members. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 99(2):143–160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Plous S (1995) A comparison of strategies for reducing interval overconfidence in group judgments. J. Appl. Psych. 80(4):443–454.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Post C, Byron K (2015) Women on boards and firm financial performance: A meta-analysis. Acad. Management J. 58(5):1546–1571.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Russo JE, Schoemaker PJ (1992) Managing overconfidence. Sloan Management Rev. 33(2):7–17.Google Scholar
• Schachter S (1959) The Psychology of Affiliation (Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA).Google Scholar
• Shrout PE, Bolger N (2002) Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psych. Methods 7(4):422–445.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith-Lovin L, Brody C (1989) Interruptions in group discussions: The effects of gender and group composition. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 54(3):424–435.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sniezek JA (1990) A comparison of techniques for judgmental forecasting by groups with common information. Group Organ. Management 15(1):5–19.Google Scholar
• Sniezek JA (1992) Groups under uncertainty: An examination of confidence in group decision making. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 52(1):124–155.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sniezek JA, Henry RA (1989) Accuracy and confidence in group judgment. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 43(1):1–28.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Soll JB, Klayman J (2004) Overconfidence in interval estimates. J. Experiment. Psych. Learning Memory Cognition 30(2):299–314.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stasser G (1992) Information salience and the discovery of hidden profiles by decision-making groups: A “thought experiment.” Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 52(1):156–181.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tindale RS, Larson JR (1992) Assembly bonus effect or typical group performance? A comment on Michaelsen, Watson, and Black (1989). J. Appl. Psych. 77(1):102–105.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tost LP, Gino F, Larrick RP (2013) When power makes others speechless: The negative impact of leader power on team performance. Acad. Management J. 56(5):1465–1486.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Triandis HC, Kurowski LL, Gelfand MJ (1994) Workplace diversity. Triandis HC, Dunnette MD, Hough LM, eds. Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 4 (Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA), 769–827.Google Scholar
• Tsai CI, Klayman J, Hastie R (2008) Effects of amount of information on judgment accuracy and confidence. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 107(2):97–105.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Kahneman D (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science 185:1124–1131.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van Dyne L, LePine JA (1998) Helping and voice extra-role behaviors: Evidence of construct and predictive validity. Acad. Management J. 41(1):108–119.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van Knippenberg D, Schippers MC (2007) Work group diversity. Annual Rev. Psych. 58:515–541.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van Knippenberg D, De Dreu CK, Homan AC (2004) Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. J. Appl. Psych. 89(6):1008–1022.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van Vugt M, Iredale W (2013) Men behaving nicely: Public goods as peacock tails. British J. Psych. 104(1):3–13.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wegge J, Roth C, Neubach B, Schmidt KH, Kanfer R (2008) Age and gender diversity as determinants of performance and health in a public organization: The role of task complexity and group size. J. Appl. Psych. 93(6):1301–1313.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Williams M, Polman E (2015) Is it me or her? How gender composition evokes interpersonally sensitive behavior on collaborative cross-boundary projects. Organ. Sci. 26(2):334–355.Link, Google Scholar
• Wolfers J (2006) Diagnosing discrimination: Stock returns and CEO gender. J. Eur. Econom. Assoc. 4(2):531–541.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Woolley AW, Chabris CF, Pentland A, Hashmi N, Malone TW (2010) Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Science 330(6004):686–688.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zaichkowsky JL (2014) Women in the board room: One can make a difference. Internat. J. Bus. Governance Ethics 9(1):91–113.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zarnoth P, Sniezek JA (1997) The social influence of confidence in group decision making. J. Experiment. Social Psych. 33(4):345–366.Crossref, Google Scholar