Too Much Trust in Group Decisions: Uncovering Hidden Profiles by Groups and Markets

References

• Adamowicz W, Hanemann M, Swait J, Johnson R, Layton D, Regenwetter M, Reimer T, Sorkin R (2005) Decision strategy and structure in households: A “groups” perspective. Marketing Lett. 16:387–399.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adler PS (2001) Market, hierarchy, and trust: The knowledge economy and the future of capitalism. Organ. Sci. 12(2):215–234.Link, Google Scholar
• Arrow KJ, Forsythe R, Gorham M, Hahn R, Hanson R, Ledyard JO, Levmore S, et al.. (2008) The promise of prediction markets. Science 320(5878):877–878.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Atanasov P, Rescober P, Stone R, Swift SA, Servan-Schreiber E, Tetlock P, Ungar L, Mellers B (2017) Distilling the wisdom of crowds: Prediction markets vs. prediction polls. Management Sci. 63(3):691–706.Link, Google Scholar
• Ba S, Pavlou PA (2002) Evidence of the effect of trust building technology in electronic markets: Price premiums and buyer behavior. MIS Quart. 26(3):243–268.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berg JE, Rietz TA (2014) Market design, manipulation, and accuracy in political prediction markets: Lessons from the Iowa Electronic Markets. PS Political Sci. Politics 47(2):293–296.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bonaccio S, Dalal RS (2006) Advice taking and decision-making: An integrative literature review, and implications for the organizational sciences. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 101(2):127–151.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brodbeck FC, Kerschreiter R, Mojzisch A, Frey D, Schulz-Hardt S (2002) The dissemination of critical, unshared information in decision-making groups: The effects of pre-discussion dissent. Eur. J. Soc. Psych. 32(1):35–56.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Broughton PD (2013) Prediction markets: Value among the crowd. Financial Times (April 24), https://www.ft.com/content/f03fc956-9586-11e2-a151-00144feabdc0.Google Scholar
• Budescu DV, Maciejovsky B (2005) The effect of payoff feedback and information pooling on reasoning errors: Evidence from experimental markets. Management Sci. 51(12):1829–1843.Link, Google Scholar
• Cain DM, Loewenstein G, Moore DA (2005) The dirt on coming clean: Perverse effects of disclosing conflicts of interest. J. Legal Stud. 34(1):1–25.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cain DM, Loewenstein G, Moore DA (2011) When sunlight fails to disinfect: Understanding the perverse effects of disclosing conflicts of interest. J. Consumer Res. 37(5):836–857.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Camerer CF (1998) Can asset markets be manipulated? A field experiment with racetrack betting. J. Political Econom. 106(3):457–482.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Camerer CF, Dreber A, Holzmeister F, Ho T-H, Huber J, Johannesson M, Kirchler M, et al.. (2018) Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015. Nature Human Behav. 2:637–644.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen K-Y, Plott CR (2002) Information aggregation mechanisms: Concept, design and implementation for a sales forecasting problem. Working paper, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
• Christensen M, Knudsen T (2010) Design of decision-making organizations. Management Sci. 56(1):71–89.Link, Google Scholar
• Cooper DJ, Kagel JH (2005) Are two heads better than one? Team vs. individual play in signaling games. Amer. Econom. Rev. 95(3):477–509.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cowgill B, Zitzewitz E (2015) Corporate prediction markets: Evidence from Google, Ford, and Firm X. Rev. Econom. Stud. 82(4):1309–1341.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cramton CD (2001) The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration. Organ. Sci. 12(3):346–371.Link, Google Scholar
• Croxson K (2011) Information markets for decision-making. Williams LV, ed. Prediction Markets: Theory and Applications (Routledge, London), 52–74.Google Scholar
• Csaszar F (2012) Organizational structure as a determinant of performance: Evidence from mutual funds. Strategic Management J. 33(6):611–632.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Csaszar F, Eggers JP (2013) Organizational decision-making: An information aggregation view. Management Sci. 59(10):2257–2277.Link, Google Scholar
• Dahan E, Kim AJ, Lo AW, Poggio T, Chan N (2011) Securities trading of concepts (STOC). J. Marketing Res. 48(3):497–517.Crossref, Google Scholar
• de Melo CS, Carnevale PJ, Gratch J (2013) People’s biased decisions to trust and cooperate with agents that express emotions. Presentation, Trust Workshop at the Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS) Conference, May 6–10.Google Scholar
• De Wit FRC, Jehn KA, Scheepers D (2013) Task conflict, information processing, and decision-making: The damaging effect of relationship conflict. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 122(2):177–189.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Deck C, Lin S, Porter D (2013) Affecting policy by manipulating prediction markets: Experimental evidence. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 85:48–62.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dennis AR, George JF, Jessup LM, Nunamaker JF, Vogel DR (1988) Information technology to support electronic meetings. MIS Quart. 12(4):591–624.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DeSanctis G, Gallupe RB (1987) A foundation for the study of group decision support systems. Management Sci. 33(5):589–609.Link, Google Scholar
• Dietvorst B, Simmons J, Massey C (2015) Algorithm aversion: People erroneously avoid algorithms after seeing them err. J. Experiment. Psych. General 144(1):114–126.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Economist, The (2012) Don’t bet on it: Intrade retreats from American regulators. The Economist (December 1), https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2012/12/01/dont-bet-on-it.Google Scholar
• Fischbacher U (2007) Z-tree. Zurich toolbox for readymade economic experiments. Experiment. Econom. 10:171–178.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Garicano L (2000) Hierarchies and the organization of knowledge in production. J. Political Econom. 108(5):876–904.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gavetti G, Greve HR, Levinthal DA, Ocasio W (2012) The behavioral theory of the firm: Assessments and prospects. Acad. Management Ann. 6(1):1–40.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gefen D, Straub DW (2004) Consumer trust in B2C e-commerce and the importance of social presence: Experiments in e-products and e-services. Omega 32(6):407–424.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gigone D, Hastie R (1997) Proper analysis of the accuracy of group judgments. Psych. Bull. 121(1):149–167.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gillen B, Plott CR, Shum M (2017) A Pari-mutuel-like mechanism for information aggregation: A field test inside Intel. J. Political Econom., ePub ahead of print June 23, https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/692714.Google Scholar
• Goel S, Reeves DM, Watts DJ, Pennock DM (2010) Prediction without markets. Proc. 11th ACM Conf. Electronic Commerce (ACM, New York), 357–366.Google Scholar
• Good Judgment Project (2015) Exploring the optimal forecasting frontier: How much room is there to improve subjective forecasting accuracy. Report, IARPA, Bethesda, MD.Google Scholar
• Greitemeyer T, Schulz-Hardt S (2003) Preference-consistent evaluation of information in the hidden-profile paradigm: Beyond group-level explanations of shared information in group decisions. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 84(2):322–339.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hankins R, Lee A (2011) Crowd Sourcing and Prediction Markets (ACM, New York).Google Scholar
• Hanson R, Oprea R (2009) A manipulator can aid prediction market accuracy. Economica 76(302):304–314.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hanson R, Oprea R, Porter D (2006) Information aggregation and manipulation in an experimental market. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 60(4):449–459.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Healy PJ, Linardi S, Lowery JR, Ledyard JO (2010) Prediction markets: Alternative mechanism for complex environments with few traders. Management Sci. 56(11):1977–1996.Link, Google Scholar
• Heinrich J, Boyd R, Bowles S, Camerer C, Fehr E, Gintis H, McElreath R, et al.. (2005) “Economic man” in cross-cultural perspective: Behavioral experiments in 15 small-scale societies. Behav. Brain Sci. 28(6):795–815.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hinsz VB (1990) Cognitive and consensus processes in group recognition memory performance. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 59(4):705–718.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hollingshead AB, Wittenbaum GW, Jacobsohn GC, Fraidin SN (2005) Competitive members in cooperative groups. Working paper, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
• Jiang G, Mahoney PG, Mei J (2005) Market manipulation: A comprehensive study of stock pools. J. Financial Econom. 77(1):147–170.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karau SJ, Kelly JR (1992) The effects of time scarcity and time abundance on group performance quality and interaction process. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 28(6):542–571.Google Scholar
• Kaufmann E, Budescu DV (2020) Do teachers consider advice? On the acceptance of computerized expert models. J. Ed. Measurement 57:311–342.Google Scholar
• Kerr NL, Tindale RS (2004) Small group decision making and performance. Annual Rev. Psych. 55:623–656.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kerr NL, Tindale RS (2011) Group-based forecasting? A social psychological analysis. Internat. J. Forecasting 27(1):14–40.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Knudsen T, Marchiori D, Warglien M (2018) Hierarchical decision-making produces persistent differences in learning performance. Sci. Rep. 8(1):15782.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kogut B, Zander U (1992) Knowledge of the firm, combative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organ. Sci. 3(3):383–397.Link, Google Scholar
• Koriat A (2012) When are two heads better than one and why? Sci. 336(6079):360–362.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kruglanski AW, Webster DM (1996) Motivated closing of the mind: “Seizing” and “freezing.” Psych. Rev. 103(2):263–283.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lam SSK, Schaubroeck J (2000) Improving group decisions by better pooling information: A comparative advantage of group decision support systems. J. Appl. Psych. 85(4):565–573.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Larrick RP, Soll JB (2006) Intuitions about combining opinions: Misappreciation of the averaging principle. Management Sci. 52(1):111–127.Link, Google Scholar
• Laughlin PR (1999) Collective induction: Twelve postulates. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 80(1):50–69.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laughlin PR (2011) Group Problem Solving (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Laughlin PR, Hatch EC, Silver JS, Boh L (2006) Groups perform better than the best individuals on letters-to-numbers problems: Effects of group size. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 90(4):644–651.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laughlin PR, Zander ML, Knievel EM, Tan TS (2003) Groups perform better than the best individuals on letters-to-numbers problems: Informative equations and effective reasoning. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 85(4):684–694.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levine SS, Apfelbaum EP, Bernard M, Bartelt VL, Zajac EJ, Stark D (2014) Ethnic diversity deflates price bubbles. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 111(52):18524–18529.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lewis K, Lange D, Gillis L (2005) Transactive memory systems, learning, and learning transfer. Organ. Sci. 16(6):581–598.Link, Google Scholar
• Lightle JP, Kagel JH, Arkes HR (2009) Information exchange in group decision making: The hidden profile problem reconsidered. Management Sci. 55(4):568–581.Link, Google Scholar
• Loewenstein G, Cain DM, Sah S (2011) The limits of transparency: Pitfalls and potential of disclosing conflicts of interest. Amer. Econom. Rev. 101(3):423–428.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lorenz J, Rauhut H, Schweitzer F, Helbig D (2011) How social influence can undermine the wisdom of the crowd effect. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 108(22):9020–9025.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lu L, Yuan YC, McLeod PL (2012) Twenty-five years of hidden profiles in group decision making. Personality Soc. Psych. Rev. 16(1):54–75.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Maciejovsky B, Budescu DV (2007) Collective induction without cooperation? Learning and knowledge transfers in cooperative groups and competitive auctions. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 92(5):854–870.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Maciejovsky B, Budescu DV (2013) Markets as a structural solution to knowledge-sharing dilemmas. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 120(2):154–167.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Maciejovsky B, Sutter M, Budescu DV, Bernau P (2013) Teams make you smarter: Learning and knowledge transfer in auctions and markets by individuals and teams. Management Sci. 59(6):1255–1270.Link, Google Scholar
• Mantzavinos C, North DC, Shariq S (2004) Learning, institutions, and economic performance. Perspect. Politics 2(1):75–94.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mayer RC, Davis JH, Schoorman FD (1995) An integrative model of organizational trust. Acad. Management Rev. 20(3):709–734.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McCue K (1996) Promotions and wage growth. J. Labor Econom. 14(2):175–209.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McKinsey (2011) How companies are benefiting from Web 2.0. McKinsey Quart. (September 1), http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/digital-mckinsey/our-insights/how-companies-are-benefiting-from-web-20-mckinsey-global-survey-results.Google Scholar
• McLeod PL (1992) An assessment of the experimental literature on electronic support of group work: Results of a meta-analysis. Human–Comput. Interaction 7(3):257–280.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McLeod PL, Baron RS, Weighner M, Yoon K (1997) The eyes have it: Minority influence in face-to-face and computer-mediated group discussion. J. Appl. Psych. 82(5):706–781.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Medoff J, Abraham K (1980) Experience, performance, and earnings. Quart. J. Econom. 95(4):(703–736.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Medoff J, Abraham K (1981) Are those paid more really more productive? The case of experience. J. Human Resources 16(2):186–216.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mellers B, Ungar L, Baron J, Ramos J, Gurcay B, Fincher K, Tetlock PE (2014) Psychological strategies for winning a geopolitical forecasting tournament. Psych. Sci. 25(5):1106–1115.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mitusch K (2006) Non-commitment in performance evaluation and the problem of information distortions. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 60(4):507–525.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Morgan PM, Tindale RS (2002) Group vs. individual performance in mixed-motive situations: Exploring an inconsistency. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 87(1):44–65.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Morgeson FP, DeRue DS, Karam EP (2010) Leadership in teams: A functional approach to understanding leadership structures and processes. J. Management 36(1):5–39.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Navajas J, Niella T, Garbulsky G, Bahrami B, Sigman M (2018) Aggregated knowledge from a small number of debates outperforms the wisdom of large crowds. Nature Human Behav. 2:126–132.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nijstad BA, Paulus PB (2003) Group creativity: Common themes and future directions. Paulus PB, Nijstad BA, eds. Group Creativity: Innovation Through Collaboration (Oxford University Press, New York), 326–339.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Othman A, Sandholm T (2010) When do markets with simple agents fail? van der Hoek W, Kaminka GA, Lesperance G, Luck M, and Sen S, eds. Proc. 9th Internat. Conf. Autonomous Agents Multi-Agent Systems (ACM, New York), 865–872.Google Scholar
• Pearsall MJ, Venkataramani V (2015) Overcoming asymmetric goals in teams: The interactive role of team learning orientation and team identification. J. Appl. Psychol. 100(3):735–748.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Plott CR, Sunder S (1982) Efficiency of experimental security markets with insider information: An application of rational expectations models. J. Political Econom. 90(4):663–698.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Plott CR, Sunder S (1988) Rational expectations and the aggregation of diverse information in laboratory security markets. Econometrica 56(5):1085–1118.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Polgreen PM, Nelson FD, Neumann GR, Weinstein RA (2007) Use of prediction markets to forecast infectious disease activity. Clinical Infectious Diseases 44(2):272–279.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Puranam P, Maciejovsky B (2017) Organizational structure and organizational learning. Argote L, Levine JM, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Group and Organizational Learning (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK), 521–534.Google Scholar
• Puranam P, Alexy O, Reitzig M (2014) What’s “new” about new forms of organizing? Acad. Management Rev. 39(2):162–180.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Puranam P, Raveendran M, Knudsen T (2012) Organizational design: The epististemic interdependence perspective. Acad. Management Rev. 37(3):419–440.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rothschild DM (2009) Forecasting elections comparing prediction markets, polls, and their biases. Public Opinion Quart. 73(5):895–916.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rothschild DM, Sethi R (2016) Trading strategies and market microstructure: Evidence from a prediction market. J. Prediction Markets 10:1–29.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sah S, Loewenstein G (2015) Conflicted advice and second opinions: Benefits, but unintended consequences. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 130:89–107.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Salas E, Cooke NJ, Rosen MA (2008) On teams, teamwork, and team performance: Discoveries and developments. Human Factors 50(3):540–547.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Salas E, Stagl KC, Burke CS, Goodwin GF (2007) Fostering team effectiveness in organizations: Toward an integrative theoretical framework of team performance. Dienstbier RA, Shuart JW, Spaulding W, Poland J, eds. Modeling Complex Systems: Motivation, Cognition and Social Processes, Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, vol. 51 (University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln), 185–243.Google Scholar
• Schilling MA, Fang C (2014) When hubs forget, lie, and play favorites: Interpersonal network structure, information distortion, and organizational learning. Strategic Management J. 35(7):974–994.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sethi R, Vaughan J (2016) Belief aggregation with automated market makers. Comput. Econom. 48:155–178.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shore J, Bernstein E, Lazer D (2015) Facts and figuring: An experimental investigation of network structure and performance in information and solution spaces. Organ. Sci. 26(5):1236–1551.Link, Google Scholar
• Stasser G, Titus W (1985) Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 53:81–93.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stasser G, Titus W (1987) Effects of information load and percentage of shared information on the dissemination of unshared information during group discussion. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 53(1):81–93.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Steiner ID (1972) Group Processes and Productivity (Academic Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Sutton RI, Hargadon A (1996) Brainstorming groups in context: Effectiveness in a product design firm. Admin. Sci. Quart. 41(4):685–718.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tan CW, Benbasat I, Cenfetelli RT (2008) Building citizen trust toward e-government services: Do high quality websites matter? Proc. 41st Hawaii Internat. Conf. System Sci. (HICSS 2008) (IEEE, Washington, DC).Google Scholar
• Thompson JD (1967) Organizations in Action (McGraw-Hill, New York, NY).Google Scholar
• Thompson LL, Wang J, Gunia BC (2010) Negotiation. Annual Rev. Psych. 61(1):491–515.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tindale RS (1989) Group vs. individual information processing: The effects of outcome feedback on decision making. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 44(3):454–473.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tindale RS, Kluwe K (2015) Decision making in groups and organizations. Keren G, Wu G, eds. The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making (John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK), 849–874.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tindale RS, Smith CM, Thomas LS, Filkins J, Sheffey S (1996) Shared representations and asymmetric social influence processes in small groups. Witte E, David JH, eds. Understanding Group Behavior: Consensual Action by Small Groups (Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ), 1–81.Google Scholar
• Toma C, Butera F (2009) Hidden profiles and concealed information: Strategic information sharing and use in group decision making. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 35(6):793–806.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tsai M-H, Bendersky C (2016) The pursuit of information sharing: Expressing task conflicts as debates vs. disagreements increases perceived receptivity to dissenting opinions in groups. Organ. Sci. 27(1):141–156.Link, Google Scholar
• Tushman ML, Nadler DA (1978) Information processing as an integrating concept in organizational design. Acad. Management Rev. 3(3):613–624.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Valacich JS, Jessup LM, Dennis AR, Nunamaker JF (1992) A conceptual framework of anonymity in group support systems. Group Decision Negotiation 1:219–241.Crossref, Google Scholar
• van Knippenberg D, Kooij-de Bode HJM, van Ginkel WP (2010) The interactive effects of mood and trait negative affect in group decision making. Organ. Sci. 21(3):731–744.Link, Google Scholar
• Veiga H, Vorsatz M (2009) Price manipulation in an experimental asset market. Eur. Econom. Rev. 53(3):327–342.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Veiga H, Vorsatz M (2010) Information aggregation in experimental asset markets in the presence of a manipulator. Experiment. Econom. 13:379–398.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wason PC (1966) Reasoning. Foss B, ed. New Horizons in Psychology (Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, UK), 135–151.Google Scholar
• Wellins RS, Byham WC, Dixon GR (1994) Inside Teams: How 20 World-Class Organizations Are Winning Through Teamwork (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco).Google Scholar
• Wittenbaum GM, Stasser G (1996) Management of information in small groups. Nye JL, ed. What’s Social About Social Cognition (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA), 967–978.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wittenbaum GM, Hollingshead AB, Botero IC (2004) From cooperative to motivated information sharing in groups: Moving beyond the hidden profile paradigm. Comm. Monographs 71(3):286–310.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wittenbaum GM, Hubbell AP, Zuckerman C (1999) Mutual enhancement: Toward and understanding of the collective preference for shared information. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 77(5):967–978.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wolfers J, Zitzewitz E (2004) Prediction markets. J. Econom. Perspect. 18(2):107–126.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Woolley AW, Aggarwal I, Malone TW (2015) Collective intelligence and group performance. Current Directions Psych. Sci. 24(6):420–424.Crossref, Google Scholar