Models of group problem solving.

Abstract

VIEWS of the research on group problem solving (Kelley & Thibaut, 1954; Lorge, Fox, Davitz, & Brenner, 1958) indicate that sweeping conclusions about the superiority of groups over individuals are not warranted. However, studies in this area show that it may be fruitful to examine the conditions under which groups should be superior to individuals. This paper examines conceptually the requirements of the problem solving task and selected group variables that affect the quality of a group's solution, and suggests three models for group problem solving. Following the presentation of an experiment that tests some of the assumptions of the models and sheds further light on processes affecting the quality of group solutions, the paper terminates with a discussion of other models of group problem solving and of extensions of the models to preference phenomena.Each model specifies theoretical probabilities for the outcome of group problem solving, and the antecedent conditions that should produce the expected outcomes. A significant restriction on the application of the models is that the group's product must be expressed as the distribution of individual answers. Distributions of individual responses as group products are found in legislative votes, committee votes, and in court decisions, although these are not always answers to problems. A less imposing restriction is that the individual answers must be expressed as one of three or more discrete possibilities, such as a correct answer versus two or more incorrect answers; this restriction will be relaxed at a later point in the paper.The independence model states the theoreti-1 This article reports portions of a research project financed by a grant from the Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies of the University of Michigan.2 The authors wish to express their gratitude for the help provided by Rosemary Conzemius in the early phases of this study.

Individual and group choices among solutions of a problem when solution verifiability is moderate or low

“…Our data concerning group process confirm other experimental results showing the influence of the most talkative discussion participant (Riecken, 1958;Thomas and Fink, 1961). However in our opinion, talkativeness is not only a personality characteristic; the amount of talking in defence of a position is related to the confidence of group members in the correctness of the position being defended.…”

A Theory of Collective Induction

“…This formalizes the strong "truth wins" assumption that the group will recognize and adopt the correct answer if it is proposed by at least one individual group menber. Thomas and Fink (1961) extended this special case binomial theorem for two alternatives (correct and incorrect) to the general case multinomial theorem for three or more alternatives. They also tested three assumed social combination processes rather than just "truth wins."…”

A partial replication of ‘models of group problem solving’ by Thomas and Fink

“…

As a classroom demonstration in an introductory social psychology lecture at the University of Bochum in June 1970 the author replicated that part of the study by Thomas and Fink (1961) which compared the solutions of Maier's horse trading problem by groups of three members with solutions offered by individuals.The classroom consisted of two wings with an aisle in between. The left wing with 57 students was randomly assigned to the group condition, and the right wing with 54 students to the individual condition.

…”