Components of group risk taking☆
References (13)
- et al.
The roles of information, discussion, and consensus in group risk taking
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
(1965) - et al.
Group decision making under risk of aversive consequences
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
(1965) Individual and group decisions in gambling situations
- et al.
- et al.
Risk taking as a function of the situation, the person, and the group
Cited by (108)
Risk of Avalanche Involvement in Winter Backcountry Recreation: The Advantage of Small Groups
2016, Wilderness and Environmental MedicineCitation Excerpt :Group decision-making is a highly complex topic and there is no empirical evidence whether groups make better decisions than individuals or if group decision-making pitfalls prevail.28-31 Communication research has shown that communication quality decreases when group size increases, and some research found evidence for an increasing risky shift effect with increasing group size.32-36 However, a better understanding of behavior and processes within recreational groups traveling in avalanche terrain is necessary to determine which risk factors are common in larger groups.
How individual preferences are aggregated in groups: An experimental study
2015, Journal of Public EconomicsCorporate governance and risk-taking of Chinese firms: The role of board size
2015, International Review of Economics and FinanceCitation Excerpt :Third, cultural differences should play a role in the risky choice of Chinese corporate boards. Social psychology research shows that the group decision may become more cautious (or risky) than the mean of individual decisions of the members if the group values being relatively cautious (or risky), since the members tend to conform to the social norm (Brown, 1965; Stoner, 1968), and the shift is related to the group size and whether the group is composed homogenously or heterogeneously (Teger & Pruitt, 1967; Watson & Kumar, 1992). According to Hofstede's (1985) and Hofstede, Hofstede, and Minkov (2010) national culture value survey, China values collectivism even more than Japan, in sharp contrast to the US's valuing individualism.
Who acts more like a game theorist? Group and individual play in a sequential market game and the effect of the time horizon
2013, Games and Economic BehaviorRisk and Social Work
2023, Risk and Social WorkDisaster in the Boardroom: Six Dysfunctions Everyone Should Understand
2022, Disaster in the Boardroom: Six Dysfunctions Everyone Should Understand
- ☆
This research was performed at the University of Delaware and was supported by Contract Nonr-2285(02) from the Office of Naval Research. This report is based, in large part, on a master's thesis by the same title submitted by the first author to the University of Delaware in June 1966. The authors wish to thank Dr. John McLaughlin and Dr. George Hauty for their many helpful suggestions and Miss Bette Anne Lanning for her assistance in the statistical analyses.