CAJ | 학술논문

一般认为，决策群体的优势是能综合各个成员拥有的不完整信息，形成对所有决策备择方案的无偏差的认识，从而作出最佳选择。但“群体讨论中的有偏差信息取样模型”认为，群体在决策中往往表现出倾向于讨论两种信息：（1）各成员讨论前都拥有的信息；（2）支持成员在讨论前所偏好的信息。该实验通过模拟人员选拔决策形式的实验室实验，对这一模型的假设进行验证。研究结果表明，大多数群体选择了一开始受到大多数成员支持的候选人，而非实际的最佳人选；群体讨论非但未纠正，反而加强了成员对候选人原有的歪曲印象。
일반인위，결책군체적우세시능종합각개성원옹유적불완정신식，형성대소유결책비택방안적무편차적인식，종이작출최가선택。단“군체토론중적유편차신식취양모형”인위，군체재결책중왕왕표현출경향우토론량충신식：（1）각성원토론전도옹유적신식；（2）지지성원재토론전소편호적신식。해실험통과모의인원선발결책형식적실험실실험，대저일모형적가설진행험증。연구결과표명，대다수군체선택료일개시수도대다수성원지지적후선인，이비실제적최가인선；군체토론비단미규정，반이가강료성원대후선인원유적왜곡인상。
It is commonly known that the benefit of decision-making group could pool members’ partial information. The groups could compose an unbiased recognition of the decision alternatives and then make the best decision. However, the biased sampling model of group discussion suggested that group members often fail to effectively pool their information because of two kinds of tendencies: (1) Information that members held in common before discussion and (2) information that supported members’existing preferences. This study tested the above hypotheses of the model by a simulation in laboratory experiments of selection of candidates for student body president and then met in 4-person groups to decide which candidate was best suited for the position. 180 Zhejiang University undergraduates participated in these experiments under 3 conditions. Assignment to experimental condition and to decision-making groups within conditions was random. There were 60 subjects of 15 groups in each of the shared, unshared／consensus and unshared／conflict conditions. Their preference and information about each candidate they could remember in pre-and post-discussion were measured on questionnaires, which were compared by several methods. The results showed: most of the groups decided in favor of the candidate initially preferred by most of the members rather than the most favorable candidates. The data of group members’ pre-and post-discussion recall of candidate attributes indicated that discussion tended to perpetuate, not to correct members’ distorted pictures of the candidates. The results confirmed the hypotheses of the biased sampling model of group discussion proposed by Stasser and Larson. In order to improve the efficiency of pooling information in group decision-making, some measures, such as giving group decision training in advance, were also suggested by this study.