Information processing in small group judgment Effects of information distribution, cue validities, feedback, and discussion primacy

2000 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Gigone
Keyword(s):  
Information Processing ◽  
Small Group ◽  
Information Distribution ◽  
Group Judgment

Small-Group Judgment Methods for Determining Resource-Based Relative Values

Medical Care ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. NS28-NS39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucian L. Leape ◽  
Mary Ann Freshour ◽  
Douwe Yntema ◽  
William Hsiao
Keyword(s):  
Small Group ◽  
Group Judgment

scholarly journals Distributed cognition in teams is influenced by type of task and nature of member interactions

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott Tindale ◽  
Jeremy R. Winget ◽  
Verlin Hinsz
Keyword(s):  
Information Processing ◽  
Distributed Cognition ◽  
Distribution Patterns ◽  
Information Distribution ◽  
Research Focus ◽  
Team Members ◽  
Impact Performance ◽  
The Past ◽  
Task Differences ◽  
Processing Effects

In contemporary organizations, many—if not most—teams work on cognitive or information processing tasks (Hinsz, Tindale, & Vollrath, 1997). The past 50 years of research have taught us much about how information is accessed, created, attended to, and processed as teams attempt to complete various tasks. However, many of the information processing effects that have been observed are task specific, yet little research has focused specifically on tasks and how their information processing requirements differ. In this chapter, we discuss how task differences can impact how teams use and process information and how different information distribution patterns across members might impact performance. In addition, we address how constraints on the amount and type of interactions among the team members influences performance in different task domains. We hope our discussion demonstrates the importance of task differences for understanding team information processing and highlights where greater research focus will be fruitful.

Language processing is not a race against time

2016 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giosuè Baggio ◽  
Carmelo M. Vicario
Keyword(s):  
Information Processing ◽  
Human Brain ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Cognitive Functions ◽  
Memory Systems ◽  
Language System ◽  
Moderating Factors

AbstractWe agree with Christiansen & Chater (C&C) that language processing and acquisition are tightly constrained by the limits of sensory and memory systems. However, the human brain supports a range of cognitive functions that mitigate the effects of information processing bottlenecks. The language system is partly organised around these moderating factors, not just around restrictions on storage and computation.

Attachment and Field Dependence: Individual Differences in Information Processing

2004 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrizia Vermigli ◽  
Alessandro Toni
Keyword(s):  
Information Processing ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Field Dependence ◽  
Attachment Styles ◽  
Close Relationships ◽  
Adult Age ◽  
Males And Females ◽  
Figure Test ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Measure Field

The present research analyzes the relationship between attachment styles at an adult age and field dependence in order to identify possible individual differences in information processing. The “Experience in Close Relationships” test of Brennan et al. was administered to a sample of 380 individuals (160 males, 220 females), while a subsample of 122 subjects was given the Embedded Figure Test to measure field dependence. Confirming the starting hypothesis, the results have shown that individuals with different attachment styles have a different way of perceiving the figure against the background. Ambivalent and avoidant individuals lie at the two extremes of the same dimension while secure individuals occupy the central part. Significant differences also emerged between males and females.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document