Micro-Finance Crises: Effects of Economic and Psychological Threats on Group Processes

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anjana Dube ◽  
Rajalaxmi Kamath
Keyword(s):  
Group Processes ◽  
Psychological Threats

Promoting Forgiveness: Specific Interventions, Group Processes, and Client Characteristics

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathaniel G. Wade ◽  
Marilyn A. Cornish ◽  
Brian C. Post ◽  
Jeritt R. Tucker
Keyword(s):  
Group Processes ◽  
Client Characteristics

Design and Group Creativity

2019 ◽  
pp. 305-318
Author(s):  
Arthur B. Markman ◽  
Jonathan Cagan
Keyword(s):  
Practical Reason ◽  
Group Processes ◽  
Theoretical Studies ◽  
Design Development ◽  
Group Creativity ◽  
Mental Processes ◽  
Creative Solutions ◽  
End Products ◽  
Computer Based ◽  
Do So

Design communities in engineering and other disciplines have a practical reason for caring about group creativity. People employed in these areas have to generate creative solutions routinely, and they often must do so in a group. As a result, research in these areas has focused on processes to improve group creativity. This chapter explores techniques for generating problem statements and solutions in groups that have emerged from this literature. It also examines computer-based methods of problem solving that groups can use to enhance the ideas that arise from these group processes. This work has expanded the range of elements explored in studies of group creativity. Although theoretical studies of creativity can be useful in uncovering underlying mental processes, design development requires useful end products. The focus of this research on techniques that enhance creativity in design provides an opportunity to link this literature with the broader literature on individual and group creativity.

scholarly journals COVID-19 conspiracy theories

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 270-275 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen M. Douglas
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Intergroup Relations ◽  
Group Processes ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Conspiracy Theories ◽  
Open Questions ◽  
Potential Impact

Conspiracy theories started to appear on social media immediately after the first news about COVID-19. Is the virus a hoax? Is it a bioweapon designed in a Chinese laboratory? These conspiracy theories typically have an intergroup flavour, blaming one group for having some involvement in either manufacturing the virus or controlling public opinion about it. In this article, I will discuss why people are attracted to conspiracy theories in general, and why conspiracy theories seem to have flourished during the pandemic. I will discuss what the consequences of these conspiracy theories are for individuals, groups, and societies. I will then discuss some potential strategies for addressing the negative consequences of conspiracy theories. Finally, I will consider some open questions for research regarding COVID-19 conspiracy theories, in particular focusing on the potential impact of these conspiracy theories for group processes and intergroup relations.

scholarly journals Group decisions based on confidence weighted majority voting

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sascha Meyen ◽  
Dorothee M. B. Sigg ◽  
Ulrike von Luxburg ◽  
Volker H. Franz
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Modeling ◽  
Group Discussion ◽  
Group Processes ◽  
Majority Voting ◽  
Group Decisions ◽  
Optimal Method ◽  
Weighted Majority ◽  
Real Group ◽  
Lower Accuracy ◽  
Weighted Majority Voting

Abstract Background It has repeatedly been reported that, when making decisions under uncertainty, groups outperform individuals. Real groups are often replaced by simulated groups: Instead of performing an actual group discussion, individual responses are aggregated by a numerical computation. While studies have typically used unweighted majority voting (MV) for this aggregation, the theoretically optimal method is confidence weighted majority voting (CWMV)—if independent and accurate confidence ratings from the individual group members are available. To determine which simulations (MV vs. CWMV) reflect real group processes better, we applied formal cognitive modeling and compared simulated group responses to real group responses. Results Simulated group decisions based on CWMV matched the accuracy of real group decisions, while simulated group decisions based on MV showed lower accuracy. CWMV predicted the confidence that groups put into their group decisions well. However, real groups treated individual votes to some extent more equally weighted than suggested by CWMV. Additionally, real groups tend to put lower confidence into their decisions compared to CWMV simulations. Conclusion Our results highlight the importance of taking individual confidences into account when simulating group decisions: We found that real groups can aggregate individual confidences in a way that matches statistical aggregations given by CWMV to some extent. This implies that research using simulated group decisions should use CWMV instead of MV as a benchmark to compare real groups to.

Group Processes: Dynamics Within and Between Groups.

1990 ◽  
Vol 19 (5) ◽  
pp. 754 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barry Markovsky ◽  
Rupert Brown
Keyword(s):  
Group Processes
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document