The debiasing effect of counterfactual mind-sets: Increasing the search for disconfirmatory information in group decisions

We hypothesized that the activation of a counterfactual mind-set minimizes decision errors resulting from the failure of groups to seek disconfirming information to test an initial hypothesis. To test this hypothesis, we conducted two experiments examining the decision making processes of groups. The task for both experiments was modeled after the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster, and groups had to actively seek disconfirmatory information to make a correct decision. Prior to beginning the group decision making task, groups were exposed to one of two pre-task scenarios in which the salience of counterfactual thoughts was manipulated. In Experiment 1, groups in the counterfactual prime condition were significantly more likely to make the correct decision than groups in the non-counterfactual prime condition. In Experiment 2, we replicated the effect of counterfactual primes on decision accuracy and demonstrated that groups in the counterfactual prime condition were more likely to seek disconfirmatory information than groups in the non-counterfactual prime condition. We also conducted mediation analyses that clarify the decision making process. Implications for group decision making are discussed.

[1]  J. R. Larson,et al.  Information Pooling: When It Impacts Group Decision Making , 1998 .

[2]  Charles R. Schwenk,et al.  Devil's Advocacy and Dialectical Inquiry Effects on Face-to-Face and Computer-Mediated Group Decision Making , 1995 .

[3]  T. Gilovich,et al.  The experience of regret: what, when, and why. , 1995, Psychological review.

[4]  A. Tversky,et al.  The simulation heuristic , 1982 .

[5]  H. Heckhausen,et al.  Deliberative and implemental mind-sets: Cognitive tuning toward congruous thoughts and information , 1990 .

[6]  Dale T. Miller,et al.  Counterfactual Thinking and Victim Compensation , 1986 .

[7]  Keith D. Markman,et al.  Multiple explanation: A consider-an-alternative strategy for debiasing judgments. , 1995 .

[8]  P. Devine Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components. , 1989 .

[9]  Dale T. Miller,et al.  Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives , 1986 .

[10]  S. Mohammed,et al.  Team Mental Model: Construct or Metaphor? , 1994 .

[11]  Leila T. Worth,et al.  Processing deficits and the mediation of positive affect in persuasion. , 1989, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[12]  S. Moscovici,et al.  Biased information search in group decision making. , 2000, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

[13]  A. Tversky,et al.  On the psychology of prediction , 1973 .

[14]  A. Galinsky,et al.  Counterfactuals as Self-Generated Primes: The Effect of Prior Counterfactual Activation on Person Perception Judgments , 2000 .

[15]  Adam D. Galinsky,et al.  From thinking about what might have been to sharing what we know: The effects of counterfactual mind-sets on information sharing in groups , 2004 .

[16]  N. Roese,et al.  Counterfactual Thinking: The Intersection of Affect and Function , 1997 .

[17]  Elizabeth C. Hirschman,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[18]  N. Roese,et al.  What Might Have Been: The Social Psychology of Counterfactual Thinking , 1995 .

[19]  Arvin W. Hahn REPORT TO THE PRESIDENT , 1964 .

[20]  G. Stasser,et al.  Discovery of hidden profiles by decision-making groups: Solving a problem versus making a judgment. , 1992 .

[21]  B. Fischhoff,et al.  Calibration of probabilities: the state of the art to 1980 , 1982 .

[22]  C. Nemeth Differential contributions of majority and minority influence , 1986 .

[23]  Joseph P. Forgas,et al.  Emotion and Social Judgments , 2020 .

[24]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[25]  J. R. Larson,et al.  Discussion of shared and unshared information in decision-making groups , 1994 .

[26]  M. Lepper,et al.  Considering the opposite: a corrective strategy for social judgment. , 1984, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[27]  J. Bargh,et al.  Automatic information processing and social perception: The influence of trait information presented outside of conscious awareness on impression formation. , 1982 .

[28]  Garold Stasser,et al.  The sampling of critical, unshared information in decision-making groups: the role of an informed minority , 1998 .

[29]  P. Tetlock The Impact of Accountability on Judgment and Choice: Toward A Social Contingency Model , 1992 .

[30]  R. A. Cosier The effects of three potential aids for making strategic decisions on prediction accuracy , 1978 .

[31]  Adam D. Galinsky,et al.  Counterfactuals as behavioral primes: Priming the simulation heuristic and consideration of alternatives. , 2000 .

[32]  Yaacov Trope,et al.  Social hypothesis testing: Cognitive and motivational mechanisms. , 1996 .

[33]  G. Stasser,et al.  Pooling of Unshared Information in Group Decision Making: Biased Information Sampling During Discussion , 1985 .

[34]  Steven J. Sherman,et al.  Dysfunctional implications of counterfactual thinking: When alternatives to reality fail us. , 1995 .

[35]  P. Tetlock,et al.  Accountability: a social magnifier of the dilution effect. , 1989, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[36]  J. Greenberg,et al.  Toward an integration of cognitive and motivational perspectives on social inference: A biased hypothesis-testing model , 1987 .

[37]  Victoria Husted Medvec,et al.  When doing better means feeling worse: The effects of categorical cutoff points on counterfactual thinking and satisfaction. , 1997 .

[38]  N. Roese The Functional Basis of Counterfactual Thinking , 1994 .

[39]  P. Tetlock,et al.  Social and cognitive strategies for coping with accountability: conformity, complexity, and bolstering. , 1989, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[40]  Michael W. Morris,et al.  The Lessons We (Don't) Learn: Counterfactual Thinking and Organizational Accountability after a Close Call , 2000 .

[41]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[42]  W. Swann,et al.  Hypothesis-Testing Processes in Social Interaction , 1978 .

[43]  E. Higgins,et al.  Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles. , 1996 .

[44]  Shelly Chaiken,et al.  Getting at the truth or getting along: Accuracy- versus impression-motivated heuristic and systematic processing. , 1996 .

[45]  Adam D. Galinsky,et al.  The Dissatisfaction of Having Your First Offer Accepted: The Role of Counterfactual Thinking in Negotiations , 2002 .

[46]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Propensities and counterfactuals: The loser that almost won , 1990 .

[47]  James M. Olson,et al.  Counterfactuals, Causal Attributions, and the Hindsight Bias: A Conceptual Integration , 1996 .

[48]  Thomas Mussweiler,et al.  Overcoming the Inevitable Anchoring Effect: Considering the Opposite Compensates for Selective Accessibility , 2000 .