A Study of Influence in Computer-Mediated Group Decision Making

An emerging body of research in group decision support systems (GDSS) provides evidence that computer technology can and does impact the quality of decision making in groups. Most GDSS research is oriented toward examining the effects of a computer system on group outcomes, typically decision quality or group consensus, with the process itself often treated as a "black box." The research reported in this article addresses the need for a closer, micro-level examination of group process. An important group variable, namely influence behavior, was isolated and examined at various levels and by multiple methods. A model of specific GDSS effects on influence behavior was developed, based on an information exchange view of decision making and on the impact of a GDSS as a communication channel. Based on the research questions of interest in the study, several propositions and hypotheses were advanced and empirically tested on a specific implementation of a GDSS. Results were analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively. The major empirical findings of the study showed no significant difference between the overall amount of influence behavior attempted in computer-supported versus unsupported groups, although significant differences were found in the pattern of influence behaviors, i.e., the different types of behaviors used. In addition, the distribution of influence behavior was more even in GDSS groups than in unsupported groups in one of two measures used. Empirical findings partially supported th research model, with indications that decision-making groups need more active guidance in understanding how to adapt computer support technology to their view of decision-making processes.

[1]  Robert C. Joyner,et al.  Computer Augmented Organizational Problem Solving , 1970 .

[2]  G. Huber The Nature and Design of Post-Industrial Organizations , 1984 .

[3]  Linda L. Putnam Procedural Messages and Small Group Work Climates: A Lag Sequential Analysis , 1981 .

[4]  M. Patterson,et al.  Effects of Size and Sex Composition On Interaction Distance, Participation, and Satisfaction in Small Groups , 1977 .

[5]  Ilze Zigurs,et al.  The effect of computer-based support on influence attempts and patterns in small group decision-making , 1987 .

[6]  Michael Elwood Roloff,et al.  Persuasion : new directions in theory and research , 1980 .

[7]  B. Schneider,et al.  Relationships between various criteria of leadership in small groups. , 1970, The Journal of social psychology.

[8]  Bernard M. Bass,et al.  An analysis of the leaderless group discussion. , 1949 .

[9]  George P. Huber,et al.  Issues in the Design of Group Decision Support Systems , 1984, MIS Q..

[10]  Donald W. Fiske,et al.  Face-to-face interaction: Research, methods, and theory , 1977 .

[11]  J. Dewey,et al.  How We Think , 2009 .

[12]  Dennis S. Gouran,et al.  Behavioral correlates of perceptions of quality in decision‐making discussions , 1978 .

[13]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  External validity tests of laboratory studies of information integration , 1983 .

[14]  Gary William Dickson Decision-making in purchasing : a simulation model of vendor selection , 1965 .

[15]  Michael Elwood Roloff,et al.  Persuasion: New Directions , 1980 .

[16]  Morgan W. McCall,et al.  Stogdill's Handbook of Leadership , 1982 .

[17]  J. McGrath Groups: Interaction and Performance , 1984 .

[18]  R. Watson A study of group decision support system use in three and four-person groups for a preference alloca , 1987 .

[19]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  Using a GDSS to Facilitate Group Consensus: Some Intended and Unintended Consequences , 1988, MIS Q..

[20]  Paul D. Reynolds,et al.  Comment on "The Distribution of Participation in Group Discussions" as Related to Group Size , 1971 .

[21]  R. Bales,et al.  Personality and Interpersonal Behavior. , 1971 .

[22]  Randall Steeb,et al.  A Computer-Based Interactive System for Group Decisionmaking , 1981, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[23]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Process Tracing Methods in Decision Support Systems Research: Exploring the Black Box , 1987, MIS Q..

[24]  M. E. Shaw Group dynamics : the psychology of small group behavior , 1971 .

[25]  Ronald Brent Gallupe,et al.  The impact of task difficulty on the use of a group decision support system , 1985 .

[26]  Samuel W. McDowell,et al.  The Validity of Time-Sampling in Group Interactions , 1978 .

[27]  Richard T. Watson,et al.  COMPUTER-SUPPORTED MEETINGS: BUILDING A RESEARCH ENVIRONMENT. , 1988 .

[28]  Ernest G. Bormann,et al.  The paradox and promise of small group research , 1970 .

[29]  H. Kelley,et al.  Communication And Persuasion , 1953 .

[30]  I. Janis,et al.  Decision Making: A Psychological Analysis of Conflict, Choice, and Commitment , 1977 .

[31]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  Group decision making and group decision support systems : a 3-year plan for the GDSS research project , 1987 .

[32]  Ilze Zigurs,et al.  Interaction analysis in GDSS research: description of an experience and some recommendations , 1989, Decis. Support Syst..

[33]  Linda L. Putnam Preference for procedural order in task‐oriented small groups , 1979 .

[34]  Starr Roxanne Hiltz,et al.  Computer Support for Group Versus Individual Decisions , 1982, IEEE Trans. Commun..

[35]  Matthias Jarke,et al.  Communications Requirements for Group Decision Support Systems , 1986, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[36]  Randy Hirokawa,et al.  A comparative analysis of communication patterns within effective and ineffective decision‐making groups , 1980 .

[37]  Gerald Marwell,et al.  Compliance‐Gaining Behavior: A Synthesis and Model* , 1967 .

[38]  L. R. Hoffman Group Problem Solving1 , 1965 .

[39]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  A foundation for the study of group decision support systems , 1987 .

[40]  J. Hackman,et al.  Effects of size and task type on group performance and member reactions , 1970 .