Peer-reviewed Brainstorming to Facilitate Large Group Collaboration

This paper examines the impact of peer-reviewed brainstorming on the quality of brainstorming ideas. Peer-reviewed brainstorming aims to improve the quality of the brainstorming ideas and reduce the number of noisy comments. A pilot study was conducted that compared traditional, free brainstorming to a peer-reviewed brainstorming process, which requires each idea to be reviewed and edited by peers. The peer-review process did reduce the number of low quality ideas. This process was also rated higher in satisfaction ratings than traditional

[1]  E. Santanen.  Directed brainstorming and the Cognitive Network Model of Creativity : an empirical investigation of cognitive factors related to the formation of creative solutions using an electronic brainstorming environment , 2002 .

[2]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Electronic meeting systems: ten years of lessons learned , 1995 .

[3]  A. Osborn.  Applied imagination : principles and procedures of creative problem-solving , 1957 .

[4]  John Kruse,et al.  Participant-driven GSS: Quality of Brainstorming and Allocation of Participant Resources , 2007, 2007 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'07).

[5]  Brian E. Mennecke,et al.  Tasks matter: modeling group task processes in experimental CSCW research , 1993, [1993] Proceedings of the Twenty-sixth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[6]  Mark Adkins,et al.  Group support systems for very large groups: A peer review process to filter brainstorming input , 2006, AMCIS.

[7]  P. Paulus,et al.  Performance and Perceptions of Brainstormers in an Organizational Setting , 1995 .

[8]  A. Osborn.  Applied Imagination: Principles and Procedures of Creative Thinking , 1953 .

[9]  Robert O. Briggs,et al.  Causal Relationships in Creative Problem Solving: Comparing Facilitation Interventions for Ideation , 2004, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[10]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Automatic concept classification of text from electronic meetings , 1994, CACM.

[11]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Toward Intelligent Meeting Agents , 1996, Computer.

[12]  Robert O. Briggs,et al.  Quality as a function of quantity in electronic brainstorming , 1997, Proceedings of the Thirtieth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[13]  Robert O. Briggs,et al.  Measuring the Quality of Ideation Technology and Techniques , 2006, Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'06).

[14]  A. Pinsonneault,et al.  Small Group Brainstorming and Idea Quality , 2001 .

[15]  Robert O. Briggs,et al.  Measuring satisfaction in GSS meetings , 1997, ICIS '97.

[16]  M. Diehl,et al.  Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. , 1987 .