什么时候群体比个人表现更好?公司收购实验

Marco Casari, Jingjing Zhang, Christine L. Jackson
{"title":"什么时候群体比个人表现更好?公司收购实验","authors":"Marco Casari, Jingjing Zhang, Christine L. Jackson","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1873267","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is still an open question when groups perform better than individuals in intellectual tasks. We report that in a company takeover experiment, groups placed better bids than individuals and substantially reduced the winner’s curse. This improvement was mostly due to peer pressure over the minority opinion and to learning. Learning took place from interacting and negotiating consensus with others, not simply from observing their bids. When there was disagreement, what prevailed was not the best proposal but the one of the majority. Groups underperformed with respect to a “truth wins” benchmark although they outperformed individuals deciding in isolation.","PeriodicalId":355618,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Other Organizations & Markets: Personnel Management (Topic)","volume":"55 5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"18","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"When Do Groups Perform Better than Individuals? A Company Takeover Experiment\",\"authors\":\"Marco Casari, Jingjing Zhang, Christine L. Jackson\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.1873267\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It is still an open question when groups perform better than individuals in intellectual tasks. We report that in a company takeover experiment, groups placed better bids than individuals and substantially reduced the winner’s curse. This improvement was mostly due to peer pressure over the minority opinion and to learning. Learning took place from interacting and negotiating consensus with others, not simply from observing their bids. When there was disagreement, what prevailed was not the best proposal but the one of the majority. Groups underperformed with respect to a “truth wins” benchmark although they outperformed individuals deciding in isolation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":355618,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ERN: Other Organizations & Markets: Personnel Management (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"55 5 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-06-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"18\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ERN: Other Organizations & Markets: Personnel Management (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1873267\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Other Organizations & Markets: Personnel Management (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1873267","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18

摘要

在智力任务中,群体何时比个人表现得更好,这仍然是一个悬而未决的问题。我们报告说,在一项公司收购实验中,团体出价比个人出价更好,大大减少了赢家的诅咒。这种改善主要是由于同侪对少数派意见的压力和学习。学习来自与他人的互动和协商共识,而不仅仅是观察他们的出价。当存在分歧时,获胜的不是最好的建议,而是大多数人的建议。在“真理至上”的基准上,团队表现不佳,尽管他们比独立决策的个人表现要好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
When Do Groups Perform Better than Individuals? A Company Takeover Experiment
It is still an open question when groups perform better than individuals in intellectual tasks. We report that in a company takeover experiment, groups placed better bids than individuals and substantially reduced the winner’s curse. This improvement was mostly due to peer pressure over the minority opinion and to learning. Learning took place from interacting and negotiating consensus with others, not simply from observing their bids. When there was disagreement, what prevailed was not the best proposal but the one of the majority. Groups underperformed with respect to a “truth wins” benchmark although they outperformed individuals deciding in isolation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Effect of Computer Use on Work Discretion and Work Intensity: Evidence from Europe Occupational Achievements of Same‐Sex Couples in the United States by Gender and Race Investor Sentiment and Employment The Impact of Recession on Adult Training: Evidence from the United Kingdom in 2008–2009 Towards an Optimal Teacher Salary Schedule: Designing Base Salary to Attract and Retain Effective Teachers
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1