This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Littlepage, G. E. Articles by Silbiger, H. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Recognition of Expertise in Decision-Making Groups

Effects of Group Size and Participation Patterns

Holly Silbiger

Middle Tennessee State University

Two studies examined the effects of group size and participation requirements on group performance, expertise, and recognition of group expertise. In Study 1, 324 college students were assigned to work units of 1, 2, 5, or 10 persons. They answered a 20-item multiplechoice quiz covering a variety of topics and assigned point values to items to reflect confidence in the answer. Dependent variables were an overall performance score that reflected point values assigned to correct items, number of correct items (expertise), and percentage of possible points given the number of correct items (recognition of group expertise). Results indicate that all three dependent variables were increased by group size. In Study 2, 216 subjects were assigned to 2-or 10-person groups that used procedures to equalize participation. Results suggest that the procedures affected participation patterns in 10-person groups but did notaffectperformance measures. Skewedparticipation patterns that are typical of moderately sized or large groups did not inhibit performance or recognition of group expertise. Findings of both studies suggest that recognition of expertise is an important component of group performance and that it is augmented by group size.

Small Group Research, Vol. 23, No. 3, 344-355 (1992)
DOI: 10.1177/1046496492233005


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Jackson and R. L. Moreland Transactive Memory in the Classroom Small Group Research, October 1, 2009; 40(5): 508 - 534. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. A. Wheelan Group Size, Group Development, and Group Productivity Small Group Research, April 1, 2009; 40(2): 247 - 262. [Abstract] [PDF]

				W. Arthur Jr., S. T. Bell, and B. D. Edwards A Longitudinal Examination of the Comparative Criterion-Related Validity of Additive and Referent-Shift Consensus Operationalizations of Team Efficacy Organizational Research Methods, January 1, 2007; 10(1): 35 - 58. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. P. Hare Roles, Relationships, And Groups In Organizations: Some Conclusions And Recommendations Small Group Research, April 1, 2003; 34(2): 123 - 154. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. M. Franz and J. R. Larson Jr. The Impact of Experts on Information Sharing During Group Discussion Small Group Research, August 1, 2002; 33(4): 383 - 411. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. B. Hollingshead Perceptions of Expertise and Transactive Memory in Work Relationships Group Processes Intergroup Relations, July 1, 2000; 3(3): 257 - 267. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. B. Hollingshead Groupand Individual Training: The Impact of Practice on Performance Small Group Research, April 1, 1998; 29(2): 254 - 280. [Abstract]

				J. N. Scudder, R. T. Herschel, and M. D. Crossland Test of a Model Linking Cognitive Motivation, Assessment of Alternatives, Decision Quality, and Group Process Satisfaction Small Group Research, February 1, 1994; 25(1): 57 - 82. [Abstract]