Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Small Group Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Stasson, M. F.
Right arrow Articles by Bradshaw, S. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Explanations of Individual-Group Performance Differences

What Sort of "Bonus" Can Be Gained Through Group Interaction?

Mark F. Stasson

Scott D. Bradshaw

Virginia Commonwealth University

The issues of whetherornotgroups outperform individuals on multiple-item problem-solving tasks and the size of the performance difference were discussed. The level of analysis was found to be an important consideration-groups outperformed their best member at the aggregate level of analysis (i.e., total score), but often failed to perform at the level of the best member on individual items. It was argued that groups outperform individuals at the aggregate level because group members often have complementary bases of knowledge that can compensate for each other's weaknesses and because of "synergistic " effects in groups. Implications for using groups as decision-making units in applied contexts were discussed.

Small Group Research, Vol. 26, No. 2, 296-308 (1995)
DOI: 10.1177/1046496495262007
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Journal of Management EducationHome page
G. Stark
Stop "Going Over" Exams! The Multiple Benefits of Team Exams
Journal of Management Education, December 1, 2006; 30(6): 818 - 827.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Small Group ResearchHome page
A. Miura and M. Hida
Synergy between Diversity and Similarity in Group-Idea Generation
Small Group Research, October 1, 2004; 35(5): 540 - 564.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Small Group ResearchHome page
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]

Home page
 Group Processes Intergroup RelationsHome page
F. Brodbeck and T. Greitemeyer
A Dynamic Model of Group Performance: Considering the Group Members' Capacity to Learn
Group Processes Intergroup Relations, April 1, 2000; 3(2): 159 - 182.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Small Group ResearchHome page
S. D. Bradshaw and M. F. Stasson
Attributions of Shy and Not-Shy Group Members for Collective Group Performance
Small Group Research, June 1, 1998; 29(3): 283 - 307.
[Abstract]