Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

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 Barki, H.
Right arrow Articles by Pinsonneault, A.
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?

Small Group Brainstorming and Idea Quality

Is Electronic Brainstorming the Most Effective Approach?

Henri Barki

École des Hautes Études Commerciales

Alain Pinsonneault

McGill University

Idea quality is the most important indicator of group brainstorming performance. Yet, little electronic brainstorming (EBS) research has assessed idea quality directly. This article provides a closer look at EBS and nominal brainstorming groups in terms of idea quality. This study employed an unbalanced repeated measures experimental design to compare the quality of ideas generated by small groups using four brainstorming technologies (nominal, verbal, EBS-anonymous, and EBS-non-anonymous). In the experiment, three conditions thought to improve the effectiveness of EBS groups were also manipulated. The results indicated that overall, nominal brainstorming groups generated ideas at least as good, if not better, than EBS groups. Furthermore, the three conditions manipulated did not improve the quality of the ideas generated by EBS groups.

Small Group Research, Vol. 32, No. 2, 158-205 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/104649640103200203
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
 Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics SocietyHome page
C. C. Dornburg, S. M. Stevens, S. M. L. Hendrickson, and G. S. Davidson
Improving Extreme-Scale Problem Solving: Assessing Electronic Brainstorming Effectiveness in an Industrial Setting
Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, August 1, 2009; 51(4): 519 - 527.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Small Group ResearchHome page
N. C. Romano Jr., P. B. Lowry, and T. L. Roberts
Technology-Supported Small Group Interaction: Extending a Tradition of Leading Research for Virtual Teams and Global Organizations
Small Group Research, February 1, 2007; 38(1): 3 - 11.
[PDF]

Home page
 Social Science Computer ReviewHome page
C. Underhill and M. G. Olmsted
An Experimental Comparison of Computer-Mediated and Face-to-Face Focus Groups
Social Science Computer Review, November 1, 2003; 21(4): 506 - 512.
[Abstract] [PDF]