Research

Section: G-I-transfer and group coordination (DFG project)

Important judgments and decisions in politics, economy, and science are often made by groups rather than individuals. Therefore, it is of critical interest to know when groups are actually superior decision-makers and which group-specific processes influence the quality of judgments and decisions in groups. Our research project aims to identify and study both group processes that are detrimental to group performance and those that enhance it. Here, we distinguish processes that affect group members’ motivation from processes that change their ability to perform the task and processes that influence coordination within the groups. Based on our investigations, we hope to gain important insights into cooperation within groups, which will ultimately serve as the basis for the development of interventions aiming to improve the quality of judgments and decision in groups. 

Section: Advice taking in groups (DFG project)

Groups frequently consult expert advisors when making important decisions. In fact, such expert advice can greatly improve the quality of judgments and decisions. However, it is currently debated to what extent groups are able to use advice effectively, and whether certain group-specific processes have an impact on how much groups follow external advice. We address these questions in our research project by examining whether and how groups of different sizes differ from individuals in terms of how they use external advice.

Section: Emergence of leadership (DFG project)

When groups work together, you often observe someone taking the lead, although there is no predefined leader role. Research on “emergence of leadership” seeks to identify the factors that determine who will become a leader in a group. Past research focused mostly on the emergent leader while neglecting whether his leadership attempt was successful, i.e. he was actually followed by the other group members. This research area aims at investigating factors which are predictive of leadership emergence on the one hand and followership on the other hand. In our studies, we assess a broad range of predictors, including inter-individual differences as well as behavioral styles.

This project is part of the Research Training Group 2070 Understanding Social Relationships collaborating with the German Primate Center.

Section: Process losses and process gains during negotiations (DFG project)

‘Process losses and process gains during negotiations’ is a research project in collaboration with Leuphana University Lüneburg (Prof. Dr. Roman Trötschel und Marco Warsitzka, M.A.). Within the scope of this project the role of social interaction in bargaining situations will be analyzed. Former negotiation research suggests that negotiating generally leads to better outcomes for both parties. However, group research shows that social interaction can often lead to process losses. Against this background, several variables (such as the characteristics of the bargaining situation, negotiation targets and cognitive frames) will be manipulated in order to investigate conditions under which process losses vs. process gains can be observed. For this purpose, real negotiation groups will be compared to nominal groups that do not interact socially, thereby combining group research and negotiation research. Significant differences between real and nominal groups indicate either a process loss or a process gain.

Judge-Advisor Systems with Multiple Advisors (DFG Project)

Decisions and judgments are a central part of everyday life and advice helps decision-makers to make better decisions and judgments. In judge-advisor systems, the influence of advice on judgment and decision processes can be studied under different conditions. Previous research has been mainly limited to judge-advisor systems in which a single advisor gives advice to a decision-maker. In many everyday situations, decision-makers receive and seek advice from multiple advisors (the proverbial seeking of a second opinion). In this research project, we therefore investigate issues that arise specifically in the context of judge-advisor systems with multiple advisors:

• Advice taking in the presence of multiple pieces of advice
• Utilization of dependent and independent advice by decision-makers
• Differences in the utilization of aggregated vs. non-aggregated advice