两极分化和既定集团

G. Semin, A. Glendon
{"title":"两极分化和既定集团","authors":"G. Semin, A. Glendon","doi":"10.1111/J.2044-8260.1973.TB00856.X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In research the general practice is for experimental studies to be derived from real-life observations, and particularly those from field research. The study here reverses this practice. A real-life situation has been discovered, the conditions of which correspond to those generally employed in risky-shift studies. The quantitative nature of the decisions made in the established group studied enables the data to be treated in comparable fashion to data derived from risk-taking and polarization studies. In the case studied here no shift in any direction was found. An examination of the possible factors accounting for this finding indicated that the two most important ones were the amount of information at the disposal of the group, and the reference system within which decisions were made, which was common to all the group members. These variables are put forward as worthy of further experimental analysis. Discussion focuses on the implications of research such as this for the external validity of experimental studies.","PeriodicalId":76614,"journal":{"name":"The British journal of social and clinical psychology","volume":"4 1","pages":"113-121"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1973-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Polarization and the Established Group\",\"authors\":\"G. Semin, A. Glendon\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/J.2044-8260.1973.TB00856.X\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In research the general practice is for experimental studies to be derived from real-life observations, and particularly those from field research. The study here reverses this practice. A real-life situation has been discovered, the conditions of which correspond to those generally employed in risky-shift studies. The quantitative nature of the decisions made in the established group studied enables the data to be treated in comparable fashion to data derived from risk-taking and polarization studies. In the case studied here no shift in any direction was found. An examination of the possible factors accounting for this finding indicated that the two most important ones were the amount of information at the disposal of the group, and the reference system within which decisions were made, which was common to all the group members. These variables are put forward as worthy of further experimental analysis. Discussion focuses on the implications of research such as this for the external validity of experimental studies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":76614,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The British journal of social and clinical psychology\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"113-121\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1973-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The British journal of social and clinical psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/J.2044-8260.1973.TB00856.X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The British journal of social and clinical psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/J.2044-8260.1973.TB00856.X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

摘要

在研究中,一般做法是实验性研究来源于现实生活中的观察,特别是来自实地研究的观察。这里的研究与此相反。已经发现了一个现实生活中的情况,其条件与风险转移研究中通常使用的条件相对应。在所研究的既定群体中作出的决定的数量性质,使这些数据能够以与从冒险和两极分化研究中获得的数据相比较的方式加以处理。在这里研究的案例中,没有发现任何方向的变化。对造成这一结果的可能因素的审查表明,两个最重要的因素是小组所掌握的信息量和作出决定的参照制度,这是小组所有成员共同的。这些变量值得进一步的实验分析。讨论的重点是这类研究对实验研究的外部有效性的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Polarization and the Established Group
In research the general practice is for experimental studies to be derived from real-life observations, and particularly those from field research. The study here reverses this practice. A real-life situation has been discovered, the conditions of which correspond to those generally employed in risky-shift studies. The quantitative nature of the decisions made in the established group studied enables the data to be treated in comparable fashion to data derived from risk-taking and polarization studies. In the case studied here no shift in any direction was found. An examination of the possible factors accounting for this finding indicated that the two most important ones were the amount of information at the disposal of the group, and the reference system within which decisions were made, which was common to all the group members. These variables are put forward as worthy of further experimental analysis. Discussion focuses on the implications of research such as this for the external validity of experimental studies.
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
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信