Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Clinical Ethics and the Dynamics of Group Decision-Making: Applying the Psychological Data to Decisions Made by Ethics Committees

  • Published:
HEC Forum Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • American Hospital Association (1986). Guidelines for hospital ethics committees. In: J. W. Ross (ed.), Handbook for hospital ethics committees. Chicago: AHA.

  • American Medical Association, Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs (1985). Guidelines for ethics committees in health care institutions. Journal of the American Medical Association, 235, 2698–2699.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Society for Bioethics and Humanities, Task Force on Standards for Bioethics Consultation (1998). Core competencies for health care ethics consultation: the report of the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities. Glenview, IL: ASBH.

  • Aulisio M.P., Arnold R.M., Youngner S.J. (2000) Healthcare ethics consultation: nature, goals and competencies. Annals of Internal Medicine 133: 59–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Brodbeck F.C., Kerschreiter R., Mojzisch A, Frey D., Schulz-Hardt S. (2002) The dissemination of critical, unshared information in decision- making groups: the effects of prediscussion dissent. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations 3: 115–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis J.H. (1973) Group decisions and social interactions: a theory of social decision schemes. Psychological Review 80: 97–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis J.H. (1996) Group decision and procedural justice. In: Fishbein M. (eds) Progress in social psychology, vol. 1. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 157–229

    Google Scholar 

  • Dukerich J.M., Nichols M.L., Elm D., Vollrath D. (1990) Moral reasoning in groups: leaders make a difference. Human Relations 43(5): 473–493

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DuDreu C.K.W., Carnevale P. (2003) Motivational bases for information processing and strategic choice in conflict and negotiation. In: Zanna M.P. (eds) Advances in experimental social psychology, vol. 35. Academic Press, New York, pp 235–291

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fox E., Myers S., Pearlman R.A. (2007) Ethics consultation in United States hospitals: a national survey. American Journal of Bioethics 7(2): 13–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • GigoneD. Hastie R. (1993) The common knowledge effect: information sharing and group judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 65: 959–974

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gigone D., Hastie R. (1996) The impact of information on group judgment: a model and computer simulation. In: Witte E., Davis J.H. (eds) Understanding group behavior: consensual action by small groups, vol. 1. Mahwah, Lawrence Erlbaum, pp 221–251

    Google Scholar 

  • Graesser C.C. (1982) A social averaging theorem for group decision-making. In: Anderson N.H. (eds) Contributions of information integration theory, vol. 2. Academic Press, New York, pp 1–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Greitemeyer T., Schulz-Hardt S. (2003) Preference-consistent evaluation of information in the hidden profile paradigm: beyond group-level explanations for the dominance of shared information in group decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 84(2): 322–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guo L., Schick I.C. (2003) The impact of committee characteristics on the success of healthcare ethics committees. HEC Forum 15(3): 287–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helmreich R.L. (1997) Managing human error in aviation. Scientific American 276: 62–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hightower R.T., Sayeed L. (1996) Effects of communication mode and prediscussion information distribution characteristics on information exchange in groups. Information Systems Research 7(4): 451–465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinsz V.B. (1999) Group decision making with responses of a quantitative nature: the theory of social decision schemes for quantities. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 80: 28–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollingshead A.B. (1996) The rank order effect in group decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Making Processes 68: 181–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kameda T. (1991) Procedural influence in small-group decision-making: deliberation style and assigned decision rule. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 61: 245–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Kameda T., Tindale R.S., Davis J.H. (2002) Cognitions, preferences and social sharedness: past, present and future directions in group decision making. In: Schneider S.L., Shanteau J. (eds) Emerging perspectives on judgment and decision research. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Katzenstein G. (1996) The debate on structured debate: toward a unified theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 66: 316–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kerr N. (1981) Social transition schemes: charting the group’s road to agreement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 41: 684–702

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohlberg L. (1973) Collected papers on moral development and moral education. Laboratory of Human Development, Harvard University, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruglanski A.W., Webster D.M. (1996) Motivated closing of the mind: “seizing” and “freezing”. Psychological Review 103: 263–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larson J.R., Foster-Fishman P.G., Keys C.B. (1994) Discussion of shared and unshared information in decision-making groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 67: 446–61

    Google Scholar 

  • Laughlin P.R., VanderStoep S.W., Hollingshead A.B. (1991) Collective versus individual induction: recognition of truth, rejection of error and collective information processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 61: 50–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laughlin P.R., Hollingshead A.B. (1995) A theory of collective induction. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 61: 94–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laughlin P.R., Bonner B.L., Altermatt T.W. (1998) Collective versus individual induction with single versus multiple hypotheses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 75: 1481–89

    Google Scholar 

  • Marks M.A., Zaaro S.J., Mathieu J.E. (2000) Performance implications of leader briefings and team-interaction training for team adaptation to novel environments. Journal of Applied Psychology 85: 971–986

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathieu J.E., Heffner T.S., Goodwin G.F., Sala E., Cannon-Bowers J.A. (2000) The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology 85: 273–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLeod P.L., Baron R.S., Weighner M.M., Yoon K. (1997) The eyes have it: minority influence in face-to-face and computer mediated group discussion. Journal of Applied Psychology 82: 706–718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mumford M., Feldman J.M., Hein M.B., Nagao D.J. (2001) Tradeoffs between ideas and structure: individual verses group performance in creative problem solving. Journal of Creative Behavior 35(1): 1–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichols M.L., Day V. (1982) A comparison of moral reasoning of groups and individuals on the defining issues test. Academy of Management Journal 25(1): 201–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Postmes T., Spears R., Cihangir S. (2001) Quality of decision making and group norms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 80(6): 918–930

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • President’s Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research (1983). Deciding to forego life-sustaining treatment: a report on the ethical, medical, and legal issues in treatment decisions. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

  • Rest J. (1979) Development in judging moral issues. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer J.E. (1997). Information sharing and integration in multifunctional decision-making groups, presented at Annual Meeting of Society for Judgment and Decision Making, Philadelphia, PA.

  • Scholten L., Knippenberg D., Nihstad B.A., DeDreu C. (2007) Motivated information processing and group decision-making: effects of process accountability on information processing and decision quality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 43: 539–552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulz-Hardt S., Brodbeck F.C., Mojzisch A., Kerschreiter R., Frey D. (2006) Group decision making in hidden profile situations: dissent as a facilitator for decision quality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 91(6): 1080–1093

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheffey S., Tindale R.S., Scott L.A. (1989) Information sharing and group decision-making. Presented at Midwestern Psychological Association, Chicago, IL

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith M., Bisanz A., Kempfer A.J., Adams B., Candelari T.G., Blackburn R.K. (2004) Criteria for determining the appropriate method for an ethics consultation. HEC Forum 16(2): 95–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sniezek J.A., Henry R.A. (1989) Accuracy and confidence in group judgment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 43: 1–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stasser G., Titus W. (1985) Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 48: 1467–1478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stasser G., Stewart D.D. (1992) Discovery of hidden profiles by decision-making groups: solving a problem vs. making a judgment. Journal of Psychology and Social Psychology 63: 426–434

    Google Scholar 

  • Stasser G., Stewart D.D. (1998) The sampling of critical, unshared information in decision-making groups. European Journal of Social Psychology 28: 95–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steiner I.D. (1972) Group process and productivity. Academic Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Tindale R.S., Smith C.M., Thomas L.S., Filkins J., Sheffey S. (1996) Shared representations and asymmetrical social influence processes in small groups. In: Witte E., David J.H. (eds) Understanding group behavior: consensual action by small groups. Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 81–103

    Google Scholar 

  • Vinokur A., Burnstain E. (1978) Novel argumentation and attitude change: the case of polarization following discussion. European Journal of Social Psychology 8: 335–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wegner D.M. (1987) Transactive memory: a contemporary analysis of the group mind. In: Mullen B., (eds) Theories of group behavior. Springer, New York, pp 185–208

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittenbaum G.M., Stasser G. (1996) Management of information in small groups. In: Nye J.L., Brower A.M. (eds) What’s social about social cognition?. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 3–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittenbaum G.M. (1998) Information sampling in decision-making groups: the impact of members’ task-relevant status. Small Group Research 29(1): 57–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wittenbaum G.M., Hubbell A.P., Zuckerman C. (1999) Mutual enhancement: toward an understanding of collective preference for shared information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 77: 967–78

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Health Care Ethics, Saint Louis University, 6333 North Rosebury Ave #3W, St. Louis, MO, 63105, USA

    Erica K. Rangel (Ph.D. (Cand.)

Authors
  1. Erica K. Rangel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Erica K. Rangel.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rangel, E.K. Clinical Ethics and the Dynamics of Group Decision-Making: Applying the Psychological Data to Decisions Made by Ethics Committees. HEC Forum 21, 207–228 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10730-009-9096-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10730-009-9096-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation