Advertisement

Biases in Group Decisions

  • Alexander Felfernig
  • Ludovico Boratto
  • Martin Stettinger
  • Marko Tkalčič
Chapter
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Electrical and Computer Engineering book series (BRIEFSELECTRIC)

Abstract

Decision biases can be interpreted as tendencies to think and act in specific ways that result in a systematic deviation of potentially rational and high-quality decisions. In this chapter, we provide an overview of example decision biases and show possibilities to counteract these. The overview includes (1) biases that exist in both single user and group decision making (decoy effects, serial position effects, framing, and anchoring) and (2) biases that especially occur in the context of group decision making (GroupThink, polarization, and emotional contagion).

References

  1. 1.
    G. Adomavicius, J. Bockstedt, S. Curley, J. Zhang, Recommender systems, consumer preferences, and anchoring effects, in RecSys 2011 Workshop on Human Decision Making in Recommender Systems (2011), pp. 35–42Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    T. Amoo, H. Friedman, Do numeric values influence subjects responses to rating scales? J. Int. Mark. Mark. Res. 26, 41–46 (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    D. Arnott, A taxonomy of decision biases. Technical Report, Monash University, Caulfield East, VIC (1998), pp. 1–48Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    S. Asch, Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of judgements, in Groups, Leadership, and Men (1951), Swarthmore College, pp. 177–190Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. Atas, A. Felfernig, M. Stettinger, T.N. Trang Tran, Beyond item recommendation: using recommendations to stimulate knowledge sharing in group decisions, in 9th International Conference on Social Informatics (SocInfo 2017), Oxford, 2017, pp. 368–377Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    S. Barsade, The ripple effect: emotional contagion and its influence on group behavior. Adm. Sci. Q. 47(4), 644–675 (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. Bertini, L. Wathieu, The framing effect of price format. Working Paper, Harvard Business School (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    F. Brodbeck, R. Kerschreiter, A. Mojzisch, D. Frey, S. Schulz-Hardt, The dissemination of criticial, unshared information in decision making groups: the effects of pre-discussion dissent. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 32(1), 35–56 (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    P. Cheng, W. Chiou, Framing effects in group investment decision making: role of group polarization. Psychol. Rep. 102(1), 283–292 (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    D. Cosley, S. Lam, I. Albert, J. Konstan, J. Riedl, Is seeing believing? How recommender system interfaces affect users’ opinions, in Proceedings of CHI’03 (2003), pp. 585–592Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. Esser, Alive and well after 25 years: a review of groupthink research. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 73(2–3), 116–141 (1998)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    A. Felfernig, G. Friedrich, B. Gula, M. Hitz, T. Kruggel, R. Melcher, D. Riepan, S. Strauss, E. Teppan, O. Vitouch, Persuasive recommendation: serial position effects in knowledge-based recommender systems, in 2nd International Conference of Persuasive Technology (Persuasive 2007). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4744 (Springer, Berlin, 2007), pp. 283–294Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    A. Felfernig, B. Gula, G. Leitner, M. Maier, R. Melcher, S. Schippel, E. Teppan, A dominance model for the calculation of decoy products in recommendation environments, in AISB Symposium on Persuasive Technologies, Aberdeen, 2008, pp. 43–50Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    A. Felfernig, C. Zehentner, G. Ninaus, H. Grabner, W. Maalej, D. Pagano, L. Weninger, F. Reinfrank, Group decision support for requirements negotiation, in Advances in User Modeling. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 7138 (Springer, Berlin, 2011), pp. 105–116Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    A. Felfernig, E. Teppan, K. Isak, Decoy effects in financial service E-sales systems, in RecSys’11 Workshop on Human Decision Making in Recommender Systems (Decisions@RecSys’11), Chicago, IL, 2011, pp. 1–8Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    D. Forsyth, Group Dynamics (Thomson Higher Education, Belmont, 2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    C. Fraser, C. Gouge, M. Billig, Risky shifts, cautious shifts, and group polarization. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 1(1), 7–30 (1971)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    T. Greitemeyer, S. Schulz-Hardt, Preference-consistent evaluation of information in the hidden profile paradigm: beyond group-level explanations for the dominance of shared information in group decisions. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 84(2), 332–339 (2003)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    S. Highhouse, A. Gallo, Order effects in personnel decision making. Hum. Perform. 10, 31–46 (1997)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    J. Huber, J. Payne, C. Puto, Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives: violations of regularity and the similarity hypotheses. J. Consum. Res. 9, 90–98 (1982)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    K. Jacowith, D. Kahneman, Measures of anchoring in estimation tasks. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 21(11), 1161–1166 (1995)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    A. Jameson, M. Willemsen, A. Felfernig, M. de Gemmis, P. Lops, G. Semeraro, L. Chen, Human decision making and recommender systems, in Recommender Systems Handbook, 2nd edn., ed. by F. Ricci, L. Rokach, B. Shapira (Springer, Berlin, 2015), pp. 611–648Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    I. Janis, Victims of Groupthink (Houghton-Mifflin, Boston, 1972)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    D. Kahneman, A. Tversky, Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2), 263–291 (1979)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    N. Kerr, G. Kramer, R. MacCoun, Bias in judgement: comparing individuals and groups. Psychol. Rev. 103(4), 687–719 (1996)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    J. Levine, E. Russo, Impact of anticipated interaction on information acquisition. Soc. Cogn. 13(3), 293–317 (1995)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    R. Luce, Individual Choice Behavior (Wiley, New York, 1959)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    M. Mandl, A. Felfernig, E. Teppan, M. Schubert, Consumer decision making in knowledge-based recommendation. J. Intell. Inf. Syst. 37(1), 1–22 (2010)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    J. Masthoff, Group recommender systems: combining individual models, in Recommender Systems Handbook (Springer, New York, 2011), pp. 677–702Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    J. Masthoff, A. Gatt, In pursuit of satisfaction and the prevention of embarrassment: affective state in group recommender systems. User Model. User-Adap. Inter. 16(3–4), 281–319 (2006)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    T. McElroy, J. Seta, Framing effects: an analytic-holistic perspective. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 39(6), 610–617 (2003)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    K. Milch, E. Weber, K. Appelt, M. Handgraaf, D. Krantz, From individual preference construction to group decisions: framing effects and group processes. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 108(2), 242–255 (2009)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    P. Miller, N. Fagley, The effects of framing problem variations, and providing rationale on choice. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 17(5), 517–522 (1991)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    A. Mojzisch, S. Schulz-Hardt, Knowing others preferences degrades the quality of group decisions. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 98(5), 794–808 (2010)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    S. Moscovici, M. Zavalloni, The group as a polarizer of attitudes. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 12(2), 125–135 (1969)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    J. Murphy, C. Hofacker, R. Mizerski, Primacy and recency effects on clicking behavior. J. Comput.-Mediat. Commun. 11(2), 522–535 (2006)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    M. Neale, M. Bazerman, G. Northcraft, C. Alperson, Choice shift effects in group decisions: a decision bias perspective. Int. J. Small Group Res. 2(1), 33–42 (1986)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    E. Nipher, On the distribution of errors in numbers written from memory. Trans. Acad. Sci. St. Louis 3, CCX–CCXI (1878)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    J. Osmani, Heuristics and cognitive biases: can the group decision-making avoid them? Acad. J. Interdisciplinary Stud. 5(3), 225–232 (2016)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    P. Paese, M. Bieser, M. Tubbs, Framing effects and choice shifts in group decision making. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 56(1), 149–165 (1993)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    L. Quijano-Sanchez, J. Recio-García, B. Díaz-Agudo, G. Jiménez-Díaz, Social factors in group recommender systems. ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol. 4(1), 8:1–8:30 (2006)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    S. Schulz-Hardt, D. Frey, C. Lüthgense, S. Moscovici, Biased information search in group decision making. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 78(4), 655–669 (2000)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    V. Sessa, R. Kaiser, J. Taylor, R. Campbell, Executive selection: a research report on what works and what doesn’t. Center for Creative Leadership (1998)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    J. Slaughter, J. Bagger, A. Li, Context effects on group-based employee selection decisions. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 100(1), 47–59 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    M. Stettinger, A. Felfernig, G. Leitner, S. Reiterer, Counteracting anchoring effects in group decision making, in 23rd Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation, and Personalization (UMAP’15), Dublin, 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 9146 (2015), pp. 118–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    M. Stettinger, A. Felfernig, G. Leitner, S. Reiterer, M. Jeran, Counteracting serial position effects in the Choicla group decision support environment, in 20th ACM Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI2015), Atlanta, GA, 2015, pp. 148–157Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    C. Sunstein, R. Hastie, Wiser: Getting Beyond Groupthink to Make Groups Smarter (Harvard Business Review Press, Boston, 2014)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    E. Teppan, A. Felfernig, Minimization of decoy effects in recommender result sets. Web Intell. Agent Syst. 1(4), 385–395 (2012)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    G. Tomer, Implications of perceived utility on individual choice and preferences: a new framework for designing recommender system. J. Int. Technol. Inf. Manag. 24(2), 55–64 (2015)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    D. Winterfeldt, W. Edwards, Decision Analysis and Behavioral Research (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1986)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexander Felfernig
    • 1
  • Ludovico Boratto
    • 2
  • Martin Stettinger
    • 1
  • Marko Tkalčič
    • 3
  1. 1.Institute for Software TechnologyGraz University of TechnologyGrazAustria
  2. 2.EURECATCentre Tecnológico de CatalunyaBarcelonaSpain
  3. 3.Faculty of Computer ScienceFree University of Bozen-BolzanoBolzanoItaly

Personalised recommendations