THE NORM-INFORMATION-DISTANCE MODEL - A STOCHASTIC APPROACH TO PREFERENCE CHANGE IN GROUP-INTERACTION

被引:16
作者
CROTT, HW
WERNER, J
机构
[1] Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, Freiburg i. Br.
关键词
D O I
10.1006/jesp.1994.1004
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
The Norm-Information-Distance (NID) model is a formalized description of the process of change in collective judgment tasks. The model is derived in two steps. First, the probability that an individual within a group will change opinion is expressed as a function of relative subgroup size for the new choice, the informational attractiveness of that choice, and the number of alternatives intermediate between the original and the new opinion, which we label distance. Second, these individual transition probabilities are merged into a matrix of group constellation transition probabilities. The result is a stationary Markov process that predicts group constellation changes period-for-period during an experimental deliberation. The NID model is tested against data from Stasser and Davis (1981) to successfully show its ability to approximate the opinion change process in a two-response case. It is further tested against a multiple-response case using 225 male law and economics students at the University of Freiburg, Germany, Subjects were instructed to determine an appropriate sentence in a mock jury case. The NID model was applied to these data in several ways and was able to predict change in choice probabilities at any point during the process. Normative influence as measured by faction size appears to explain more of choice change than does informational attractiveness. Informational influence seems to work conditionally in the sense that it relates to only those alternatives that are presently held by at least one group member. The NID model has a high degree of flexibility and is expected to be useful in a variety of tasks and situations, in addition to those described in this article.
引用
收藏
页码:68 / 95
页数:28
相关论文
共 39 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1983, INSIDE JURY
[2]  
Asch S. E., 1956, PSYCHOL MONOGRAPHS, V9
[3]  
Bishop Y, 1975, DISCRETE MULTIVARIAT
[4]   TESTING 2 CLASSES OF THEORIES ABOUT GROUP INDUCED SHIFTS IN INDIVIDUAL CHOICE [J].
BURNSTEIN, E ;
VINOKUR, A .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1973, 9 (02) :123-137
[5]   PERSUASIVE ARGUMENTATION AND SOCIAL-COMPARISON AS DETERMINANTS OF ATTITUDE POLARIZATION [J].
BURNSTEIN, E ;
VINOKUR, A .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1977, 13 (04) :315-332
[6]   WHAT A PERSON THINKS UPON LEARNING HE HAS CHOSEN DIFFERENTLY FROM OTHERS - NICE EVIDENCE FOR PERSUASIVE-ARGUMENTS EXPLANATION OF CHOICE SHIFTS [J].
BURNSTEIN, E ;
VINOKUR, A .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1975, 11 (05) :412-426
[7]  
COOMBS LH, 1988, STRUCTURE CONFLICT
[8]   SOCIAL DECISION SCHEMES AND CHOICE SHIFT - AN ANALYSIS OF GROUP DECISIONS AMONG BETS [J].
CROTT, HW ;
ZUBER, JA ;
SCHERMER, T .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1986, 22 (01) :1-21
[9]   GROUP DECISION, CHOICE SHIFT, AND POLARIZATION IN CONSULTING, POLITICAL, AND LOCAL POLITICAL SCENARIOS - AN EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION AND THEORETICAL-ANALYSIS [J].
CROTT, HW ;
SZILVAS, K ;
ZUBER, JA .
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN DECISION PROCESSES, 1991, 49 (01) :22-41
[10]  
CROTT HW, 1983, CR6811 DTSCH FORSCH