Fuller SR, Aldag RJ
School of Business Administration, University of Washington
Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1998 Feb;73(2/3):163-84. doi: 10.1006/obhd.1998.2760.
We adopt the role of devil's advocate, arguing that the quarter-century experience with groupthink represents an unfortunate episode in the history of group problem solving research. In view of the facts that there has been remarkably little empirical support for the groupthink phenomenon, that the phenomenon rests on arguable assumptions, that published critiques of groupthink have generally been ignored by groupthink researchers, and that groupthink is presented as fact in journal articles and textbooks, we see continued advocacy of groupthink as a form of organizational Tonypandy, in which knowledgeable individuals fail to speak out against widely accepted but erroneous beliefs. We explore the nature and causes of this Tonypandy and encourage researchers to cast off the artificial determinism and constraints of the groupthink model and instead seek to inform the general group decision making literature. Copyright 1998 Academic Press.
我们站在唱反调的立场,认为群体思维长达25年的研究历程在群体问题解决研究史上是一段不幸的插曲。鉴于以下事实:群体思维现象几乎没有得到实证支持,该现象基于有争议的假设,已发表的对群体思维的批评通常被群体思维研究者忽视,并且群体思维在期刊文章和教科书中被当作事实呈现,我们认为对群体思维的持续鼓吹是一种组织性的托尼潘迪现象,即有见识的个体未能对广泛接受但错误的信念发声反对。我们探究这种托尼潘迪现象的本质和成因,并鼓励研究者摒弃群体思维模型的人为决定论和限制,转而努力为一般的群体决策文献提供信息。版权所有1998年学术出版社。