Torsten Reimer

Shared and coordinated cognition in competitive and dynamic task environments: An information‐processing perspective for team sports

Abstract From a groups‐as‐information‐processors perspective, the notion of shared cognition is crucial to the understanding of team performance. This approach is used to comprehend the effectiveness of sports teams. Typically, sports teams are placed in a dynamic environment in which tasks are highly interdependent. Individual actions have to be coordinated with regard to the team objectives and with regard to the opponent teams actions. Although sports are considered behavioral tasks by their nature, performance may be strongly affected by cognitive processes. We review studies and give examples that demonstrate that the degree to which cognitions are shared and coordinated among the members of such teams influences the extent to which the individual actions are coordinated. The sharing and coordinating of cognitions pertain to the attention, information‐processing, and action phases of the decision making and behavior process. We also discuss how feedback and coaching can affect information processing in teams such that coordination of actions is more likely to arise

Decision-Making Groups Attenuate the Discussion Bias in Favor of Shared Information: A Meta-Analysis

Groups often focus their discussions on information that all members know at the outset. To test how robust the sampling advantage for shared information is, a meta-analysis was conducted. The analysis integrated findings from 20 publications (45 independent effects), in which information sharedness was manipulated. Groups discussed more shared than unshared information overall. However, the observed sampling advantage was smaller than expected. Groups attenuated the discussion bias in particular when they had to choose among a small number of decision alternatives and when they had less than 30 minutes discussion time. Moreover, groups performing a hidden-profile task tended to display a smaller discussion bias than groups performing tasks with equally attractive alternatives.

Effects of metacognitive thinking and knowledge acquisition in dyads on individual problem solving and transfer performance

We investigated if metacognitive thinking and knowledge acquisition in dyads improve individual problem solving performance and transfer to new problems. In the learning phase, participants solved several Tower of Hanoi problems and half of them were stimulated to metacognitive thinking. A second variable studied was if the learning tasks were solved individually or in dyads. The subsequent individually completed test phase consisted of two structurally similar and of two dissimilar transfer tasks. Metacognitive stimulation enhanced performance in all cases. Those participants who had been stimulated to metacognitive thinking, whether individually or in dyads, performed better on every task than did the individuals in the control group. Dyads proved better at solving the learning tasks than did the individuals, although this advantage did not affect individual performance on the transfer tasks.

Effects of the Information Environment on Group Discussions and Decisions in the Hidden-Profile Paradigm

Research on the Information Sampling Model (ISM) revealed that information items that are known to all group members at the outset (shared information) are more likely to be mentioned during discussion than information items that are only known to individual members (unshared information) (Stasser & Titus, 1985; Wittenbaum, Hollingshead, & Botero, 2004). In prior studies involving the ISM, groups typically functioned in a very specific information environment: All information items were provided in form of unique cues, which described only one of the choice alternatives among which the groups had to choose. Because this specific information environment may impact group discussions and decisions, we included an experimental condition incorporating common cues. In contrast to unique cues, common cues provide information on each and every choice option. As expected, groups in the common-cue condition showed a weaker sampling advantage for shared information, and chose the hidden-profile alternative more often than groups in the classic unique-cue condition.

The gap between reality and research

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to present a review of the deception detection literature that arrives at a different conclusion from the one presented by King and Dunn. Specifically, the authors’ review shows that people can detect deception at significantly above chance accuracy in policing environments. A new paradigm for deception detection is also discussed.Design/methodology/approach – An extensive literature review was conducted.Findings – People can detect deception at levels that exceed chance in a variety of police‐related environments when an ecological approach to detecting deception is adopted.Practical implications – The authors’ review suggests that it is time for deception detection training and manuals to move away from the demeanor‐based systems that are currently dominant and toward coherence and correspondence‐based systems.Originality/value – The paper presents a perspective that is different from the one advanced by King and Dunn. It also introduces the ecological detection of...

Communicating Quantitative Risk Information

People often seek quantitative risk information, but, at the same time, many have problems understanding risk messages that contain statistics and numbers. Common hurdles with comprehending such messages can be related to the risk message itself, the message sender, and the message receiver. In this chapter, we review literature indicating that some representations and formats of quantitative risk information are easier to understand than others. These representations provide an important tool for risk communicators. Second, we detail the ways in which the message sender, a risk communicator, may hinder effective communication. Third, we discuss receiver characteristics, including literacy and numeracy skills, which can affect how the message is comprehended. For each of these three classes, we give practical recommendations that may help risk communicators to effectively communicate quantitative risk information. We conclude with a discussion of quantitative risk information in relation to risk perception and provide future research directions.

Kognitive Ansätze zur Vorhersage der Gruppenleistung

Zusammenfassung: Anhand einer interdependenten Aufgabe wurden verschiedene Vorhersagen der Problemloseleistung in interagierenden Gruppen im Vergleich zu einer Einzelbedingung getestet: Die Distraktorhypothese nimmt an, das bei der Losung kognitiv belastender Aufgaben Prozesverluste entstehen, da sich die Gruppenmitglieder gegenseitig von der zu losenden Aufgabe ablenken. Dem Kompensationsansatz zufolge sind dagegen Leistungsvorteile der Gruppen zu erwarten, die prinzipiell uber bessere Kompensationsmoglichkeiten als Einzelpersonen verfugen. Der Akzentuierungsansatz sagt einen Gruppenvorteil voraus, wenn die einzelnen Gruppenmitglieder uber angemessene Problemlosestrategien verfugen; neigen die Problemloser dagegen dazu, fehlerhafte Losungsprozeduren anzuwenden, so sind dagegen Prozesverluste zu erwarten. Den Probanden wurde die Aufgabe gestellt, mehrere Turm von Hanoi-Probleme entweder einzeln oder in einer Paarbedingung zu losen, nachdem ihnen eine zielfuhrende (Goal-Recursion-Prozedur) oder eine ausers...

Resolving Rivalries and Realigning Goals: Challenges of Clinical and Research Multiteam Systems

This article describes the care processes for a 64-year-old man with newly diagnosed advanced non-small-cell lung cancer who was enrolled in a first-line clinical trial of a new immunotherapy regimen. The case highlights the concept of multiteam systems in cancer clinical research and clinical care. Because clinical research represents a highly dynamic entity-with studies frequently opening, closing, and undergoing modifications-concerted efforts of multiple teams are needed to respond to these changes while continuing to provide consistent, high-level care and timely, accurate clinical data. The case illustrates typical challenges of multiteam care processes. Compared with clinical tasks that are routinely performed by single teams, multiple-team care greatly increases the demands for communication, collaboration, cohesion, and coordination among team members. As the case illustrates, the described research team and clinical team are separated, resulting in suboptimal function. Individual team members interact predominantly with members of their own team. A considerable number of team members lack regular interaction with anyone outside their team. Accompanying this separation, the teams enact rivalries that impede collaboration. The teams have misaligned goals and competing priorities that create competition. Collective identity and cohesion across the two teams are low. Research team and clinical team members have limited knowledge of the roles and work of individuals outside their team. Recommendations to increase trust and collaboration are provided. Clinical providers and researchers may incorporate these themes into development and evaluation of multiteam systems, multidisciplinary teams, and cross-functional teams within their own institutions.

The SAGE Handbook of Risk Communication

Acknowledgments Introduction: Explicating Communication in Risk Communication - Hyunyi Cho, Torsten Reimer, and Katherine A. McComas Part I: Foundations of Risk Communication Section 1: Risk Perceptions of Individuals Chapter 1: Risk Perception - Nicolai Bodemer and Wolfgang Gaissmaier Chapter 2: The Challenge of the Description-Experience Gap to the Communication of Risks - Ralph Hertwig and Renato Frey Chapter 3: The Feeling of Risk: Implications for Risk Perception and Communication - Stephan Dickert, Daniel Vastfjall, Robert Mauro, and Paul Slovic Section 2: Risk as Social Construction Chapter 4: Social Construction of Risk - Adam Burgess Chapter 5: The Role of News Media in the Social Amplification of Risk - Andrew R. Binder, Michael A. Cacciatore, Dietram A. Scheufele, and Dominique Brossard Chapter 6: Rhetoric of Risk - Robin E. Jensen Part II: Components of Risk Communication Section 3: Models of Risk Communication Chapter 7: Risk Information Seeking and Processing Model - Sharon Dunwoody and Robert J. Griffin Chapter 8: The Societal Risk Reduction Motivation Model - Hyunyi Cho and Kai Kuang Section 4: Audiences of Risk Communication Chapter 9: The Role of Numeracy in Risk Communication - Priscila G. Brust-Renck, Valerie F. Reyna, Jonathan C. Corbin, Caisa E. Royer, and Rebecca B. Weldon Chapter 10: Edgework and Risk Communication - Stephen Lyng, Thomas Workman, and G. H. Morris Section 5: Risk Communication Messages Chapter 11: Numeric Communication of Risk - Torsten Reimer, Christina Jones, and Christine Skubisz Chapter 12: Narrative Communication of Risk: Toward Balancing Accuracy and Acceptance - Hyunyi Cho and L. Brooke Friley Chapter 13: Visual Messaging and Risk Communication - Andrew J. King Section 6: Risk Communication and the Media Chapter 14: Media Portrayal of Risk: The Social Production of News - Susanna Priest Chapter 15: Framing, the Media, and Risk Communication in Policy Debates - Matthew C. Nisbet Chapter 16: Social Media and Risk Communication - Stephen A. Rains, Steven R. Brunner, and Kyle Oman Part III: Contexts of Risk Communication Section 7: Interpersonal Contexts of Risk Communication Chapter 17: Risk Communication in Provider-Patient Interactions - Carma L. Bylund, Erin Maloney, and Emily B. Peterson Chapter 18: Informed Consent - Janet Yang Section 8: Organizational Contexts of Risk Communication Chapter 19: Risk Communication in Groups - Tillman Russell and Torsten Reimer Chapter 20: Crisis Communication - Timothy L. Sellnow Section 9: Risk Communication in the Public Sphere Chapter 21: Social Movements and Risk Communication - Hilary Schaffer Boudet and Shannon Elizabeth Bell Chapter 22: Public Engagement in Risk-Related Decision Making - John C. Besley Glossary Author Index Subject Index About the Editors About the Contributors

Direkte und indirekte Effekte der Argumentqualität

Zusammenfassung: In der Persuasionsforschung (z.B. Petty, Cacioppo & Goldman, 1981) werden haufig die Angaben zur Expertise eines Kommunikators und die Qualitat der Argumente variiert. Gewohnlich gelingt es dabei jedoch nicht, diese beiden Faktoren unabhangig voneinander zu manipulieren, wodurch die interne Validitat der Experimente eingeschrankt wird. In der vorliegenden Untersuchung wurde die Annahme eines indirekten Effektes der Argumentstarke auf die Einstellung getestet, der uber die wahrgenommene Expertise vermittelt ist. 100 Studierenden des Bachelor-Studienganges “Psychologie” an der Universitat Basel wurde ein Zeitungsartikel zur Neuregelung der Kreditpunktevergabe im Psychologiestudium vorgelegt. Als unabhangige Variablen wurden die Expertise des Autors (hoch/niedrig/keine Angaben) und die Argumentqualitat (hoch/niedrig) variiert. Wie erwartet, hatte die Qualitat der verwendeten Argumente nicht nur einen Effekt auf die Einstellung gegenuber der vorgeschlagenen Neuregelung, sondern auch einen mas...