Cited by 725
Northwestern University
Publishes on Complex Systems and Decision Making, Team Dynamics and Performance, Cognitive Science and Mapping. 100 papers and 4k citations.
Add your photo, update your bio, and get notified when your ranking changes.
Individuals and groups of 2, 3, 4, or 5 people solved 2 letters-to-numbers problems that required participants, on each trial, to identify the coding of 10 letters to 10 numbers by proposing an equation in letters, receiving the answer in letters, proposing a hypothesis, and receiving feedback on the correctness of the hypothesis. Groups of 3, 4, and 5 people proposed more complex equations and had fewer trials to solution than the best of an equivalent number of individuals. Groups of 3, 4, and 5 people had fewer trials to solution than 2-person groups but did not differ from each other. These results suggest that 3-person groups are necessary and sufficient to perform better than the best individuals on highly intellective problems.
Four-person groups and 4 independent individuals solved rule induction problems under 4 levels of potential information. Groups performed at the level of the 2nd-best individuals for correct hypotheses (recognition of truth) and at the level of the best individuals for nonplausible hypotheses (rejection of error)