Risk Perception Within Subjects As Elected Representatives Compared To Consensus-based Group-decision Making. - Info and Reading Options

The Internet Archive:

It is often posited that humanity’s evolutionary success derives from its extraordinary capability to live in large social groups (Dunbar & Shultz, 2007; Tomasello, 2020). Thus, it is unsurprising that most of people’s interactions with the environment, both physical and social, are often facilitated through group memberships. A vast literature thus seeks to investigate the mechanisms of group behavior, particularly how groups make decisions (Bahrami et al., 2012; Bang et al., 2017; Charness & Jackson, 2009; Mahmoodi et al., 2015; Mann, 2018; Mollick & Nanda, 2016). Unfortunately, this work has tended to focus specifically on consensus-based choice where group members contribute equally to the final decision (Bahrami et al., 2012; Bose et al., 2017; Charness & Jackson, 2009; El Zein et al., 2019; Mann, 2018). In contrast, many of the decisions made at institutional levels of society depend on the individual choices made by a group representative (Landa & Pevnick, 2020), though these representatives sometimes derive their authority from group consensus. However, despite its prevalence in group structures in our daily lives, there is little work investigating the psychological implications of representative decisions (Wang et al., 2018), specifically in contrast to that of consensus-based choice (Song, 2009). Here we investigate how group-decision making may be influenced by whether it derives from a representative’s choice or a group’s consensus, specifically in the domain of risk perception. Primarily, because group representatives both have a disproportionate responsibility over the outcomes of the decisions they make and make these decisions on the behalf of others (Atanasov, 2010; Atanasov & Kunreuther, 2016; Batteux et al., 2019; Charness & Jackson, 2009; Crockett et al., 2017; El Zein et al., 2019; Mengarelli et al., 2014; Song, 2008, 2009; Wang et al., 2018), we hypothesize that representatives of groups are more likely to be risk-averse relative to individual constituents of consensus-based groups. This may mean that decisions made by representatives fail to adequately reflect the preferences of the group they represent. This work will not only further our understanding of the psychological dynamics that sustain group-based living but provide practical insight into the organization of social institutions. A notable practical example is the contemporary discourse around the merits of a representative vs. direct democratic political systems (Blick & Salter, 2021; Budge, 2006; Landa & Pevnick, 2020; Santerre, 1986).

Search for “Risk Perception Within Subjects As Elected Representatives Compared To Consensus-based Group-decision Making.” downloads:

Visit our Downloads Search page to see if downloads are available.

Find “Risk Perception Within Subjects As Elected Representatives Compared To Consensus-based Group-decision Making.” in Libraries Near You:

Read or borrow “Risk Perception Within Subjects As Elected Representatives Compared To Consensus-based Group-decision Making.” from your local library.

• The WorldCat Libraries Catalog: Find a copy of “Risk Perception Within Subjects As Elected Representatives Compared To Consensus-based Group-decision Making.” at a library near you.