Are groups more rational than individuals? A review of interactive decision making in groups

• Many decisions are interactive; the outcome of one party depends not only on its decisions or on acts of nature but also on the decisions of others. Standard game theory assumes that individuals are rational, self-interested decision makersthat is, decision makers are selfish, perfect calculators, and flawless executors of their strategies. A myriad of studies shows that these assumptions are problematic, at least when examining decisions made by individuals. In this article, we review the literature of the last 25 years on decision making by groups. Researchers have compared the strategic behavior of groups and individuals in many games: prisoner's dilemma, dictator, ultimatum, trust, centipede and principalagent games, among others. Our review suggests that results are quite consistent in revealing that group decisions are closer to the game-theoretic assumption of rationality than individual decisions. Given that many real-world decisions are made by groups, it is possible to argue that standard game theory is a better descriptive model than previously believed by experimental researchers. We conclude by discussing future research avenues in this area. WIREs Cogn Sci 2012, 3:471482. doi: 10.1002/wcs.1184 For further resources related to this article, please visit the .

Subject headings

SAMHÄLLSVETENSKAP  -- Annan samhällsvetenskap (hsv//swe)

SOCIAL SCIENCES  -- Other Social Sciences (hsv//eng)

Keyword

interindividual-intergroup discontinuity

team dictator game

to-take

experiment

group polarization

backward induction

centipede game

power

fairness

judgment

behavior

rsythe r

1994

games and economic behavior

v6

p347

kelvey rd

1992

econometrica

v60

p803

dor em

1982

journal of personality and social psychology

v42

p178

Publication and Content Type

ref (subject category)

art (subject category)