hidden profile

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    团体在解决问题方面往往胜过个人。然而,未能批判性地评估想法可能会通过所谓的群体思维导致次优结果。先前的研究表明,持有共同目标的人,观点,或者对环境的理解显示出类似的大脑活动模式,这本身可以通过建立共识的讨论得到加强。是否单独共享唤醒可以预测集体决策结果,然而,仍然未知。为了解决这个差距,我们计算了人际心率同步,与共同注意力相关的共享唤醒的外围指数,移情准确性,和团体凝聚力,在44组(n=204)中执行集体决策任务。这项任务要求对所有可用信息进行严格检查,以超越劣等信息,默认选项并做出正确的选择。使用多维递归定量分析(MdRQA)和机器学习,我们发现心率同步预测群体达成正确共识决策的概率>70%的交叉验证准确性-显著高于讨论持续时间所预测的。仅对团队功能或基线心率进行主观评估。我们建议小组讨论期间的心率同步提供了人际参与的生物标志物,可促进集体决策期间的自适应学习和有效的信息共享。
    Groups often outperform individuals in problem-solving. Nevertheless, failure to critically evaluate ideas risks suboptimal outcomes through so-called groupthink. Prior studies have shown that people who hold shared goals, perspectives, or understanding of the environment show similar patterns of brain activity, which itself can be enhanced by consensus-building discussions. Whether shared arousal alone can predict collective decision-making outcomes, however, remains unknown. To address this gap, we computed interpersonal heart rate synchrony, a peripheral index of shared arousal associated with joint attention, empathic accuracy, and group cohesion, in 44 groups (n = 204) performing a collective decision-making task. The task required critical examination of all available information to override inferior, default options and make the right choice. Using multidimensional recurrence quantification analysis (MdRQA) and machine learning, we found that heart rate synchrony predicted the probability of groups reaching the correct consensus decision with >70% cross-validation accuracy-significantly higher than that predicted by the duration of discussions, subjective assessment of team function or baseline heart rates alone. We propose that heart rate synchrony during group discussion provides a biomarker of interpersonal engagement that facilitates adaptive learning and effective information sharing during collective decision-making.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Preprint
    团体在解决问题方面往往胜过个人。然而,小组成员在讨论中未能批判性地评估想法可能会导致次优结果——这种现象被称为“群体思维”。虽然最近的研究发现人际生理同步与共同关注和群体凝聚力相关,它是否可以通过客观定义的绩效衡量来跟踪集体决策任务中的小组效能仍然存在争议。为了解决这个差距,我们收集了58组(n=271)的心率数据,这些组根据隐藏的配置文件模式执行任务.使用多维递归定量分析(MdRQA)和机器学习,我们发现,心率同步性预测了组超越群体思维并达成正确共识的概率,交叉验证准确率超过70%-显著高于仅通过对团队功能或基线心率的主观评估所预测的准确率.这些发现表明,自然小组讨论期间的心率同步可能是有效集体决策的生物标志物。
    Groups often outperform individuals in problem-solving. Nevertheless, failure to critically evaluate ideas risks sub-optimal outcomes through so-called groupthink. Prior studies have shown that people who hold shared goals, perspectives or understanding of the environment show similar patterns of brain activity, which itself can be enhanced by consensus building discussions. Whether shared arousal alone can predict collective decision-making outcomes, however, remains unknown. To address this gap, we computed interpersonal heart rate synchrony, a peripheral index of shared arousal associated with joint attention, empathic accuracy and group cohesion, in 44 groups (n=204) performing a collective decision-making task. The task required critical examination of all available information to override inferior, default options and make the right choice. Using multi-dimensional recurrence quantification analysis (MdRQA) and machine learning, we found that heart rate synchrony predicted the probability of groups reaching the correct consensus decision with greater than 70% cross-validation accuracy-significantly higher than that predicted by the duration of discussions, subjective assessment of team function or baseline heart rates alone. We propose that heart rate synchrony during group discussion provides a biomarker of interpersonal engagement that facilitates adaptive learning and effective information sharing during collective decision-making.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Comparative Study
    Head-mounted displays enable social interactions in immersive virtual environments. However, it is yet unclear whether the technology is also suitable for collaborative work between remote group members. Previous research comparing group performance in nonimmersive computer-mediated communication and face-to-face (FtF) interaction yielded inconsistent results. For this reason, we set out to compare multi-user immersive virtual reality (IVR), video conferencing (VC), and FtF interaction in a group decision task. Furthermore, we examined whether the conditions differed with respect to cognitive load and social presence. Using the hidden profile paradigm, we tested 174 participants in a fictional personnel selection case. Discussion quality in IVR did not differ from VC and FtF interaction. All conditions showed the typical bias for discussing information that was provided for all participants (i.e., shared information) compared with information that was only disclosed to individual participants (i.e., unshared information). Furthermore, we found that IVR groups showed the same probability of solving the task correctly. Social presence in IVR was reduced compared with FtF interaction; however, we found no differences in cognitive load. In sum, our results imply that IVR can effectuate efficient group behavior in a modern working environment that is characterized by a growing demand for remote collaboration.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号