Motivated information processing and group decision-making: Effects of process accountability on information processing and decision quality

  • Scholten L
  • van Knippenberg D
  • Nijstad B
 et al. 
  • 14


    Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
  • N/A


    Citations of this article.


Integrating dual-process models [Chaiken, S., & Trope, Y. (Eds.). (1999). Dual-process theories in social psychology. NewYork: Guilford Press] with work on information sharing and group decision-making [Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1467-1478.], we predicted that groups with high epistemic motivation engage in more information-driven and less preference-driven interaction, and achieve better decisions. An experiment manipulating process accountability showed that groups under process accountability experienced greater need for more information, repeated unshared information more often, and more often chose the correct decision alternative. Mediation analysis established that epistemic motivation produced high quality decisions because it stimulated systematic information processing. Results also revealed that preference heterogeneity stimulated information-driven interaction and led to higher decision quality. © 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Author-supplied keywords

  • Group decision-making
  • Information exchange
  • Information processing
  • Motivation

Get free article suggestions today

Mendeley saves you time finding and organizing research

Sign up here
Already have an account ?Sign in

Find this document


  • L Scholten

  • D van Knippenberg

  • B A Nijstad

  • C K W De Dreu

Cite this document

Choose a citation style from the tabs below

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free