Editing Anchoring effect (section)

===Anchoring bias in groups===

Given the old saying that 'Two Heads are Better than One', it is often presumed that groups come to a more unbiased decision relative to individuals.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Tindale |first1=R. Scott |last2=Winget |first2=Jeremy R. |title=Group Decision-Making |journal=Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology |date=26 March 2019 |doi=10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.262|isbn=9780190236557 |url=http://psyarxiv.com/kq2ft/ }}</ref> However, this assumption is supported with varied findings that could not come to a general consensus.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Gigone |first1=Daniel |last2=Hastie |first2=Reid |title=The common knowledge effect: Information sharing and group judgment. |journal=Journal of Personality and Social Psychology |date=1993 |volume=65 |issue=5 |pages=959–974 |doi=10.1037/0022-3514.65.5.959}}</ref><ref name="Bias in judgment: Comparing individ">{{cite journal |last1=Kerr |first1=Norbert L. |last2=MacCoun |first2=Robert J. |last3=Kramer |first3=Geoffrey P. |title=Bias in judgment: Comparing individuals and groups. |journal=Psychological Review |date=October 1996 |volume=103 |issue=4 |pages=687–719 |doi=10.1037/0033-295X.103.4.687|url=https://kar.kent.ac.uk/41331/1/KerrMcCounKramer.1996.BiasPaper.pdf }}</ref><ref name="Group Performance and Decision Maki">{{cite journal |last1=Kerr |first1=Norbert L. |last2=Tindale |first2=R. Scott |title=Group Performance and Decision Making |journal=Annual Review of Psychology |date=February 2004 |volume=55 |issue=1 |pages=623–655 |doi=10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142009|pmid=14744229 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Laughlin |first1=Patrick R. |last2=Bonner |first2=Bryan L. |last3=Altermatt |first3=T. William |title=Collective versus individual induction with single versus multiple hypotheses. |journal=Journal of Personality and Social Psychology |date=1998 |volume=75 |issue=6 |pages=1481–1489 |doi=10.1037/0022-3514.75.6.1481}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Laughlin |first1=Patrick R. |last2=VanderStoep |first2=Scott W. |last3=Hollingshead |first3=Andrea B. |title=Collective versus individual induction: Recognition of truth, rejection of error, and collective information processing. |journal=Journal of Personality and Social Psychology |date=1991 |volume=61 |issue=1 |pages=50–67 |doi=10.1037/0022-3514.61.1.50}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Sunstein |first1=Cass R. |title=Group Judgments: Deliberation, Statistical Means, and Information Markets |journal=SSRN Electronic Journal |date=2004 |doi=10.2139/ssrn.578301|url=https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1132&context=public_law_and_legal_theory |url-access=subscription }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Whyte |first1=Glen |title=Escalating Commitment in Individual and Group Decision Making: A Prospect Theory Approach |journal=Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes |date=April 1993 |volume=54 |issue=3 |pages=430–455 |doi=10.1006/obhd.1993.1018}}</ref> Nevertheless, while some groups are able to perform better than an individual member, they are found to be just as biased or even more biased relative to their individual counterparts.<ref name="Bias in judgment: Comparing individ"/><ref name="Group Performance and Decision Maki"/> A possible cause would be the discriminatory fashion in which information is communicated, processed and aggregated based on each individual's anchored knowledge and belief.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=De Dreu |first1=Carsten K. W. |last2=Nijstad |first2=Bernard A. |last3=van Knippenberg |first3=Daan |title=Motivated Information Processing in Group Judgment and Decision Making |journal=Personality and Social Psychology Review |date=February 2008 |volume=12 |issue=1 |pages=22–49 |doi=10.1177/1088868307304092|pmid=18453471 |s2cid=37435044 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Schulz-Hardt |first1=Stefan |last2=Brodbeck |first2=Felix C. |last3=Mojzisch |first3=Andreas |last4=Kerschreiter |first4=Rudolf |last5=Frey |first5=Dieter |title=Group decision making in hidden profile situations: Dissent as a facilitator for decision quality. |journal=Journal of Personality and Social Psychology |date=2006 |volume=91 |issue=6 |pages=1080–1093 |doi=10.1037/0022-3514.91.6.1080|pmid=17144766 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Stasser |first1=Garold |last2=Titus |first2=William |title=Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. |journal=Journal of Personality and Social Psychology |date=June 1985 |volume=48 |issue=6 |pages=1467–1478 |doi=10.1037/0022-3514.48.6.1467}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Stasser |first1=Garold |last2=Titus |first2=William |title=Effects of information load and percentage of shared information on the dissemination of unshared information during group discussion. |journal=Journal of Personality and Social Psychology |date=1987 |volume=53 |issue=1 |pages=81–93 |doi=10.1037/0022-3514.53.1.81}}</ref> This results in a diminished quality in the decision-making process and consequently, amplifies the pre-existing anchored biases.

The cause of group anchoring remains unsure. Group anchors may have been established at the group level or may simply be the culmination of several individual's personal anchors. Prior studies have shown that when given an anchor before the experiment, individual members consolidated the respective anchors to attain a decision in the direction of the anchor placed.<ref name="The Effect of Multiple Anchors on A">{{cite journal |last1=Whyte |first1=Glen |last2=Sebenius |first2=James K. |title=The Effect of Multiple Anchors on Anchoring in Individual and Group Judgment |journal=Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes |date=January 1997 |volume=69 |issue=1 |pages=75–85 |doi=10.1006/obhd.1996.2674}}</ref> However, a distinction between individual and group-based anchor biases does exist, with groups tending to ignore or disregard external information due to the confidence in the joint decision-making process.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Minson |first1=Julia A. |last2=Mueller |first2=Jennifer S. |title=The Cost of Collaboration: Why Joint Decision Making Exacerbates Rejection of Outside Information |journal=Psychological Science |date=March 2012 |volume=23 |issue=3 |pages=219–224 |doi=10.1177/0956797611429132|pmid=22344447 |s2cid=15978610 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Minson |first1=Julia A. |last2=Mueller |first2=Jennifer S. |title=Groups Weight Outside Information Less Than Individuals Do, Although They Shouldn't: Response to Schultze, Mojzisch, and Schulz-Hardt (2013) |journal=Psychological Science |date=July 2013 |volume=24 |issue=7 |pages=1373–1374 |doi=10.1177/0956797613476894|pmid=23640063 |s2cid=6062825 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Schultze |first1=Thomas |last2=Mojzisch |first2=Andreas |last3=Schulz-Hardt |first3=Stefan |title=Groups Weight Outside Information Less Than Individuals Do Because They Should: Response to Minson and Mueller (2012) |journal=Psychological Science |date=July 2013 |volume=24 |issue=7 |pages=1371–1372 |doi=10.1177/0956797612472206|pmid=23640064 |s2cid=41307737 |url=https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/8333 }}</ref> The presence of pre-anchor preferences also impeded the extent to which external anchors affected the group decision, as groups tend to allocate more weight to self-generated anchors, according to the 'competing anchor hypothesis'.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Sniezek |first1=Janet A |title=Groups under uncertainty: An examination of confidence in group decision making |journal=Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes |date=June 1992 |volume=52 |issue=1 |pages=124–155 |doi=10.1016/0749-5978(92)90048-C}}</ref><ref name="The Effect of Multiple Anchors on A"/>

Recently, it has been suggested that the group member who speaks first often has an unproportionally high impact on the final decision.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Hartmann |first1=Stephan |last2=Rafiee Rad |first2=Soroush |date=2020-10-01 |title=Anchoring in Deliberations |url=https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-018-0064-y |journal=Erkenntnis |language=en |volume=85 |issue=5 |pages=1041–1069 |doi=10.1007/s10670-018-0064-y |issn=1572-8420}}</ref><ref>{{Cite thesis |title=Anchoring in deliberations of structured groups |url=https://edoc.ub.uni-muenchen.de/33309/ |publisher=Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München |date=2024-02-23 |degree=Text.PhDThesis |doi=10.5282/edoc.33309 |language=English |first=José Antonio |last=Leyva Galano}}</ref>

A series of experiments were conducted to investigate anchoring bias in groups and possible solutions to avoid or mitigate anchoring. The first experiment established that groups are indeed influenced by anchors while the other two experiments highlighted methods to overcome group anchoring bias. Methods that were utilized include the use of process accountability<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Ten Velden |first1=Femke S. |last2=Beersma |first2=Bianca |last3=De Dreu |first3=Carsten K. W. |title=It Takes One to Tango: The Effects of Dyads' Epistemic Motivation Composition in Negotiation |journal=Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin |date=November 2010 |volume=36 |issue=11 |pages=1454–1466 |doi=10.1177/0146167210383698|pmid=20841436 |s2cid=6252360 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Scholten |first1=Lotte |last2=van Knippenberg |first2=Daan |last3=Nijstad |first3=Bernard A. |last4=De Dreu |first4=Carsten K.W. |title=Motivated information processing and group decision-making: Effects of process accountability on information processing and decision quality |journal=Journal of Experimental Social Psychology |date=July 2007 |volume=43 |issue=4 |pages=539–552 |doi=10.1016/j.jesp.2006.05.010}}</ref> and motivation through competition instead of cooperation<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Nijstad |first1=Bernard A. |last2=Oltmanns |first2=Jan |title=Motivated information processing and group decision refusal |journal=Group Processes & Intergroup Relations |date=September 2012 |volume=15 |issue=5 |pages=637–651 |doi=10.1177/1368430212454588|s2cid=147023588 }}</ref> to reduce the influence of anchors within groups.