[Paleopsych] NS: Creativity Special (thoughts on group thinking)
Todd I. Stark
thrst4knw at aol.com
Mon Nov 14 15:17:32 UTC 2005
One of the most interesting points I took away from this issue of NS was
the finding they reported regarding "brainstorming." This is usually
proposed in business as a group dynamic, where people's ideas are
assumed to trigger other ideas from other people. From experience, I've
found this to be largely untrue. Whenever the issue is one that is
important to people, they can't seem to avoid censoring themselves and
each other rather than triggering creative new combinations. The theory
that people can "think together" just doesn't seem to pan out under most
conditions, except where the "thinking" is a very primitive form of mob
coordination.
But that is just my limited experience. One of the articles mentioned
that brainstorming has also been found experimentally to work better
when people come up with ideas individually first and then get together
to evaluate them. Other research shows that groups tend to make
slightly better decisions than the average decision maker in the group,
but worse than the best decision maker in the group. So working closely
with other people in making decisions seems to bring us down roughly to
the group average. Not exactly the ideal of "synergy" that we would
like to strive for.
I suspect this is right, because the creative process occurs more within
individual minds than within the communication media we use. A similar
misconception occurs in business in "knowledge management." In our zeal
to represent knowledge by using external networks we lose track of how
sophisticated and different the network of knowledge *within* the human
mind really is. Groups can certainly share _information_, but knowledge
is really still within individuals rather than being anything stored
externally at this point. Network properties are interesting but
networks in an animal brain are of a qualitatively different sort than
those that we use to connect ourselves together.
It's hard enough to get people to talk to each other openly, much less
"collaborate" more efficiently through the use of information
technology. The better we connect ourselves, the less we seem to think
as individuals, so we often and perhaps often rightly resist group
processes that supposedly improve on individual thinking.
kind regards,
Todd
More information about the paleopsych
mailing list