mirror of
https://github.com/13hannes11/bachelor_thesis.git
synced 2024-09-04 01:11:00 +02:00
add even more literature
This commit is contained in:
hannes.kuchelmeister
@@ -552,9 +552,231 @@ OCLC: 935904837}
|
||||
urldate = {2019-10-29},
|
||||
date = {1992-06},
|
||||
pages = {124-155},
|
||||
keywords = {group-decisions},
|
||||
keywords = {confidence in decions,group-decisions},
|
||||
author = {Sniezek, Janet A},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\FB7B7PIK\\Sniezek - 1992 - Groups under uncertainty An examination of confid.pdf}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{delicResearchMethodsGroup2016,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {Research {{Methods}} for {{Group Recommender Systems}}},
|
||||
abstract = {In this article we argue that the research on group recommender systems must look more carefully at group dynamics in decision making in order to produce technologies that will be truly beneficial for users. Hence, we illustrate a user study method aimed at observing and measuring the evolution of user preferences and actions in a tourism decision making task: finding a destination to visit. We discuss the benefits and caveats of such an observational study method and we present the implications that the derived data and findings may have on the design of interactive group recommender systems.},
|
||||
date = {2016},
|
||||
pages = {8},
|
||||
keywords = {group recommender,methods},
|
||||
author = {Delic, Amra and Neidhardt, Julia and Nguyen, Thuy Ngoc},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\IXW2MLZP\\Delic et al. - Research Methods for Group Recommender Systems.pdf}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@inproceedings{chenInterfaceInteractionDesign2011,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
location = {{Chicago, Illinois, USA}},
|
||||
title = {Interface and Interaction Design for Group and Social Recommender Systems},
|
||||
isbn = {978-1-4503-0683-6},
|
||||
url = {http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=2043932.2044007},
|
||||
doi = {10.1145/2043932.2044007},
|
||||
abstract = {Group and social recommender systems aim to recommend items of interest to a group or a community of people. The user issues in such systems cannot be addressed by examining the satisfaction of their members as individuals. Rather, group satisfaction should be studied as a result of the interaction and interface methods that support group dynamics and interaction. In this paper, we survey the state-of-the-art in user experience design of group and social recommender systems. We further apply the techniques used in the current recommender systems to GroupFun, a music social group recommender system. After presenting the interface and interaction characteristics of GroupFun, we further analyze the design space and propose areas for future research in pursuit of an affective recommender.},
|
||||
eventtitle = {The Fifth {{ACM}} Conference},
|
||||
booktitle = {Proceedings of the Fifth {{ACM}} Conference on {{Recommender}} Systems - {{RecSys}} '11},
|
||||
publisher = {{ACM Press}},
|
||||
urldate = {2019-10-30},
|
||||
date = {2011},
|
||||
pages = {363},
|
||||
author = {Chen, Yu},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\BXIV2L5C\\Chen - 2011 - Interface and interaction design for group and soc.pdf}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{vanginkelKnowledgeDistributionInformation2009,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {Knowledge about the Distribution of Information and Group Decision Making: {{When}} and Why Does It Work?},
|
||||
volume = {108},
|
||||
issn = {07495978},
|
||||
url = {https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0749597808001064},
|
||||
doi = {10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.10.003},
|
||||
shorttitle = {Knowledge about the Distribution of Information and Group Decision Making},
|
||||
abstract = {Research has shown that decision-making groups with distributed information perform better when group members know which member is knowledgeable about what. Thus far research has been unable to identify the process responsible for this effect. In the present study, we propose that group members’ task representations mediate the effect of knowledge about the distribution of information on decision performance. Building on this proposition, we also propose that reflection about the task moderates the effect of knowledge about distributed information through its effect on task representations. These hypotheses were put to the test in an experimental study of decision-making groups (N = 125). As predicted, knowledge of distributed information interacted with reflection to affect decision quality. Findings confirmed the proposed mediating role of task representations and information elaboration.},
|
||||
number = {2},
|
||||
journaltitle = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes},
|
||||
shortjournal = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes},
|
||||
urldate = {2019-10-30},
|
||||
date = {2009-03},
|
||||
pages = {218-229},
|
||||
author = {van Ginkel, Wendy P. and van Knippenberg, Daan},
|
||||
options = {useprefix=true},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\Y4XVVAZ3\\van Ginkel und van Knippenberg - 2009 - Knowledge about the distribution of information an.pdf}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{milchIndividualPreferenceConstruction2009,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {From Individual Preference Construction to Group Decisions: {{Framing}} Effects and Group Processes},
|
||||
volume = {108},
|
||||
issn = {07495978},
|
||||
url = {https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0749597808001106},
|
||||
doi = {10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.11.003},
|
||||
shorttitle = {From Individual Preference Construction to Group Decisions},
|
||||
abstract = {Two choice tasks known to produce framing effects in individual decisions were used to test group sensitivity to framing, relative to that of individuals, and to examine the effect of prior, individual consideration of a decision on group choice. Written post-decision reasons and pre-decision group discussions were analyzed to investigate process explanations of choices made by preexisting, naturalistic groups. For a risky choice problem, a similar framing effect was observed for groups and individuals. For an intertemporal choice task where consumption was either delayed or accelerated, naïve groups (whose members had not preconsidered the decision) showed a framing effect, less discounting in the delay frame, opposite to that observed in individuals. Predecided groups showed a non-significant effect in the other, expected direction. In all cases, process measures better explained variability in choices across conditions than frame alone. Implications for group decision research and design considerations for committee decisions are addressed.},
|
||||
number = {2},
|
||||
journaltitle = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes},
|
||||
shortjournal = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes},
|
||||
urldate = {2019-10-30},
|
||||
date = {2009-03},
|
||||
pages = {242-255},
|
||||
author = {Milch, Kerry F. and Weber, Elke U. and Appelt, Kirstin C. and Handgraaf, Michel J.J. and Krantz, David H.},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\V444AHG9\\Milch et al. - 2009 - From individual preference construction to group d.pdf}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{bonnerEffectsMemberExpertise2002,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {The Effects of Member Expertise on Group Decision-Making and Performance},
|
||||
volume = {88},
|
||||
issn = {07495978},
|
||||
url = {https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0749597802000109},
|
||||
doi = {10.1016/S0749-5978(02)00010-9},
|
||||
abstract = {This study assesses the effects of member expertise on group decision-making and group performance. Three-person cooperative groups and three independent individuals solved either an easy or moderately difficult version of the deductive logic game Mastermind. Experimental groups were given veridical performance information, i.e., the members’ rankings on prior individual administrations of the task. Control groups were not provided with this information. Results supported the predictions of this study: (1) groups gave more weight to the input of their highest performing members with the group decision-making process being best approximated by post hoc ‘‘expert weighted’’ social decision schemes and (2) groups performed at the level of the best of an equivalent number of individuals. Ó 2002 Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved.},
|
||||
number = {2},
|
||||
journaltitle = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes},
|
||||
shortjournal = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes},
|
||||
urldate = {2019-10-30},
|
||||
date = {2002-07},
|
||||
pages = {719-736},
|
||||
author = {Bonner, Bryan L and Baumann, Michael R and Dalal, Reeshad S},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\EQHEQVEN\\Bonner et al. - 2002 - The effects of member expertise on group decision-.pdf}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{hollingsheadRankOrderEffectGroup1996,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {The {{Rank}}-{{Order Effect}} in {{Group Decision Making}}},
|
||||
volume = {68},
|
||||
issn = {07495978},
|
||||
url = {https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0749597896900989},
|
||||
doi = {10.1006/obhd.1996.0098},
|
||||
number = {3},
|
||||
journaltitle = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes},
|
||||
shortjournal = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes},
|
||||
urldate = {2019-10-30},
|
||||
date = {1996-12},
|
||||
pages = {181-193},
|
||||
author = {Hollingshead, Andrea B.},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\GPRG7D8G\\Hollingshead - 1996 - The Rank-Order Effect in Group Decision Making.pdf}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{crottGroupDecisionChoice1991,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {Group Decision, Choice Shift, and Polarization in Consulting, Political, and Local Political Scenarios: {{An}} Experimental Investigation and Theoretical Analysis},
|
||||
volume = {49},
|
||||
issn = {07495978},
|
||||
url = {https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/074959789190040Z},
|
||||
doi = {10.1016/0749-5978(91)90040-Z},
|
||||
shorttitle = {Group Decision, Choice Shift, and Polarization in Consulting, Political, and Local Political Scenarios},
|
||||
number = {1},
|
||||
journaltitle = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes},
|
||||
shortjournal = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes},
|
||||
urldate = {2019-10-30},
|
||||
date = {1991-06},
|
||||
pages = {22-41},
|
||||
author = {Crott, Helmut W and Szilvas, Klaus and Zuber, Johannes A},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\CXGJWE27\\Crott et al. - 1991 - Group decision, choice shift, and polarization in .pdf}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{schulz-hardtProductiveConflictGroup2002,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {Productive Conflict in Group Decision Making: Genuine and Contrived Dissent as Strategies to Counteract Biased Information Seekingq},
|
||||
abstract = {Decision-making groups in organizations are often expected to function as a ‘‘think tank’’ and to perform ‘‘reality testing’’ to detect the best alternative. A biased search for information supporting the group’s favored alternative impairs a group’s ability to fulfill these requirements. In a two-factorial experiment with 201 employees and managers from various economic and public organizations, genuine and contrived dissent were investigated as counterstrategies to biased information seeking. Genuine dissent was manipulated by forming three-person groups whose members either all favored the same alternative individually (homogeneous groups) or consisted of a minority and a majority faction with regard to their favored alternative (heterogeneous groups). Contrived dissent was varied by the use or nonuse of the ‘‘devil’s advocacy’’ technique. The results demonstrate that heterogeneity was more effective in preventing a confirmatory information-seeking bias than devil’s advocacy was. Confidence was identified as an important mediator. Implications for the design of interventions aimed at facilitating reality testing in group decision making are discussed. Ó 2002 Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved.},
|
||||
journaltitle = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes},
|
||||
date = {2002},
|
||||
pages = {24},
|
||||
author = {Schulz-Hardt, Stefan and Jochims, Marc and Frey, Dieter},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\6C92UPS6\\Schulz-Hardt et al. - 2002 - Productive conflict in group decision making genui.pdf}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@inproceedings{atasItemRecommendationUsing2017,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
location = {{Cham}},
|
||||
title = {Beyond {{Item Recommendation}}: {{Using Recommendations}} to {{Stimulate Knowledge Sharing}} in {{Group Decisions}}},
|
||||
isbn = {978-3-319-67256-4},
|
||||
doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-67256-4_29},
|
||||
shorttitle = {Beyond {{Item Recommendation}}},
|
||||
abstract = {The intensity of domain knowledge exchange among group members is an important factor that directly influences group decision quality. The more frequent information is exchanged among group members, the higher the quality of the corresponding decision. In this paper we present results of an empirical study conducted with groups of students – the task of each group was to take a decision regarding the exam topics the group prefers. This group decision had to be taken on the basis of a group decision support environment with included recommendation functionality and a discussion forum that allows for information exchange among group members. Depending on the included variant of the group recommendation algorithm, groups received recommendations that varied in terms of recommendation diversity. The results of the study show that increased recommendation diversity leads to an increased degree of information exchange among group members.},
|
||||
booktitle = {Social {{Informatics}}},
|
||||
series = {Lecture {{Notes}} in {{Computer Science}}},
|
||||
publisher = {{Springer International Publishing}},
|
||||
date = {2017},
|
||||
pages = {368-377},
|
||||
keywords = {Decision quality,Group decision making,Group recommender systems,Information exchange},
|
||||
author = {Atas, Müslüm and Felfernig, Alexander and Stettinger, Martin and Tran, Thi Ngoc Trang},
|
||||
editor = {Ciampaglia, Giovanni Luca and Mashhadi, Afra and Yasseri, Taha},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\JEFM2ATK\\Atas et al_2017_Beyond Item Recommendation.pdf}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{brodbeckDisseminationCriticalUnshared2002,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {The Dissemination of Critical, Unshared Information in Decision-Making Groups: The Effects of Pre-Discussion Dissent},
|
||||
volume = {32},
|
||||
issn = {1099-0992},
|
||||
url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ejsp.74},
|
||||
doi = {10.1002/ejsp.74},
|
||||
shorttitle = {The Dissemination of Critical, Unshared Information in Decision-Making Groups},
|
||||
abstract = {Previous research in group decision making has found that in situations of a hidden profile (i.e. the best choice alternative is hidden from individual members as they consider their pre-discussion information), unshared information is disproportionately neglected and sub-optimal group choices are highly likely. In an experimental study, three-person groups decided which of three candidates to select for a professorial appointment. We hypothesised that minority dissent in pre-discussion preferences improves the consideration of unshared information in groups and increases the discovery rate of hidden profiles. As predicted, consideration of unshared information increased with minority dissent. The expectation of an improvement of group decision quality was partially supported. In diversity groups (i.e. each member prefers a different alternative) consideration of unshared information and group decision quality was significantly higher than in simple minority groups. Results are discussed in the light of theories of minority influence. The benefits of using the hidden profile paradigm with minority and diversity groups for theory development in the area of group decision making are highlighted. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley \& Sons, Ltd.},
|
||||
number = {1},
|
||||
journaltitle = {European Journal of Social Psychology},
|
||||
urldate = {2019-10-30},
|
||||
date = {2002},
|
||||
pages = {35-56},
|
||||
author = {Brodbeck, Felix C. and Kerschreiter, Rudolf and Mojzisch, Andreas and Frey, Dieter and Schulz‐Hardt, Stefan},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\DTVUVFD5\\ejsp.html}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{esserAliveWell251998,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
title = {Alive and {{Well}} after 25 {{Years}}: {{A Review}} of {{Groupthink Research}}},
|
||||
volume = {73},
|
||||
issn = {0749-5978},
|
||||
url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597898927583},
|
||||
doi = {10.1006/obhd.1998.2758},
|
||||
shorttitle = {Alive and {{Well}} after 25 {{Years}}},
|
||||
abstract = {This article provides a summary of empirical research on groupthink theory. Groupthink research, including analyses of historical cases of poor group decision making and laboratory tests of groupthink, is reviewed. Results from these two research areas are briefly compared. Theoretical and methodological issues for future groupthink research are identified and discussed. I conclude that groupthink research has had and continues to have considerable heuristic value. A small, but growing, body of empirical literature has been generated. In addition, groupthink research has stimulated a number of theoretical ideas, most of which have yet to be tested.},
|
||||
number = {2},
|
||||
journaltitle = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes},
|
||||
shortjournal = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes},
|
||||
urldate = {2019-10-30},
|
||||
date = {1998-02-01},
|
||||
pages = {116-141},
|
||||
keywords = {group-decisions,groupthink},
|
||||
author = {Esser, James K},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\KMR4CLGA\\Esser_1998_Alive and Well after 25 Years.pdf;C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\NSYG2B7Z\\S0749597898927583.html}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@inproceedings{felfernigPersuasiveRecommendationSerial2007,
|
||||
langid = {english},
|
||||
location = {{Berlin, Heidelberg}},
|
||||
title = {Persuasive {{Recommendation}}: {{Serial Position Effects}} in {{Knowledge}}-{{Based Recommender Systems}}},
|
||||
isbn = {978-3-540-77006-0},
|
||||
doi = {10.1007/978-3-540-77006-0_34},
|
||||
shorttitle = {Persuasive {{Recommendation}}},
|
||||
abstract = {Recommender technologies are crucial for the effective support of customers in online sales situations. The state-of-the-art research in recommender systems is not aware of existing theories in the areas of cognitive and decision psychology and thus lacks of deeper understanding of online buying situations. In this paper we present results from user studies related to serial position effects in human memory in the context of knowledge-based recommender applications. We discuss serial position effects on the recall of product descriptions as well as on the probability of product selection. Serial position effects such as primacy and recency are major building blocks of persuasive, next generation knowledge-based recommender systems.},
|
||||
booktitle = {Persuasive {{Technology}}},
|
||||
series = {Lecture {{Notes}} in {{Computer Science}}},
|
||||
publisher = {{Springer}},
|
||||
date = {2007},
|
||||
pages = {283-294},
|
||||
keywords = {human memory,interactive selling,knowledge-based recommendation,persuasive technologies,recommender systems},
|
||||
author = {Felfernig, A. and Friedrich, G. and Gula, B. and Hitz, M. and Kruggel, T. and Leitner, G. and Melcher, R. and Riepan, D. and Strauss, S. and Teppan, E. and Vitouch, O.},
|
||||
editor = {de Kort, Yvonne and IJsselsteijn, Wijnand and Midden, Cees and Eggen, Berry and Fogg, B. J.},
|
||||
options = {useprefix=true},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\T38JCWRX\\Felfernig et al_2007_Persuasive Recommendation.pdf}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@article{kerrBiasJudgmentComparing1996,
|
||||
title = {Bias in Judgment: {{Comparing}} Individuals and Groups.},
|
||||
volume = {103},
|
||||
number = {4},
|
||||
journaltitle = {Psychological review},
|
||||
date = {1996},
|
||||
pages = {687},
|
||||
keywords = {group-decisions,bias},
|
||||
author = {Kerr, Norbert L and MacCoun, Robert J and Kramer, Geoffrey P},
|
||||
file = {C\:\\Users\\Hannes.Kuchelmeister\\Zotero\\storage\\HQGR93PH\\Kerr et al_1996_Bias in judgment.pdf},
|
||||
publisher = {{American Psychological Association}}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user