Inkaro poveikis individualiems ir grupiniams vertinimams
LTDviejų tyrimų tikslas - palyginti inkaro poveikį individualiems ir grupiniams vertinimams. Siekta įvertinti, kaip nuo vertinimų grupėse procedūros ypatumų priklauso inkaro poveikis. Metodai. Tyrimai atlikti pagal klasikinę dviejų stadijų paradigmą. Inkaras ir taikinys buvo semantiškai suderinti, t. y. priklausė tai pačiai semantinei kategorijai. Rezultatai, išvados. Nustatyta, kad inkaro įtaka grupiniams vertinimams, einantiems po individualių sprendimų, nesiskiria nuo įtakos ankstesniems individualiems vertinimams. Grupės dažnai naudojo vidurkio strategiją, kuri ir buvo vienodų rezultatų priežastis. Grupiniai įverčiai be išankstinių individualių vertinimų yra tiksliausi, mažiausiai veikiami inkaro. Aiškinant inkaro poveikio mechanizmus būtina postuluoti dviejų stadijų modelius. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Inkaro efektas; Grupiniai vertinimai; Inkaro poveikio fazės; Anchoring; Group judgements; Anchoring stages; Group judgments.
ENThe objective of the two studies was to compare anchoring in individual and group judgments. The studies aimed at estimation how anchoring depended upon the peculiarities of the procedure of group judgments. Methods. The studies were carried out in accordance with the classical two- study paradigm. The comparative questions were given in the first instance, while the absolute ones were asked afterwards. The anchor and the target were compatible semantically, i.e. they both appertained to the same semantic category. Results, conclusions. It was established that the anchoring in the group judgments following the individual ones did not differentiate from that in the foregone individual judgments. The group used the averaging strategy frequently, which resulted in uniformity of the effects. The group judgments, without preconceived individual ones, proved to be the most precise, the anchoring in which was the least. Under the circumstances, the more precise results were received not by reason of the groups' efficiency in the problem solution without preconceived individual judgments but due to inability to employ the averaging strategy and therefore to refuse discussion of the problem too early. At explanation of the anchoring mechanisms it is necessary to postulate the two-stage models. [From the publication]
