28th International Congress of Psychology August 8 ... - U-netSURF

We established a situation in which members of two dense groups (respectively 25 members) pass
over a designated spot at a quick step. The groups encountered one another over the spot and
parted. In "facing" condition the two groups meet squarely facing each other then parting. In
"crossing," the two groups cross each other at an angle of 90 degrees when passing the spot.
"Joining" condition means the two groups merge in middle of the way and thereafter proceed in
the same direction.
3118.137 The effects of group interaction on idea-generation performance, Guibing He 1 , Ya
Zheng 2 , 1 Zhejiang University, China; 2 Peking University, China
This study investigated the effects of communication media, discussion rules and discussion
structure on the quantity and quality of unique ideas produced by decision-making groups who
were given the problem of “how to control SARS spreading in a city”. The results showed that: (1)
Structured discussion groups had higher performance than unstructured groups not only on the
number of effective ideas, the idea creativity, but also on the confidence. (2) Brainstorming groups
generated more ideas with higher quality than free discussion groups. (3) Compared to FTF, CM
Groups perceived the task easier, but generated ideas broader.
3118.138 The effects of two-component individuality on the group formation process, Chikae
Isobe, Mitsuhiro Ura, Hiroshima University, Japan
This study showed the possibility that the individuals engaged in group formation process
voluntarily based on individuality that is individuals' orientation to the self as differentiation
and/or independence. Considering findings of Kampmeier & Simon (2001), the level of
individuality would provide individuals' motives for group formation. First, we developed the
scale of motives for group formation (sub-factors: intergroup differentiation, intragroup
differentiation, group identity, ingroup advantage, and self-profitability) to measure individuals'
voluntary group formation process. Next, we conducted to Multivariate multiple regression
analysis. The results supported our predictions, that is, each component of individuality had
different effects on these motives.
3118.139 Leadership effectiveness: The role of leader ingroup prototypicality in an intergroup
context, Kiriko Sakata, Kohei Fujimoto, Hiroshi Kohguchi, Hiroshima University, Japan
We investigated differences in the strength of influences of ingroup prototypical and
less-prototypical leaders in an intergroup context. We expected that a prototypical leader elicited
stronger compliance from ingroup members than a less-prototypical leader. One hundred and four
students read a scenario describing a prototypical or a less-prototypical leader directed them to act
in either a cooperative manner or an antagonistic manner toward the outgroup in four task
situations. Results showed that the prototypical leader was slightly more effective than the
less-prototypical leader, but influences of the prototypical leader consistently directing
cooperation in all task situations declined.
3118.140 Third party punishment and social exchanges in groups, Mizuho Shinada, Yu Ohmura,
Toshio Yamagishi, Hokkaido University, Japan
We conducted two experiments to test a hypothesis that costly third-party punishment is more
likely to be directed toward in-group norm violators than out-group violators. We argue that such
783