Demonstrability and social combination processes on mathematical intellective tasks¶
Laughlin, P. R., & Ellis, A. L. (1986). Demonstrability and social combination processes on mathematical intellective tasks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Domain-specific¶
- Assembly Bonus Effect
- The effect is task-contingent: it is most reliably observed on intellective or eureka-type problems where there is a demonstrably correct answer that non-solvers can recognize and be shown, where partial information is distributed across members, or where error-correction by a second perspective adds value; it is least likely on purely additive tasks, on tasks where the group can do no more than adopt whatever its best member already knows, and on tasks requiring synchronized motor performance, where coordination losses dominate
This sourceThe demonstrability condition — a task is intellective when it has a demonstrably correct solution within a shared conceptual system, and the group surplus depends on non-solvers being able to recognise that solution when it is proposed and on the solver being able to show it to them. The additive, best-member-capped and synchronized-motor half of this sentence is Steiner's task taxonomy rather than this paper's.
Supported in partVerified against the source
- The effect is task-contingent: it is most reliably observed on intellective or eureka-type problems where there is a demonstrably correct answer that non-solvers can recognize and be shown, where partial information is distributed across members, or where error-correction by a second perspective adds value; it is least likely on purely additive tasks, on tasks where the group can do no more than adopt whatever its best member already knows, and on tasks requiring synchronized motor performance, where coordination losses dominate
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:51bd73fe184d · see in the full table