Research suggests that authentic dissent frequently leads a group to better decisions than a contrarian simply playing “Devil’s Advocate.” The question is: why should it matter if someone really disagrees, or is just faking it?
- Links for the Curious -
Devil's advocate versus authentic dissent: stimulating
quantity and quality (Nemeth et al, 2001) - [ Ссылка ]
Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory (Mercier & Sperber, 2011) - [ Ссылка ]
The Influence of Social Interaction on Intuitions of Objectivity and Subjectivity (Fisher et al, 2016) - [ Ссылка ]
Minority Influence Theory (Nemeth, 2009) - [ Ссылка ]
In-Class Debates: Fertile Ground for Active Learning and the
Cultivation of Critical Thinking and Oral Communication Skills (Kennedy, 2007) - [ Ссылка ].pdf#page=83
Dissoi Logoi (Robinson, 1979) - [ Ссылка ]
Groups of diverse problem solvers can outperform groups of high-ability problem solvers (Hong & Page, 2004) - [ Ссылка ]
Why do men want to play devil's advocate? An investigation - [ Ссылка ]
Opinion | The Dying Art of Disagreement - [ Ссылка ]
The Social Epistemology of Argument – Problems in Argument Analysis and Evaluation - [ Ссылка ]
Updating on the Credences of Others:
Disagreement, Agreement, and Synergy (Easwaran et al, 2015) - [ Ссылка ]
Detecting true and false opinions: The Devil's Advocate approach as a lie detection aid (Leal et al, 2010) - [ Ссылка ]
Effects of the Expert, Devil’s Advocate, & Dialectical Inquiry Methods on Prediction Performance (Schwenk et al, 1980) - [ Ссылка ]
Deviance and Dissent in Groups (Jessen, 2013) - [ Ссылка ]
Group Creativity (see chapter by Nemeth) - [ Ссылка ]
64. The Argumentative Theory of Human Reason - [ Ссылка ]
135. Aumann's Agreement Theorem & Arguing to Learn - [ Ссылка ]
