» Articles » PMID: 36961795

Does (mis)communication Mitigate the Upshot of Diversity?

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2023 Mar 24
PMID 36961795
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

This paper contributes to the literature on how diversity impacts groups by exploring how communication mediates the ability of diverse individuals to work together. To do so we incorporate a communication channel into a representative model of problem-solving by teams of diverse agents that provides the foundations for one of the most widely cited analytical results in the literature on diversity and team performance: the "Diversity Trumps Ability Theorem". We extend the model to account for the fact that communication between agents is a necessary feature of team problem-solving, and we introduce the possibility that this communication occurs with error, and that this error might sometimes be correlated with how different agents are from one another. Accounting for communication does not give us reason to reject the claim associated with the theorem, that functionally diverse teams tend to outperform more homogeneous teams (even when the homogeneous teams are comprised of individuals with more task relevant expertise). However, incorporating communication into our model clarifies the role that four factors play in moderating the extent to which teams capture the benefits of functional diversity: i) the complexity of the problem, ii) the number of available approaches to solving the problem, iii) the ways of encoding or conceptualizing a problem, and iv) institutional characteristics, such as how teams work together. Specifically, we find that whether (and to what extent) teams capture the benefits of functional diversity depends on how these four factors interact with one another. Particularly important is the role institutional dynamics (like search methods) play in moderating or amplifying interpersonal frictions (like miscommunication), and notably we find that institutions that work in one setting can be counterproductive in other settings.

Citing Articles

Noise and opinion dynamics: how ambiguity promotes pro-majority consensus in the presence of confirmation bias.

Steiglechner P, Keijzer M, Smaldino P, Moser D, Merico A R Soc Open Sci. 2024; 11(4):231071.

PMID: 38660596 PMC: 11040247. DOI: 10.1098/rsos.231071.

References
1.
Takacs K, Flache A, Mas M . Discrepancy and Disliking Do Not Induce Negative Opinion Shifts. PLoS One. 2016; 11(6):e0157948. PMC: 4917087. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0157948. View

2.
Lorenz J, Rauhut H, Schweitzer F, Helbing D . How social influence can undermine the wisdom of crowd effect. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011; 108(22):9020-5. PMC: 3107299. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1008636108. View

3.
Kauffman S, Levin S . Towards a general theory of adaptive walks on rugged landscapes. J Theor Biol. 1987; 128(1):11-45. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5193(87)80029-2. View

4.
Kauffman S, Weinberger E . The NK model of rugged fitness landscapes and its application to maturation of the immune response. J Theor Biol. 1989; 141(2):211-45. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5193(89)80019-0. View

5.
Steel D, Fazelpour S, Crewe B, Gillette K . Information elaboration and epistemic effects of diversity. Synthese. 2021; 198(2):1287-1307. PMC: 7907020. DOI: 10.1007/s11229-019-02108-w. View