Groups systematically discuss shared knowledge while undervaluing their most distinctive information

Evidence

Research has shown, for example, that individuals are more likely to discuss shared knowledge (aspects of what they know is part of their common knowledge) compared to unshared information (their distinctive or unique knowledge). This tendency contributes to what has been called the “common knowledge effect” (see Strasser, 1999, for a review). Because of this common knowledge effect, when uncommon information does happen to be introduced into a discussion the discussion of that information tends to be more cursory or muted. In short, distinctive and potentially valuable information tends to be undervalued and utilized. — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 1981 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

And in such interactions, what observations and beliefs are likely to emerge? Group discussions tend to be dominated by shared information – i.e., knowledge available to many members of a group – rather than by unshared information, or the idiosyncratic bits of knowledge possessed by individual people (Larson, Foster-Fishman, & Keys, 1994). Thus, if many individuals have projected specific traits onto an outgroup, those common perceptions are likely to be exchanged and discussed. As a result, stereotypes initially constructed at the level of the individual could be further developed and elaborated at the group level. Furthermore, research by Lambert et al. (2003) shows that when people think about groups in the presence (or even imagined presence) of others, the likelihood that stereotypes associated with those groups will come to mind and be expressed significantly increases. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2368 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Valuing their own talk lets citizen groups grow political knowledge and broaden concern — Nina Eliasoph, Avoiding politics: how Americans…, 1498; Scholarly networks create echo chambers that sideline marginal knowledge — Crystal Abidin and Megan Lindsay Brown (eds.), Microcelebrity Around the Globe:…, 116; Holding information shared across a group reads as expertise and confers influence — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide: The Social…, 940 (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• Groups systematically undervalue distinctive information that only one member holds #corroborates (0.95) — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 1981
• Shared information dominates group discussions, amplifying consensus stereotypes #expands (0.92) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2368