Who Dunnit: Mood, Information Processing, and Group ProblemSolving Kosha D' Sabin

1
Who Dunnit Mood, Information Processing,
and Group Problem-Solving Kosha D. Sabin
Karen Gasper, Department of Psychology,
Pennsylvania State University
Introduction Moods influence a variety of
information and social processing strategies at
the individual level. Sad moods promote A
local, systematic,conservative, and linear
processing style Happy moods promote A global,
heuristic, generative, and integrative processing
style Question How do moods influence
systematic problem- solving within a group
context? While sad moods facilitate performance
on systematic tasks at the individual level,
there may be reason to believe that it is happy
moods, not sad moods, that promote performance on
a systematic problem-solving task in a group
context. A group task, unlike an individual
task, involves an element of sociability. Happy
moods have been shown to promote sociability,
positive person-perception judgments, pro-social
behaviors, and effective negotiation
tactics. Also, the nature of the problem-solving
task changes in a group context. A task that was
previously a simple, systematic problem-solving
task when completed alone, becomes a complex task
that requires generation of ideas, integration of
information, and global perspective taking when
completed in a group. If positive moods lead to
the generation of ideas, integration of
information, and a global perspective, then
positive moods may facilitate systematic
processing more so than negative moods when in a
group context.
DESIGN 2 (Happy, Sad) X 2 Deliberation (Alone,
Group) DEPENDENT VARIABLES Ranking of guilt for
Eddie and Suspect Chosen Analyses for the alone
condition were run separately from the group
condition, rather than using a crossed factorial
design. This was done because individuals in the
group condition were nested within sessions as a
consequence of the group interaction, whereas
individuals in the alone condition were not.
Alone Condition Results Ranking of Eddie
Sad gt Happy F (1,69) 2.51, p .12
(Happy1.80, Sad2.11) Suspect Chosen
Chi-square analysis w/ mood X suspect
?(3)8.38, p lt .05 Systematic answer
(Eddie) Sad gt Happy, p .33 Heuristic
answer (Mickey) Happy gt Sad, p lt .01
Interestingly, sad participants were more likely
to choose the foil over the incorrect,
heuristic suspect, Mickey, p.07 (Sad gt
Happy, p .08) Overall, these results are
consistent with the hypothesis that sad
participants would engage in more systematic
processing, whereas happy participants would
engage in more heuristic processing on a task
performed alone.
Group Condition Results Ranking of Eddie
Happy gt sad F (1, 98) 3.69, p .06 (Happy
2.76, Sad 2.54) Suspect Chosen
Chi-square analysis w/ mood X suspect
?(3)14.45, p lt .01 Systematic answer
(Eddie), Happy gt Sad, p.07 Heuristic answer
(Mickey), Sad gt Happy, p.001 These results
support the hypothesis. In a group context, happy
participants were significantly more likely than
sad participants to rank Eddie, the correct,
systematic suspect as the guilty suspect. In
addition, sad participants were significantly
more likely than happy participants to choose
Mickey, the incorrect, heuristic suspect.
Therefore, it is hypothesized   In the alone
condition Sad participants will engage in
systematic processing on the task, while happy
participants will engage in heuristic processing
and therefore sad participants will outperform
happy participants on the task.   In the group
condition Happy participants will engage in
systematic processing in the context of the group
more than sad participants and therefore happy
participants will outperform sad participants on
the task.
ALONE Percent of participants in each group who
chose a given suspect
GROUP Percent of participants in each group who
chose a given suspect
Method 42 men, 122 women, and 7 gender outlaws
watched either a happy movie clip (The Chris
Farley Show) or a sad movie clip (Sophies
Choice) to induce mood. They had 12 minutes to
read through a shorted version of Stasser
Stewarts (1992) Murder Mystery Case.
Participants then deliberated on the case for 10
minutes either alone or in a group. Next,
participants in both the alone and group
condition made individual decisions about which
suspect they felt committed the murder.
Participants then completed a series of follow-up
questionnaires. Murder Mystery Case Participants
were presented with a case file containing police
interviews in a murder mystery case. There were
three suspects in the murder mystery case
Eddiesystematic processing of the clues reveal
him as the correct suspect. Mickeyhis strong
motives make him the heuristic suspect
Billyis being framed, and is therefore the
foil suspect
Discussion Consistent with past research, when
the task was performed alone, sad participants
relied less on heuristic processing while happy
participants relied more on heuristic processing.
However, when the task was performed as a group,
happy participants chose the correct, systematic
answer more often than sad participants. The
results from this experiment support the
hypothesis that moods may differentially
influence performance on a task performed at the
individual level versus the group level. Work is
currently underway to investigate whether these
differences are as a result of happy moods
facilitating increased sociability and global
processing which in turn leads to the sharing,
critical evaluation, and integration of
information within the group context.