Devil's advocate versus authentic dissent: stimulating quantity and quality

Given the relationship between uniformity of views, premature adoption of a preferred solution and poor decision making, many suggestions have been ai med at fostering dissent, including the usage of a 'devil's advocate.' The hope is that such a mechanism will stimulate the kinds of reconsideration, better information processing and decision making as has been found to be s timulated by authentic dissent. In a prior study comparing these two proces ses, devil's advocate appeared to foster thinking that was primarily aimed at cognitive bolstering of the initial viewpoint rather than stimulate dive rgent thought. While that study left the actual position of the DA unknown, the present study compared conditions where the devil's advocate position was known (and consistent or inconsistent with the assigned position) or un known. It further utilized quantity and quality of solutions as a dependent measure rather than simply cognitive activity. Results indicated that the authentic minority was superior to all three forms of 'devil's advocate,' a gain underscoring the value and importance of authenticity and the difficul ty in cloning such authenticity by role-playing techniques. Copyright (C) 2 001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.