Degree of group consensus shapes perceived power structures and decision-process evaluations of groups

Abstract

Groups often make decisions by consensus and choose the option(s) preferred by the majority. Most research has therefore treated group consensus as a singular construct, contrasting consensus and dissensus, or the majority and minority. The current research, however, found that varying degrees of consensus among the majority impacted outside observers’ perceptions of the voting group’s internal power structure and evaluations of its decision-making process. Specifically, partial consent (not all members agree), versus unanimous consent (all members agree), led observers to (i) infer that the group had a more decentralized, egalitarian (vs centralized, hierarchical) power structure and, consequently (ii) evaluated the group’s ostensible decision-making process more (vs less) favorably. In sum, this research demonstrated how a lack of unanimity can bolster group perceptions, identified one context where that effect was attenuated by making unanimity favorable, discusses the role of procedural fairness in group judgments, and reveals potential implications for public affairs.