Abstract.
This study examined the separate and joint impact of two
standard, but seemingly conflicting brainstorming rules on idea
generation in interacting and nominal groups: the free-wheeling
rule, which calls for the production of dissimilar ideas, and
the build-on rule, which encourages idea combination and
improvement. We also tested whether the superior
performance of interacting groups found in several previous
studies using a brainwriting technique may have been due to the
different response formats employed by groups and
individuals. Interacting groups and individuals generated
ideas for improving their university under one of three sets of
instructions. In one condition, participants were given
the build-on rule, but not the freewheeling rule, and in another
condition, the reverse was true. In the third condition,
both rules were provided. When the two rules were
presented separately, interacting and nominal groups responded
similarly, generating ideas from more semantic categories in
response to the free-wheeling rule, and generating more
practical ideas in response to the build-on rule. But when
those rules were presented simultaneously, interacting groups
generated ideas from fewer semantic categories than did nominal
groups. In addition, interacting groups produced more
ideas overall than nominal groups, but only when the two used
different response formats.