ABSTRACT
RENEWED interest in choice shift through group argument is due largely to a theoretical controversy, persuasive arguments theory (PAT) and social comparison theory (SCT) being the competing explanations. Central to PAT is the axiom that the choice shift results from informational influences, particularly the persuasive arguments that are advanced during group discussion, whereas SCT posits that normative influence, or group pressure, exerts the most important causal impact on group decisions. In the chapter that is the focus of this comment, Meyers and Seibold do not address the issue of normative influence, leaving us with the assertion that “currently the most prominent theory in the area of decision shifts is persuasive arguments theory” (p. XXX). But the authors’ goal is to develop a grand theory of group decision making, and in so doing they commit a sin of omission by dismissing an important component in the process. There is strength in numbers as well as in arguments, and any complete explanation of the choice shift in particular, and group decision making in general, must account for both.
