Since the original Stasser and Titus (1985) study, researchers who study small groups have been interested in why and under what conditions discussion favors shared information (known to all members) over unshared information (known to a single member). The preponderance of research in the Stasser and Titus tradition carries with it theoretical assumptions that bear little mundane realism to natural decision-making groups. In particular, group members are presumed to be unbiased, to work cooperatively with each other, and to share information with all members during a single group meeting. In contrast, we argue that information exchange is a motivated process whereby members deliberately select information to share with particular members at particular times in order to satisfy goals, and group composition varies as a function of member goals with some groups being relatively cooperative and others being relatively competitive. Data from an organizational survey add further insight into characteristics of goal-driven information exchange among members of natural decision-making teams. This data and our theorizing suggest new information sharing processes to examine in groups by reevaluating the assumptions that have characterized that research for eighteen years.
