Fact and Fiction in Analyzing Research on Participative Decision Making: A Critique of Cotton, Vollrath, Froggatt, Lengnick-Hall, and Jennings

Abstract

A review by concluded that previously reported discrepancies in the results among studies of participative decision making (PDM) are largely due to differences in the form of PDM used. In this article we critique both the procedures used and the conclusions reached by these authors. Problems were found in how they classified, sampled, and interpreted the results of PDM studies. Suggestions for future research and interpretations of the PDM literature are also discussed.