Individuals and groups of 2, 3, 4, or 5 people solved 2 letters-to-numbers problems that required participants, on each trial, to identify the coding of 10 letters to 10 numbers by proposing an equation in letters, receiving the answer in letters, proposing a hypothesis, and receiving feedback on the correctness of the hypothesis. Groups of 3, 4, and 5 people proposed more complex equations and had fewer trials to solution than the best of an equivalent number of individuals. Groups of 3, 4, and 5 people had fewer trials to solution than 2-person groups but did not differ from each other. These results suggest that 3-person groups are necessary and sufficient to perform better than the best individuals on highly intellective problems.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Laughlin et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: