The effect of collaborative triadic conversations in noise on decision-making in a general-knowledge task (2024)

The description in this readme is largely quoted or adapted from Örnolfsson et al. (2024)*. For questions or inquiries, please contact Ingvi Örnolfsson ([e-mail], ORCID: 0000-0002-2222-0739).<b>Abstract</b>This study investigated how background noise influenced group decision-making in triadic interactions. Ten triads of normal-hearing participants were recruited. Initially, each participant responded to a series of binary general knowledge questions and provided a confidence rating along with their response. Subsequently, the questions were discussed in groups of three in two distinct conditions; a high-intensity background noise condition (78 dB, referred to as the ‘noisy’ condition’) or a low-intensity condition (48dB, referred to as the ‘quiet’ condition). Finally, participants individually answered the same questions again.<b>Methods</b><br>The study comprised 30 participants organized into groups of ten triads. All participants, aged between 20 and 35 years, were native Danish speakers with self-reported normal-hearing status. Except for two pairs, participants were unfamiliar with each other prior to the experiment. The experiment was conducted in Danish and took approximately 2.5 hours.The participants were seated in an equilateral triangle configuration, facing the other two group members, as illustrated in Figure 1b. The distance between participants was approximately 1.5 m. They wore eye-tracking glasses capturing point-of-view footage, eye-gaze data, and pupil dilation. Additionally, three microphones were utilized, including a pair of in-ear binaural microphones and a cheek-mounted microphone; however, data from these devices were not analyzed in this study.The group was surrounded by eight loudspeakers (Dynaudio BM6P), arranged in a ring of radius 2.4 m. Each loudspeaker played a separate Danish monologue (Ahrens &amp; Lund, 2022), resulting in a spatially distributed multi-talker masker. The monologues lasted approximately 90 seconds each and were looped for the duration of the conversation. The loudspeakers were driven by a sonible d:24 amplifier. The masker was presented at sound pressure levels (SPLs) of either 48 dB or 78 dB, corresponding to the quiet and the noisy condition, respectively. The simultaneous presentation of multiple masking speech sources rendered them individually unintelligible in both conditions. To eliminate visual distractions, a circular black curtain entirely enclosed the participant area.The initial task for the participants involved responding individually to a series of binary general-knowledge questions categorized into three topics: Hollywood movies (identifying the oldest of two movies), Copenhagen landmarks (determining which of two locations is closest to the city center), and European countries (determining which of two countries has the most inhabitants). Each topic comprised two lists of 28 questions, one for each acoustic noise condition. Consequently, each list contained 28 trials, formulated by employing all unique binary questions from the eight items associated with that topic (e.g., eight Hollywood movies). Before the primary experiment, the group underwent a brief trial round on a different topic not used in the study. This allowed participants to familiarize themselves with the task, the technical interface, and with each other, thus overcoming any initial awkwardness in their conversations.Questions were presented on a touch-screen tablet, showing a visual illustration of the two options along with accompanying labels. The participants were instructed to select an option and provide a confidence level, expressed as a percentage between 50% and 100%, with 50% indicating no preference for either option, while 100% meant absolute certainty in the decision (Figure 1a). They were asked to interpret the scale as indicating their estimated probability of having answered the question correctly, i.e. a metacognitive judgment<i>.</i>After the initial set of 28 questions, a conversation round followed, during which the participants discussed their answers with the other group members. Collaborative problem-solving was encouraged, emphasizing the importance of improving the performance of all group members, not just oneself. Each participant was given a sheet displaying the eight items from the preceding question round during the conversation (see Figure 1b). Once a 10-minute time limit was reached or the conversation concluded naturally, participants individually answered the same 28 questions again (see Figure 1c). This process was repeated six times, once for each of the three topics and in each of the two noise conditions. The order of topics and conditions was randomized between groups, ensuring that the same topic did not appear consecutively. A brief break was incorporated after the third question round.*Örnolfsson, I., Ahrens, A., Dau, T., and May, T. The effect of collaborative triadic conversations in noise on decision-making in a general-knowledge task" (2024), DOI: ______________________.

本自述文件中的描述主要引用或改编自Örnolfsson等人（2024）的研究*。如有疑问或咨询，请联系Ingvi Örnolfsson（邮箱：[e-mail]，开放研究者与贡献者身份识别码（ORCID）：0000-0002-2222-0739）。

摘要
本研究探讨了背景噪声对三人互动场景下群体决策的影响。研究招募了10组听力正常的被试，每组3人。实验初始阶段，每名被试独立完成一系列二元常识判断题，并在作答的同时给出信心评分。随后，被试以三人小组为单位，在两种不同条件下讨论题目：高强度背景噪声条件（78分贝，下称‘嘈杂组’）与低强度背景噪声条件（48分贝，下称‘安静组’）。实验最后，被试再次独立作答全部题目。

方法
本研究共招募30名被试，分为10个三人小组。所有被试年龄介于20至35岁之间，均为丹麦母语使用者，且自我报告听力正常。除两对被试外，其余所有被试在实验开始前均互不相识。实验以丹麦语进行，总时长约2.5小时。
被试以等边三角形就座，面朝另外两名同组成员，如图1b所示。被试间间距约1.5米。每名被试佩戴眼动追踪眼镜，可采集第一视角影像、眼动数据与瞳孔扩张数据。此外，实验共使用3个麦克风，包括一对入耳式双耳麦克风与一个脸颊式麦克风，但本研究未对这些设备采集的数据进行分析。
实验环境中，8台Dynaudio BM6P型扬声器以半径2.4米的环形布局环绕被试区域。每台扬声器播放一段独立的丹麦语独白（Ahrens与Lund, 2022），形成空间分布的多说话人掩蔽声。每段独白时长约90秒，在对话过程中循环播放。扬声器由sonible d:24功率放大器驱动。掩蔽声的声压级（SPL）设置为48分贝或78分贝，分别对应安静组与嘈杂组。两种条件下均同时播放多段掩蔽语音，使得单段掩蔽语音在任何条件下均无法被听懂。为消除视觉干扰，实验区域被圆形黑色幕布完全包围。
被试的初始任务为独立完成一系列二元常识判断题，题目分为三大类别：好莱坞电影（判断两部电影中哪一部上映更早）、哥本哈根地标（判断两处地点中哪一个更靠近城市中心）以及欧洲国家（判断两个国家中人口更多的那一个）。每个类别包含两套共28道题目，分别对应两种声学噪声条件。每套题目包含28个试次，由对应类别下的8个条目生成所有唯一的二元问题组合（例如，8部好莱坞电影可生成28组二元比较）。正式实验开始前，各小组需完成一轮简短的练习，练习题目采用未在正式实验中使用的其他类别题目，帮助被试熟悉实验任务、技术界面并相互熟悉，以缓解对话初期的尴尬氛围。
题目通过触控平板电脑展示，屏幕上会呈现两个选项的可视化图示与对应标签。被试需选择其中一个选项，并给出50%至100%区间内的信心评分：50%代表对两个选项无偏好，100%代表完全确定自己的选择（如图1a所示）。实验要求被试将该评分理解为自己答对题目的估计概率，即元认知判断。
完成初始的28道题目后，进入讨论环节，被试需与小组其他成员共同讨论各自的答案。实验鼓励协作式问题解决，强调提升全体小组成员的表现而非仅个人表现。讨论期间，每名被试会获得一张印有前一轮题目所涉8个条目的清单（见图1b）。当10分钟讨论时限结束或对话自然结束后，被试需再次独立作答全部28道题目（见图1c）。上述流程共重复6次，分别对应三大题目类别与两种噪声条件的所有组合。各小组的题目类别与噪声条件顺序均为随机排列，确保同一类别不会连续出现。第三轮题目作答完成后，安排了短暂休息。

*Örnolfsson, I., Ahrens, A., Dau, T. 与May, T.《噪声环境下三人协作对话对常识判断任务决策的影响》（2024），DOI：______________________。