Studies of small-group decision-making have found that groups explicitly assigning a "devil's advocate" role — a participant charged with raising objections regardless of personal opinion — tend to identify weaknesses in proposed plans more reliably than groups without such a role. The improvement persists even when members know the role is being played and even when participants rotate through the role over multiple sessions.
Which inference is most strongly supported by the passage?
- A
Rotation through devil's advocate roles eliminates any benefit
- B
The benefits of structured dissent depend on participants being unaware of the role's existence
- C
Small-group decision-making produces optimal results without any structural intervention
- Dcheck_circle
Formal role assignment can support critical scrutiny that would otherwise be inhibited in group settings
Explanation
Better weakness-identification with the role, even when known and rotated, supports B. A, C, D contradict the findings.