What is a major benefit of employing devil's advocacy in discussions?

Employing devil's advocacy in discussions is beneficial primarily because it promotes objectivity by examining different points of view. This approach encourages participants to explore a range of perspectives, particularly those that differ from the prevailing opinion or consensus. By challenging assumptions and considering alternative arguments, this technique helps to uncover blind spots and reduce the risk of groupthink, where consensus is prioritized over critical analysis. This thorough examination of differing viewpoints ultimately leads to more informed decision-making.

The other options do not capture the essence of devil's advocacy. Ensuring that only the most popular opinions are voiced contradicts the very purpose of this method, which is to bring forth less popular or contrary views. Strengthening the primary viewpoint by removing doubts does not align with the goal of critical examination; instead, it would potentially reinforce biases. Lastly, while discussion dynamics may vary, the process of engaging in devil's advocacy can sometimes lengthen debates rather than speed up decision-making, as it requires time for reflection and consideration of different perspectives.