Members of 43 three-person groups completed a deductive logic task. Each member was provided with unique clues and information indicating the utility of each clue. Objective validity varied because some clues were essential to problem solution and others were not useful. Social validity was manipulated by informing participants that some clues would likely be useful and that other clues were not likely to be useful. Clues were discussed more frequently if either objective validity or social validity was high, but the effects were not additive. Clues were discussed less frequently in the low objective validity–low social validity condition than in all other conditions. Alignment of both types of validity facilitated the group’s ability to focus on relevant information.