Crowd source What if you could tap your own diverse opinions?
Image: iStock/adisa
-
The Wisdom of Psychopaths
In this engrossing journey into the lives of psychopaths and their infamously crafty behaviors, the renowned psychologist Kevin Dutton reveals that there is a...
Read More »
There is an old saying that two heads are better than one. This saying received empirical support in social psychology in the 1920s, when a series of studies showed that groups were more accurate than their individual members. In an early demonstration of the phenomenon, for example, Columbia University’s Hazel Knight asked students to estimate the temperature in a classroom. When the estimates were averaged together, the resulting group answer was more accurate than the estimate of a typical member.
Early authors found this surprising and attributed it to some mysterious group property. Eventually, however, it was recognized as a product of statistics: Using a large sample of imperfect estimates tends to cancel out extreme errors and converge on the truth. Subsequent research in forecasting demonstrated the power of averaging compared to more sophisticated statistical methods of combination. The power and simplicity of averaging was summed up in the title of James Surowiecki’s 2004 best-selling book, “The Wisdom of Crowds.”
In a fascinating new article in Psychological Science, Stefan Herzog and Ralph Hertwig turned the old aphorism on its head: One head can be nearly as good as two. Herzog and Hertwig had participants make estimates about quantitative values they did not know with certainty—specifically, dates in history. They then had participants make second estimates. Could this “crowd in the mind” help improve judgments? The answer is yes, and the literature on the wisdom of crowds helps us understand why.
Crowds, of course, are not always wise. They are more likely to be wise when two principles are followed. The first principle is that groups should be composed of people with knowledge relevant to a topic. The second principle is that the group needs to hold diverse perspectives and bring different knowledge to bear on a topic. Valuing diversity has become a truism, but it is interesting to consider exactly how diversity improves decision making. People inevitably make errors. The question is whether people make similar errors, in which case individuals are interchangeable and there is little benefit gained from a crowd; or whether people make different errors, in which case their errors will often cancel out. Differences in perspective are created both through who is in the group—when people have different experiences, training, and judgment models—and through process—when ideas are formed and expressed independently from the ideas of others. Interestingly, the benefits of diversity are so strong that one can choose group members that differ pretty widely in their ability and still gain—as long as there is added diversity.
Herzog and Hertwig used the insights of the “wisdom of crowd” perspective to make one head nearly as good as two. After participants made their first guesses at the dates of historical events, they then made a second estimate using one of two methods. In one condition, participants simply gave a second estimate. This condition did little to increase either knowledge or diversity.
In the second condition, participants were given detailed directions for making their follow-up guess: “First, assume that your first estimate is off the mark. Second, think about a few reasons why that could be. Which assumptions and considerations could have been wrong? Third, what do these new considerations imply?... Fourth, based on this new perspective, make a second, alternative estimate.” When the participants used the more involved method, the average was significantly more accurate than the first estimate. The “crowd within” achieved about half the accuracy gains that would have been achieved by averaging with a second person.
See what we're tweeting about
51 Comments
Add CommentQuorum sensing, were they serving homoserinelactones?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this1) Make a wild ass guess
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this2) Assume it is wrong and identify the potential areas of error
3) Make a reasoned, calculated estimate based on #2
4) Average # 1 with #2
Isn't this the way most people make Guesstimates? Take a stab, refine the input then make your final answer?
A subject I have made a study of for a number of years. I confer and happy to substantiate group intelligence is greater than that of the sum of the individuals forming a significant part of our id. There are numerous examples, too many to mention here. Interestingly we subconsciously use this intelligence all of the time, there are numerous examples and applies equally to other species.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAlarmingly the group intelligence now has the assistance of technology resulting in collective decisions being made, not necessarily in the interest of the individuals of the group. The recent plight of suicides experienced by the Army may be an example, both combatant and non-combatant men sadly falling victim. Take away the very powerful collective G created by an army in combat and you are left with individualism lost and floundering with a void to fill, making a relaxing furlough the very opposite of best therapy.
Collective intelligence is a fascinating topic and no doubt there will be comments to demonstrate its worth although from my experience people are fearful of the realisation they are not completely in control of their own consciousness.
A subject I have made a study of for a number of years. I confer and happy to substantiate group intelligence is greater than that of the sum of the individuals forming a significant part of our id. There are numerous examples, too many to mention here. Interestingly we subconsciously use this intelligence all of the time, there are numerous examples and applies equally to other species.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAlarmingly the group intelligence now has the assistance of technology resulting in collective decisions being made, not necessarily in the interest of the individuals of the group. The recent plight of suicides experienced by the Army may be an example, both combatant and non-combatant men sadly falling victim. Take away the very powerful collective G created by an army in combat and you are left with individualism lost and floundering making a relaxing furlough the very opposite of best therapy.
Collective intelligence is a fascinating topic and no doubt there will be comments to demonstrate its worth although from my experience people are fearful of the realisation they are not completely in control of their own consciousness.
A subject I have made a study of for a number of years. I confer and happy to substantiate group intelligence is greater than that of the sum of the individuals forming a significant part of our id. There are numerous examples, too many to mention here. Interestingly we subconsciously use this intelligence all of the time, there are numerous examples and applies equally to other species.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAlarmingly the group intelligence now has the assistance of technology resulting in collective decisions being made, not necessarily in the interest of the individuals of the group. The recent plight of suicides experienced by the Army may be an example, both combatant and non-combatant men sadly falling victim. Take away the very powerful collective G created by an army in combat and you are left with individualism lost and floundering making a relaxing furlough the very opposite of best therapy.
Collective intelligence is a fascinating topic and no doubt there will be comments to demonstrate its worth although from my experience people are fearful of the realisation they are not completely in control of their own consciousness.
don't we also guess, assume it to be wrong, seek more data on the subject, then make another conclusion.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is using two minds, the one before the new data and the one after the new data. Both are in the same skull, but the neurons fire a different pattern.
timteb.Wisdom of the crowd?I think of football supporters.not much wisdom there.I think of group theraphy now thats more like it.I think as lonely as a cloud beside a crowd of daffodils .(deep meaning)I think people are totally unaware,that they have no control over their own consciousness.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thistimteb You are a Freudien hence the term Id ,Was Freud lost and floudering?We are dependant on orginal minds for progress When I think of crowds I think of football supporters,not much intelligence there .Group therapy,thats closer.In my experience people are totally unaware that they have no control over conscious minds.thoughts pop into it according to the stimulation they receive and the experiances they have been subjected to.(or as Richard Dawkins puts it the memes) They see themselfs as car drivers in total control of their car (minds)I have also studied the subject.different minds different conclusions?vive la diffefence.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thistimteb & octoman: what do you mean when you say that people aren't aware, and that they have no control of their own consciousness? this sounds like the ideas of Vedanta Hinduism and Kabbalism, if i'm not mistaken.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe football crowd is a very good example of the G contribution, as I said previous it is not always to the benefit of the individuals, take the average stockbroker, wife and two children, average until he goes to a football match where, influenced by the crowd he fights and becomes out of control and when apprehended appears in court as the decent family man and everyone in disbelief of the crimes committed. Not unusual, and actually too frequent.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs for any positive at football matches, the home side with a stronger G has the advantage. Look at the tabled results and they substanciate the fact.
Octoman, Wordsworth was poetic, a little fluffy and not so deep try reading Coleridge.
Freud did write a significant paper on apparent intelligence of crowds which I have picked up from.
I am not a great fan of mimemes it having itself evolved into something "too off the wall", and seems to have been victim of its own effect? I prefer to stay practical. Car drivers are not consciously in control of the car, except at the learning stage, all driving thereafter is controlled by the subconscious, leaving the conscious mind to ponder other matters.
timteb I am happy to observe you are secure in your beliefs,I did not get the usual abuse that my different veiws provoke.I am glad you got the message,yes I was being fluffy.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisandre, consider joining the army, in spite of your present emotional drives after 6 months of rigorous training you will be ready to kill people when ordered, march, salute others who may or may not be more superior, even die for your comrades. This is not a criticism of army training as it is very effective at creating a “cohesive” force. In effect your conscious natural instincts not to kill, or walk in unison and even self preservation will have been quashed during training and your motivation almost entirely that of G. May be the army should put as much time and effort into untraining as training! Corporations too, unknowingly use G to stimulate a willing compliance and loyalty. Families form bonds.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhen A Turing devised his test for computers (or machines) he proposed a test of simulation, a computer (robot) can never be more than a machine, no matter how clever, as there is no G between man and machine.
Of course crowds aren't always wise or right! Bush got voted in twice didn't he!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisandrewoliver.Not Vedanta Hinduism and Kabbalism,just simple old Carl Jung.What I mean is people have no direct control over the content of their own consciousness .The state of the conscious mind depends upon what has been programmed into our subconscious mind .every thing you do, walking for instance.you learned how to do it it in the first place,then it is automatic there after.The same with your beliefs ,and responses they are all learned,your personality has been habit formed, thoughts are constantly popping into your head. happy or angry thoughts by turn.,we are human with human feelings which change,according to the circumstances.we are like addicts if we want give up ideas or behaviour you have to work at it.we are always work in progress.We grow or stagnate,what made you send a reply ?our subconscious mind is always driving our consciousness.not the other way round.I think.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisthis article reminds me a lot of portfolio diversification theory in Finance. the more diverse (uncorrelated) opinions/inputs you have the more accurate (smaller standard deviation) your conclusion will be. this just applies the concepts on a more qualitative level ...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thistemteb.We are not consciously in control of the car even when at the learning stage.we are using the subconscious mind to co-ordinate our movements,so it can drive the car for us.which does by using our sense organs.it is more aware than we are. We have no memories other than which the subconscious mind provides.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEvery member of Congress should read this, I think it would make the Supreme Court Nomination a clear decision. Diversity leads to better decisions.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCongress has demonstrated time and again that they are collectively dumber then the least intelligent member.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGuess that disproves the theory....................................
NV Too many cooks spoil the broth?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI believe you can learn more from a person who you disagree with,than someone you agree with.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thischlooeee...bush was a good president...bho is not any better, only a better speaker, who talks to your liberal mind, only you are not listening long enough. Essentially crowds do not understand the overall perspective of a situation...complete information in an impossibility and guessing temperatures is totally different from analyzing an overtly complex and unaccustomed task
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCar drivers ... not consciously in control of the car... ?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPresuming that you speak for yourself, please install flashing yellow warning lights on your car so that we may avoid you as you ponder.
Car drivers ... not consciously in control of the car... ?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPresuming that you speak for yourself, please install flashing yellow warning lights on your car so that we may avoid you as you ponder.
For all the science detailed in this article, reactionaries (Yep, that would be you, Republican) are going to, well, react to the "D" word. Diversity. Because the political climate today is Pre-Civil War, the entire article will be dismissed out of hand. Think I'm wrong?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDiversity true, but not a task where you had a chance to calibrate, confirm and recalibrate a million times over your life time ( temp guess experiment)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'm with "rocketscintist" any one that operates a vehicle on "autopilot" is a threat to everyone.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisrocketscientist Thank you you have proved my point people cannot,not believe their eyes."look Mom,I am driving,All on my own!"Yes the way some people drive they obviously do not use there brains.Thanks for the feedback I love reading other peoples minds,they are fantastic.Who is driving the car you or your mind?what is decoding the signals your eyes are sending to your brain?Its not rocket science.its obvious.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAt average speed, events pass quicker than you anyone can consciously react to, an experienced driver has committed to his subconscious the monitoring of events and dangers that surround him, increasing reaction time, much like the ever so referred to table tennis player whose reaction time is much faster than his conscious decision making can achieve. Those in doubt please remember to beat that heat every second or so!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thistimteb Yes I like your explaination,except I believe the subconscious mind is always in charge Could you describe the conscious mind as a indpendant entity,I would like to know.How ever I try I still end up with the conclussion that consciousness is only a sense that the subconscious provides us with, and we are just used to provide information,for our subconscious mind to work on.It has a God like quality.May be this what the religious are relating to?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPerhaps one of them meant, that we do not directly choose, or are able to choose, the thoughts or impulses that arise in our minds (how we react to them is a different matter though). I don't know about Vedanta Hinduism or Kabbalism, but some kinds of buddhism and western cognitive science agree on one strange (apparent) fact: there is no central controller in the brain or mind. What to do with this strange fact is even more difficult. Buddhism uses it to relativize the Ego (or something like that, through reasoning and contemplative practices) while cognitive science mostly freezes at the frightening gap between what the science says (no 'I', no controller) and the mundane personal tendency to assume that 'I' am in control.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisoctoman, we seem to be heading to agreement or at least splitting hairs to disagree.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPeople like to think they have control over themselves and how they affect their own environment, it is inconceivable and alarming for them to think they are not in control. The original article pertained to two heads communicating is better than two heads ... excuse shortcuts. Tipping humanity back into the animal kingdom, does not the same apply? ant hives being the standard example (but colonies over several km?), perhaps more remarkable is the cicada beetle population who spends up to 17 years buried to emerge on the same day for nuptials and the elephant who communicates with some sophistication 100s miles with others. Can these really be always explained with temperature, humidity and scent trails. What of that feeling "I am being stared at". .. as for your question posed ... the subconscious is indeed in control, and man with a well developed conscious has allowed it almost to take on its own persona (football hooligan)... separate? no, but the conscious can behave out of step with the sub, so may be yes as well!
and mentioning man as part of the animal kingdom opens another pandoras box.
It's absolutely wonderful what our minds can do. And it's even better when we can use our minds to produce the best - in us - in the world we live in.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'm excited that scientists are starting to work out practical experiments to begin measuring and understanding how the "voices in our heads" influence the decisions we make and create who we are. It would seem from personal experience, that though there is a dominant narrator mediating my conscious experience, more often than not, that narrator is having a conversation with competing perspectives and interests before significant decisions are made.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPerhaps this process is going on all the time for decisions both large and small, but it happens so fast we usually aren't able to parse these competing perspectives within our mind into imagined voices, except when working out difficult decisions in which we have the luxury of taking our time.
timteb I believe we do agree. My splitting hairs was to make sure we do agree.Language can be deceptive .You seemed to be saying the subconscious mind is in charge except when you are programming it(eg learning to drive)Were I believe there are no excptions.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisoctoman .. and what of the animals who use an unknown communication . do you have explanation other than subconscious communication, it is difficult to believe man, the most developed in the a kingdom does not share the phenomenon explaining two heads are better than two heads!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisKenmoffitt mentions homoserine lactone but for such a mechanism there would need to be physical or airborne connection which for elephants is unlikely and the cicada even more so.
timteb my dog who I am constantly observing seems to act on whims and fancies most of the time. he also is looking for clues that he associates with his main interests food,and exercise.He has a limited memory.which activates most of his behavior.He has a very limited language,so he has not our ability to communicate what he thinks.but of other unknown means of communication,they are unknown to me.though he does have vastly superior hearing and sense of smell.I dont believe apart from intellect man is a more highly developed or better adapted to their enviroment.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisoctoman as it is the weekend I will stay on the subject of dogs! An unexplainable series of events have been recorded, I have looked into this case and there is much unexplained. Dogs do not commit suicide but there is such a case of several, I am not offering an argument but it does make interesting reading for the w/e. Many of the suicides are easily confirmed and not simply the case of someone seeking notoriety.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-411038/Why-dogs-leapt-deaths-Overtoun-Bridge.html
There was also an interesting experiment, not strictly scientific where dogs when left "home alone" change their habit, ie start looking out of the window, or sit by the door at the same time their owners take the conscious decision to return home. On the human scale Shaldrake did a couple of experiments involving phone calls from a group to an individual, the receiver predicted the caller approaching statistical significance (above the odds) and another involving a subject knowing when they were being stared at, again with some significance.
Finally congratulations to your dog who proves you wrong, and seems to have you nicely trained at his beckon, food, walks, affection and he doesnt go to work, laboriously hunt for food out of necessity, you meet his medical needs and yet you, with claimed greater intellect, say you are equally adapted? Better adaptation? seems doggy has the upper paw.
Here we have the chance to think on the critical mass as the way to start changing thing that have been bothering us for long time.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe critical mass is thought to be the number of people concentrating on a single equal subject at the same time of course the same intention.
Search about this theme is most important right now.
Regards to all
M. Briceno
It is time to start doing many thing with the critical mass.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs we know, a number of people gather together for same intention, thinking the same, at the same time, would speed the occurence of the intention. It has been proved many time over since the man was created. The anciente wise men from many parts of the globe have known it and have taught it since then. The point about the wide spread of this truth resides on the very few people who believed on it. It is quite difficult to understand I know that however people should try to do their best to get acquainted with the basics of this theory
Here we have the chance to think on the critical mass as the way to start changing thing that have been bothering us for long time.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe critical mass is thought to be the number of people concentrating on a single equal subject at the same time of course the same intention.
Search about this theme is most important right now.
Regards to all
M. Briceno
Mabril. Critical mass of locust was the subject of a study. Interestingly, an Avery or collection of individual locust was added to, a few at a time, and they carried on behaving as individuals until hitting a critical mass at which point the locust behaviour became swarm. This was repeated and varified. Does man have a critical mass, two heads together are better than two heads?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thistimteb.I saw a program on TV about dog's that are aware of future events and even events occurring miles away , this is what we call precognition,and is an ability shared by man.Carl Jung wrote of many cases of precognition experienced by humans.My statement that we are intellually superior to dogs is based on the fact the dog's temporal lobes of its cerebral cortex (where interlect is located )is much less developed than ours ,this does not mean they are inferior to us .They just use the limbic system of their brains to understand their environment,and do not intellectualise as we do. Different,but just has effective for their life style.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIs a crowd better than a individual.well dogs work better in packs and humans depend on other human minds to create their ideas( no man is an island)so yes we work better in a crowd,a man wrapped up in himself makes a very small package.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisdogs work in a pack and a pack is not a crowd...some of the best ideas have come from a single human mind, who obviously built up on similar singular 'out of the box' human mind's work. Crowds are good at averaging and that too only for tasks that they had a chance to calibrate.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisbefore starting making jokes out of a serious matter go to search about critical mass and doing so try to understand intention theory, then we can follow a inteligent discussion.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRegards
mb
Joint Intension is a theory, or observation of both empathetic and oral communication. There is little doubt expressions, gestures and language contribute greatly to the intelligence of the collective, however what is discussed, (lightly over the weekend) was the possibility of other forms communication. For example consider again the cicada beetle that emerges from the ground after (up to) 17 years to nuptial. How does this little fellow convey to several million others, buried several feet underground that it is time to emerge. Suggestions of temperature, humidity and clocking are dispelled as these measures are repeated several times within the buried period. There surely is some form of communication we do not presently understand. There are many swarm, pack, herd, hive insticts, unexplainable individual behavior but perfectly logical for the group. Is the ant the animal or are ants the animal?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMan has evolved into a highly sophisticated communicator, able to converse with anyone on the planet at a moments notice, even I typing here is pretty amazing, as anyone can read this anywhere after I click!
Before man evolved into this sophisticated communicator, before even the facility of language was there other communication, not necessarily individual to individual but tribal, much like the pack of dogs, hive of ants, swarm of bees or locust. If primitive man did so, is there a residual of this communication left in us, surely yes? Is G (the group intelligence) the core of all of our national pride, company loyalty, family values. We abhor the thought of an individual flying to Switzerland for the sole intension of committing suicide but at the same time applaud the soldier willing to throw his body over a hand grenade to save his comrades. Surely both are a form of suicide? But dying for the group is comfortingly heroic. It is reassuring the collective survives after our death, is it more than reassurance, is it we live for our G and willing to die for it. Are we able to consciously tap this G resource in more ways than we do now? Could there be credibility to mediums and mystics?
It is a wide subject and undoubtedly at the core of humanity yet so little understood and rarely spoken of excepting people like the few who comment here, all with their favourite piece of a huge jigsaw, only reading all will we eventually see the whole picture, or at least some of the blue sky.
While I do find the subject of collective consciousness to be fascinating, this new age discussion is becoming wearisome.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFirst of all, I have difficulty regarding this G concept as a real idea and not simply a product of humanity's search for that 'special quality' which separates us from animals. Camraderie and espirit are traits which are not limited to humans, and there is no special psychological subroutine in our minds which causes us to recognize the value of groups over individuals. That is just common sense.
Similarly, there is no doubt that a person with supporters feels empowered to accomplish some task - one's self esteem and confidence are nearly measurable factors in one's chances of success. Or put in a different tone, one's attitude creates a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Humans are social creatures, but it is not the speed and range of communication which gives us our talent pool - it is the quality of the ideas which we exchange with each other, something which has been in decline for more than a century. Technology has been the primary driver of this effect - in a world based on convenience and productivity, we simply do not have the time or the will to engage in the exploration of topics that was once the true form of conversation.
By the way, I don't know who here drives on autopilot, but I can tell you it isn't me. Really, to think that split-second judgments must be confined to the realm of the subconscious is both a joke and an insult to human potential.
you walk, climb stairs and of course drive on auto-pilot. Try the act of consciously walking up the stairs while thinking of the process of walking up the stairs
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisG- Group-ism or the constant thirst for a human to identify himself/herself with a group it deems superior. This is why our society is fractious and essentially advancing (debatable), not sure how G -group intelligence and G-group-ism to the last man can co-exist
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisramdon thoughts If you experiment with hitting golf balls you learn a lot about autopiloting ,and intererfering with the autopilot.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisoctoman...when you are hitting golf balls, you are internalizing the movements. Once you put hitting the golf balls on the back-burner, then is when you start thinking about strength and the angle of the shot. Back-burner here being the sub. Not sure what the sub constitutes, but that is the best dark matter theory out there.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this