The recent controversies surrounding the Inauguration and the Women's March on Washington may have you asking: how do you accurately estimate the size of a crowd?
With the inauguration of the 45th president of the United States this past weekend and the dissenting marches that followed, there’s one type of science that is dominating the news cycle, and that’s crowd science, or the science behind estimating the number of people in a large crowd. Crowd scientists can have a range of expertise, including census work, remote sensing, geospatial analysis, and even cartography, all of which can help with the daunting task of crowd counting.
Some reports quoted the inaugural attendance as low as 250,000 people, but the president himself said “it looked like a million, a million and a half people.” Twenty-four hours later, estimates for attendees of the Women’s March on Washington were consistently larger, although they ranged from 500,000 to 1 million people. So who is right? How do crowd scientists estimate the number of people at these large events and why don’t they agree?
On supporting science journalism
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.
I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.
If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.
