The wisdom of crowds suggests that many independent judgments can produce surprisingly accurate results. But discussion between people can reduce the diversity on which that wisdom depends. Research suggests another possibility: small groups can deliberate together while remaining independent of other groups, combining conversation with the wider wisdom of the crowd. Abstract The aggregation of Continue reading Aggregated Knowledge From a Small Number of Debates Outperforms the Wisdom of Large Crowds Joaquin Navajas, Tamara Niella, Gerry Garbulsky, Bahador Bahrami and Mariano Sigman (December 2018)
video player How can groups make good decisions? | Mariano Sigman and Dan Ariely Mariano closes this talk with the . You can read the transcript below. Partial Transcript Good collective decisions require two components: deliberation and diversity of opinions. Right now, the way we typically make our voice heard in many societies is through Continue reading How Can Groups Make Good Decisions? Mariano Sigman and Dan Ariely (2017)
Reasoning is usually treated as a tool for forming sound beliefs and decisions. Yet research on cognitive bias suggests our individual reasoning is often unreliable and shaped by hidden distortions. Social reasoning offers an alternative: we think better together, testing ideas through dialogue and shared critique rather than alone. Continue reading The Argumentative Theory of Human Reason We did not evolve to reason individually but to reason socially
The wisdom of crowds suggests that many independent judgments can produce surprisingly accurate results. But discussion between people can reduce the diversity on which that wisdom depends. Research suggests another possibility: small groups can deliberate together while remaining independent of other groups, combining conversation with the wider wisdom of the crowd. Continue reading Wisdom of Crowds of Crowds Crowds within a crowd outperform ‘wisdom of the crowd’
