Social Influence Undermines the Wisdom of the Crowd in Sequential Decision Making

References

• Allcott H , Gentzkow M (2017) Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. NBER Working Paper No. w23089, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Alpern S , Chen B (2017) The importance of voting order for jury decisions by sequential majority voting. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 258(3):1072–1081.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Armstrong J (2006) How to make better forecasts and decisions: Avoid face-to-face meetings. Foresight—Internat. J. Appl. Forecasting (5):3–8.Google Scholar
• Arthur WB (1989) Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. Econom. J. (London) 99(394):116–131.Google Scholar
• Asch SE (1955) Opinions and social pressure. Sci. Amer. 193(5):31–35.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baker KM (1975) Condorcet: From Natural Philosophy to Social Mathematics (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Google Scholar
• Banerjee AV (1992) A simple model of herd behavior. Quart. J. Econom. 107(3):797–817.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Becker J , Brackbill D , Centola D (2017) Network dynamics of social influence in the wisdom of crowds. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 114(26):E5070–E5076.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bernstein E , Shore J , Lazer D (2018) How intermittent breaks in interaction improve collective intelligence. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 115(35):8734–8739.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bikhchandani S , Hirshleifer D , Welch I (1992) A theory of fads, fashion, custom, and cultural change as informational cascades. J. Political Econom. 100(5):992–1026.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Broomell SB , Budescu DV (2009) Why are experts correlated? Decomposing correlations between judges. Psychometrika 74(3):531–553.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bruch EE , Mare RD (2006) Neighborhood choice and neighborhood change. Amer. J. Sociol. 112(3):667–709.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Büchel B , Klößner S , Lochmüller M , Rauhut H (2020) The strength of weak leaders: An experiment on social influence and social learning in teams. Experiment. Econom. 23(2):259–293.Google Scholar
• Budescu DV , Chen E (2014) Identifying expertise to extract the wisdom of crowds. Management Sci. 61(2):267–280.Link, Google Scholar
• Chamley C (2004) Rational Herds: Economic Models of Social Learning (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Google Scholar
• Cialdini RB , Goldstein NJ (2004) Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Rev. Psych. 55:591–621.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Clemen RT , Winkler RL (1985) Limits for the precision and value of information from dependent sources. Oper. Res. 33(2):427–442.Link, Google Scholar
• Condorcet MJAN (1785) Essai sur l’Application de l’Analyse à la Probabilité des Décisions Rendues à la Pluralité des Voix (Imprimerie Royale, Paris).Google Scholar
• Cowgill B , Zitzewitz E (2015) Corporate prediction markets: Evidence from Google, Ford, and Firm X. Rev. Econom. Stud. 82(4):1309–1341.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DeGroot MH (1974) Reaching a consensus. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 69(345):118–121.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Davis-Stober CP , Budescu DV , Dana J , Broomell SB (2014) When is a crowd wise? Decision 1(2):79–101.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Farrell S (2011) Social influence benefits the wisdom of individuals in the crowd. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 108(36):E625.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fischbacher U (2007) z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments. Experiment. Econom. 10(2):171–178.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Friedkin NE , Bullo F (2017) How truth wins in opinion dynamics along issue sequences. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 114(43):11380–11385.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gale D (1996) What have we learned from social learning? Eur. Econom. Rev. 40(3–5):617–628.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galton F (1907) Vox populi. Nature 75(7):450–451.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ganser C , Keuschnigg M (2018) Social influence strengthens crowd wisdom under voting. Adv. Complex Systems 21(6-7):1850013–1850013-23.Google Scholar
• Goeree JK , Palfrey TR , Rogers BW , McKelvey RD (2007) Self-correcting information cascades. Rev. Econom. Stud. 74(3):733–762.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greiner B (2015) Subject pool recruitment procedures: Organizing experiments with ORSEE. J. Econom. Sci. Assoc. 1(1):114–125.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grofman B , Owen G , Feld SL (1983) Thirteen theorems in search of the truth. Theory Decision 15(3):261–278.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hastie R , Kameda T (2005) The robust beauty of majority rules in group decisions. Psych. Rev. 112(2):494–508.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henrich J (2015) The Secret of Our Success: How Culture Is Driving Human Evolution, Domesticating Our Species, and Making Us Smarter (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hogarth RM (1978) A note on aggregating opinions. Organ. Behav. Human Performance 21(1):40–46.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hong L , Page SE (2004) Groups of diverse problem solvers can outperform groups of high-ability problem solvers. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101(46):16385–16389.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hueffer K , Fonseca MA , Leiserowitz A , Taylor KM (2013) The wisdom of crowds: Predicting a weather and climate-related event. Judgment Decision Making 8(2):91–105.Google Scholar
• Huff C , Tingley D (2015) “Who are these people?” Evaluating the demographic characteristics and political preferences of MTurk survey respondents. Res. Politics 2(3):1–12.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jayles B , Kim HR , Escobedo R , Cezera S , Blanchet A , Kameda T , Sire C , Theraulaz G (2017) How social information can improve estimation accuracy in human groups. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 114(47):12620–12625.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kelley EK , Tetlock PC (2013) How wise are crowds? Insights from retail orders and stock returns. J. Finance 68(3):1229–1265.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kerr NL , Tindale RS (2004) Group performance and decision making. Annual Rev. Psych. 55:623–655.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keuschnigg M , Ganser C (2016) Crowd wisdom relies on agents’ ability in small groups with a voting aggregation rule. Management Sci. 63(3):818–828.Link, Google Scholar
• Krueger JI , Massey AL (2009) A rational reconstruction of misbehavior. Soc. Cognition 27(5):786–812.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kurvers RH , Herzog SM , Hertwig R , Krause J , Carney PA , Bogart A , Argenziano G , Zalaudek I , Wolf M (2016) Boosting medical diagnostics by pooling independent judgments. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 113(31):8777–8782.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ladha KK (1992) The Condorcet jury theorem, free speech, and correlated votes. Amer. J. Political Sci. 36(3):617–634.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ladha KK (1995) Information pooling through majority-rule voting: Condorcet’s jury theorem with correlated votes. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 26(3):353–372.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Larrick RP , Soll JB (2006) Intuitions about combining opinions: Misappreciation of the averaging principle. Management Sci. 52(1):111–127.Link, Google Scholar
• Levay KE , Freese J , Druckman JN (2016) The demographic and political composition of Mechanical Turk samples. SAGE Open 6(1):1–17.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lichtendahl KC Jr , Grushka-Cockayne Y , Pfeifer PE (2013) The wisdom of competitive crowds. Oper. Res. 61(6):1383–1398.Link, Google Scholar
• Lorenz J , Rauhut H , Kittel B (2015) Majoritarian democracy undermines truth-finding in deliberative committees. Res. Politics 2(2):1–10.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lorenz J , Rauhut H , Schweitzer F , Helbing D (2011) How social influence can undermine the wisdom of crowd effect. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 108(22):9020–9025.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Madirolas G , de Polavieja GG (2015) Improving collective estimations using resistance to social influence. PLOS Comput. Biol. 11(11):e1004594.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mann RP , Helbing D (2017) Optimal incentives for collective intelligence. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 114(20):5077–5082.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mannes AE (2009) Are we wise about the wisdom of crowds? The use of group judgments in belief revision. Management Sci. 55(8):1267–1279.Link, Google Scholar
• Mannes AE , Larrick RP , Soll JB (2012) The social psychology of the wisdom of crowds. Krueger JI , ed. Frontiers of Social Psychology: Social Judgment and Decision Making (Psychology Press, New York), 227–242.Google Scholar
• Minson JA , Mueller JS , Larrick RP (2018) The contingent wisdom of dyads: When discussion enhances vs. undermines the accuracy of collaborative judgments. Management Sci. 64(9):4177–4192.Link, Google Scholar
• Murr AE (2015) The wisdom of crowds: Applying Condorcet’s jury theorem to forecasting US presidential elections. Internat. J. Forecasting 31(3):916–929.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mussweiler T , Strack F , Pfeiffer T (2000) Overcoming the inevitable anchoring effect: Considering the opposite compensates for selective accessibility. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 26(9):1142–1150.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nofer M , Hinz O (2014) Are crowds on the Internet wiser than experts? The case of a stock prediction community. J. Bus. Econom . 84(3):303–338.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nolan JM , Schultz PW , Cialdini RB , Goldstein NJ , Griskevicius V (2008) Normative social influence is underdetected. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 34(7):913–923.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Polzin F , Toxopeus H , Stam E (2018) The wisdom of the crowd in funding: Information heterogeneity and social networks of crowdfunders. Small Bus. Econom. 50(2):251–273.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rauhut H , Lorenz J , Schweitzer F , Helbing D (2011) Reply to Farrell: Improved individual estimation success can imply collective tunnel vision. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 108(36):E626.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Salganik MJ , Dodds PS , Watts DJ (2006) Experimental study of inequality and unpredictability in an artificial cultural market. Science 311(5762):854–856.Crossref, Google Scholar
• See KE , Morrison EW , Rothman NB , Soll JB (2011) The detrimental effects of power on confidence, advice taking, and accuracy. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 116(2):272–285.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sewell DK (2018) Heterogeneous susceptibilities in social influence models. Soc. Networks 52:135–144.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shao C , Ciampaglia GL , Flammini A , Menczer F (2016) Hoaxy: A platform for tracking online misinformation. Proc. 25th Internat. Conf. Companion World Wide Web (Montreal, Canada) 745–750.Google Scholar
• Sjöberg L (2009) Are all crowds equally wise? A comparison of political election forecasts by experts and the public. J. Forecasting 28(1):1–18.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Soll JB (1999) Intuitive theories of information: Beliefs about the value of redundancy. Cognitive Psych. 38(2):317–346.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Spann M , Skiera B (2003) Internet-based virtual stock markets for business forecasting. Management Sci. 49(10):1310–1326.Link, Google Scholar
• Sunstein CR (2000) Deliberative trouble? Why groups go to extremes. Yale Law J. 110(1):71–119.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sunstein CR (2006) Infotopia: How Many Minds Produce Knowledge (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Surowiecki J (2004) The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many Are Smarter Than the Few and How Collective Wisdom Shapes Business (Little Brown, London).Google Scholar
• Tversky A , Kahneman D (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science 185(4157):1124–1131.Crossref, Google Scholar
• van de Rijt A (2019) Self-correcting dynamics in social influence processes. Amer. J. Sociol. 124(5):1468–1495.Google Scholar
• van de Rijt A , Siegel D , Macy M (2009) Neighborhood chance and neighborhood change: A comment on Bruch and Mare. Amer. J. Soc. 114(4):1166–1180.Crossref, Google Scholar
• van de Rijt A , Kang S , Restivo M , Patil A (2014) Field experiments of success-breeds-success dynamics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 111(19):6934–6939.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wagner C , Suh A (2014) The wisdom of crowds: Impact of collective size and expertise transfer on collective performance. 47th Hawaii Internat. Conf. System Sci. (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ), 594–603.Google Scholar
• Yaniv I , Choshen-Hillel S , Milyavsky M (2009) Spurious consensus and opinion revision: Why might people be more confident in their less accurate judgments? J. Experiment. Psych. Learn. Memory Cognition 35(2):558–563.Crossref, Google Scholar