group cognition

Question 1

the madness of crowds

Answer 1

• Charles Mackey
• began with stock market ideas
• stock market activity and economic bubbles:
  –> investors buy up cheap shares and this snowballs increasing the prices of the shares until they no longer reflect the value of the company
  –> bubble bursts and the shares are worth very little
• idea that we make worse decisions due to a group

Question 2

wisdom of the crowds - brief example

Answer 2

• people asked to estimate weight of an ox
• guesses made individually but the mean the guesses was very close to the actual weight of the ox
• idea that we can make better decisions and estimates as a group
• “any investigation into the trustworthiness and peculiarities of popular judgements is of interest”

Question 3

real world example

Answer 3

• northern rock bank
• got a bad rep
• people wanted to take money out
• the mass withdrawal of money actually caused the bank to crash
• the group decision led to the downfall of the bank
  –> may not have happened if mass withdrawal didn’t occir

Question 4

small group decision making

Answer 4

• typical paradigm to test group cognition is as follows:
  –> 3 - 6 people
  –> short tasks
  –> common aims

Question 5

example of a short decision task

Answer 5

• short task with a definitive answer
• Robin is looking at Charlie, Charlie is looking at Jules
• Robin is married but Jules is not married
• is a person who is married looking at a person who is not married?
• answers:
  –> A = yes
  –> B = no
  –> C = we cannot tell

Question 6

example of a short decision task = typical answers

Answer 6

• individual guesses:
  –> yes = 5%
  –> no = 2%
  –> can’t tell = 93%
• group guesses
  –> yes = 24%
  –> no = 3%
  –> can’t tell = 69%
• more people get the answer right in groups

Question 7

right answer to the simple decision task

Answer 7

• yes
• if Charlie is married (m), Robin (m) is looking at Charlie (m) and Charlie is looking at Jules (nm)
• if Charlie is not married (nm), Robin (m) is looking at Charlie (m) and Charlie (m) is looking at Jules (nm)
• in either scenario a married person is looking at a non-married person

Question 8

Wason’s selection task

Answer 8

• four cards all have a letter on one side and a number on the other side
• example: E X 1 6
• rule: all cards with a vowel on one side have an even number on the other side
• which cards would you have to turn over to decide whether this statement is true or false?
  –> E and 1
• 1 is an odd number so if a vowel is on this side, the rule has been broken
• most people select E and 6
  –> this is confirmation bias

Question 9

confirmation bias

Answer 9

• A preference for seeking information that can only confirm your existing beliefs, rather than contradict it
• About active search for information, not just whether you believe information when you encounter it

Question 10

confirmation bias in Wason’s task

Answer 10

• You should turn over E, since it might have an odd number on the other side
• You need to also turn over 1, since it might have a vowel on the other side
• Turning over 6 doesn’t tell you anything
  –> it would just confirm the rule but doesn’t PROVE it is correct

Question 11

Wason selection task in groups

Answer 11

• can be used in a small group decision task
• approx 80% of groups arrive at the correct answer
  –> complete flip from individuals where approx 70-80% arrive at the wrong answer
• few mins of discussion can change the wrong answer into a correct response
• allows researchers to look at the process of reasoning in groups to come to the correct answer

Question 12

Wason task controls

Answer 12

• things that don’t help:
  –> Motivation / reward
  –> Changing the wording
  –> University education
• something which does help:
  –> Making the task less abstract
  –> Working within a group (perhaps)

Question 13

Wason task - social rule version

Answer 13

• there are four people in a pub, each has a drink
• these cards each have the age (on one side) and the drink (on the other) of someone in the bar
• beer, cola, 17, 25
• rule: people with an alcoholic drink must be older than 18
• which cards inspect the rule is broken?
  –> beer and 17
  –> make sure beer isn’t below 18
  –> make sure 17 isn’t alcoholic

Question 14

conclude Wason task

Answer 14

group cognition can improve on individual reasoning

Question 15

are groups better than individuals?

Answer 15

• ‘process loss’
  –> where group decisions are worse than individual (madness of crowds)
• ‘process gain”
  –> where group decisions are better than individual (wisdom of crowds)
• Most of the time groups performed at the accuracy of second best member of the group
  –> group cognition tends to avoid the individual worst answer but also the best answer

Question 16

why comparing groups is hard:

Answer 16

• need to be able to define four factors:
  1. task type
  2. standards of comparison
  3. coordination methods
  4. individual differences

Question 17

task types

Answer 17

• intellective
  –> have a definite answer
• judgement tasks
  –> estimations / opinions
• also what does the task depend on:
  –> require insight?
  –> require background knowledge?
  –> provoke strong intuitions or emotions (biases)?

Question 18

task type: individual vs group?

Answer 18

• evidence suggests that:
  –> Given time and discussion, groups perform as well as best individual on Intellective tasks
  –> Evidence that best members outperform groups on judgement tasks
  –> When the task does not have a clear answer then groups tend to be perform at the level of the average members

Question 19

standards of comparison

Answer 19

• performance is split into:
  –> worst individual
  –> average
  –> best individual

Question 20

coordination methods:

Answer 20

• refers to how the group functions
  –> level of discussion
  –> anonymity
  –> revision
• no discussion
  –> averaging individual answers
• iterative, anonymous answers, no discussion
  –> ‘Delphi’ method revises answers to reach consensus
• Discussion group choses the best individual to answer
  –> “dictator method”
• Discussion
  –> come to group agreement “consensus method”
• Discussion with revision
  –> given collective mean, discuss and revise “dialectic methods”

Question 21

evidence for different coordination methods

Answer 21

• best improvement in dictator group
• then delphi
• then dialectic
• least improvement was the consensus group
• However, none outperformed the best individual members
• Note = in the dictator group the best performers often adjusted their response towards the collective mean

Question 22

individual differences

Answer 22

• In sources of information
  –> access to cues
• In ability
  –> i.e., better memory
• In other capacities
  –> e.g. ability/willingness to coordinate

Question 23

achieving group consensus

Answer 23

• Sniezek and Henry (1990)
• suggested that consensus is achieved through revision and weighting
• revision occurs within the individual
• weighting (the combination of multiple judgements) occurs within the group

Question 24

lens model of group decision and making consensus

Answer 24

• based on ideas of revising in individuals and weighting in groups
• model informs how groups may arrive at consensus judgements
• accuracy of group decision making relies on accuracy of individual judgments
• group judgements that are highly related to the criteria in the environment then this would be an accurate decision
• can be influenced by systematic bias or persuasive individuals (unequal weighting)
• weighting towards individuals and information can affect accuracy of the group judgement

Question 25

lens model conclusion

Answer 25

• Lens Model provides a framework to help us think systematically about the different factors which might affect group cognition
• However, it can be difficult to study as there is often limited access to the internal thought processes in discussions

Question 26

conditions for wisdom of crowds

Answer 26

• wisdom of crowds does not work all of the time
• the conditions when it does work:
  –> independent estimates = uncorrelated errors
  –> no systematic biases
  –> no coordination between group members

Question 27

uncorrelated errors

Answer 27

• there is a true value
• there is noise (differences)
• with uncorrelated errors, Ps sample this true value with noise
  –> spread out estimates
  –> some below, some above and some close to the true value

Question 28

correlated errors

Answer 28

• Ps sample the true value with noise AND bias
• all tend to group together
  –> tend to be above the true value
  –> over estimate
• Due to limited information
• Due to shared (individual) biases
• Due to group conformity
  –> all reduce the wisdom of crowds effect

Question 29

things that affect group cognition

Answer 29

• groupthink
• diversity

Question 30

groupthink

Answer 30

• polarisation in group decision making
  –> attitudes expressed in the group move away from the average of individual’s opinion
  –> move towards a more extreme position
• groupthink
  –> highly cohesive groups exhibit premature consensus seeking
  –> i.e. premature closure on the group level (quick decision making)
  –> leads to poor decision making
• impacted by:
  –> overconfidence
  –> blindness to errors
  –> conformity

Question 31

what inspired groupthink?

Answer 31

• JFK
• Cuban Missile Crisis
• Bay of Pigs
• huge mistake
• USA sent planes and tried to bomb Cuba
• massive error
• his group decision making with his close advisors was highly criticised

Question 32

example of groupthink: space shuttle challenger

Answer 32

• launched on January 28th 1986
• several delays before
• freezing temperatures
• some engineers concerned about the seals in the cold
• ended up in a huge disaster
• Rogers Commission found that issues with NASA’S organisational culture and decision-making processes had been key to the accident

Question 33

criticisms of groupthink

Answer 33

• Not a distinct phenomenon?
• Does it add anything to the literature of group reasoning?
• Has it thwarted understanding of group reasoning?
• Doesn’t happen?
  –> lack of empirical evidence for all of the constructs associated with groupthink
• Focus on when group decisions have led to negative outcomes, restricts the understanding of group decision making process
• BUT has been useful in focusing attention on potential flaws of group decision making

Question 34

diversity as an antidote to bias

Answer 34

• more diverse editing teams produce higher quality Wikipedia articles
• they spend longer in more complex discussion

Question 35

social accounts of reason

Answer 35

1. interactionist account
2. argumentative theory of reasoning

Question 36

interactionist account

Answer 36

• reason evolved to produce and evaluate arguments
• not for individuals to solve problems (the individualist account)

Question 37

interactionist approach - Wason task

Answer 37

• Individually, 80% of people fail
  –> a strong bias against getting the right answer
  –> simple aggregation should compound this effect
• Result: 80% of groups get the answer right
  –> majority failure converted to majority success
  –> a “truth wins” scenario

Question 38

argumentative theory of reasoning

Answer 38

• analysis of transcripts shows exchange of arguments is key
  –> argumentative theory or reasoning
• Mercier & Sperber argue that confirmation bias is an individual failing
  –> but here a collective strength

Question 39

how do groups reason?

Answer 39

• exchange of arguments:
  –> “Groups typically co-constructed a structure of arguments qualitatively more sophisticated than that generated by most individuals”
• arguments change people’s problem representation

Question 40

predicting collective intelligence - collective intelligence definition

Answer 40

the ability of a group to perform a wide variety of tasks

Question 41

collective intelligence

Answer 41

• collective intelligence is the general ability of a particular group to perform well across a wide range of different tasks
• Inspired by the idea of general intelligence performance of an individual across a range of different kinds of cognitive tasks, encapsulated as a common statistical factor calledgor general intelligence
• does general intelligence of group predict collective intelligence?

Question 42

general intelligence or social sensitivity?

Answer 42

• collective intelligence is not strongly correlated (only moderate relationship) with the average or maximum individual intelligence of group members
• collective intelligence is correlated with:
  –> the average social sensitivity of group members
  –> the equality in distribution of conversational turn-taking
  –> the proportion of females in the group
  diversity within the group (can hinder or help depending on the task
  –> cognitive diversity (e.g., thinking styles)
• takes more than a group of smart individuals to make a smart group
• in creative innovative tasks, diversity assists
• if efficacy is important, diversity is not helpful

Question 43

Wooley et al (2015)

Answer 43

• 272 participants
• 68 groups
  –> 34 groups online
  –> 34 groups face-to-face

Question 44

Wooley et al (2015) - experiment tasks

Answer 44

• reading the mind in the eyes
  –> measure of social cognition and ability (theory of mind)
  –> guess someone’s mental states by looking at their eyes
• choosing intelligence task
  –> sudoku was used as one measure of intelligence and was conducted either online (where communication was via text) or face-to-face
• Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices test
• generating task
  –> intelligence task

Question 45

Wooley et al (2015) - results

Answer 45

• dominant collective intelligence factor
• explained variance in results more than any other factor
• social intelligence factor
  –> online and offline average RMET scores predicted average collective intelligence
  –> i.e. social sensitivity is important to group functioning
• strong empirical evidence for the emergence of collective intelligence in online groups
• theory of mind abilities are a significant determinant of group collective intelligence
  –> even when group is online and has limited communication channels

Question 46

predictors of group intelligence

Answer 46

• average social sensitivity
• amount of communication
• distribution of communication
• strongly suggests that the coordination problem of group work often outweighs the intellectual challenges

Question 47

summarise group cognition

Answer 47

• Rather than “groups are smart” vs “groups are dumb” consider:
  –> what factors affect when groups are smart
  –> individuals bring information (but also biases to groups)
  –> how the group functions can average out (uncorrelated biases) or overcome them (through argument)
  –> communication can be as important as knowledge or intelligence