The impact of incorrect social information on collective wisdom in human groups.
computational modelling
human collective behaviour
incorrect information
social influence
wisdom of crowds
Journal
Journal of the Royal Society, Interface
ISSN: 1742-5662
Titre abrégé: J R Soc Interface
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101217269
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 2020
09 2020
Historique:
entrez:
9
9
2020
pubmed:
10
9
2020
medline:
22
6
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
A major problem resulting from the massive use of social media is the potential spread of incorrect information. Yet, very few studies have investigated the impact of incorrect information on individual and collective decisions. We performed experiments in which participants had to estimate a series of quantities, before and after receiving social information. Unbeknownst to them, we controlled the degree of inaccuracy of the social information through 'virtual influencers', who provided some incorrect information. We find that a large proportion of individuals only partially follow the social information, thus resisting incorrect information. Moreover, incorrect information can help improve group performance more than correct information, when going against a human underestimation bias. We then design a computational model whose predictions are in good agreement with the empirical data, and sheds light on the mechanisms underlying our results. Besides these main findings, we demonstrate that the dispersion of estimates varies a lot between quantities, and must thus be considered when normalizing and aggregating estimates of quantities that are very different in nature. Overall, our results suggest that incorrect information does not necessarily impair the collective wisdom of groups, and can even be used to dampen the negative effects of known cognitive biases.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32900307
doi: 10.1098/rsif.2020.0496
pmc: PMC7536058
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
20200496Références
PLoS One. 2015 Feb 23;10(2):e0118093
pubmed: 25706981
Trends Cogn Sci. 2003 Apr;7(4):145-147
pubmed: 12691758
Percept Psychophys. 1982 Feb;31(2):175-82
pubmed: 7079098
Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci. 2011 Nov;2(6):634-638
pubmed: 22121459
PLoS One. 2015 Oct 30;10(10):e0140406
pubmed: 26517825
Science. 2018 Mar 9;359(6380):1146-1151
pubmed: 29590045
Sci Rep. 2013;3:1360
pubmed: 23449043
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 May 31;108(22):9020-5
pubmed: 21576485
Cognition. 2008 Mar;106(3):1221-47
pubmed: 17678639
J R Soc Interface. 2018 Apr;15(141):
pubmed: 29669894
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016 Jan 19;113(3):554-9
pubmed: 26729863
PLoS Comput Biol. 2015 Nov 13;11(11):e1004594
pubmed: 26565619
J Exp Psychol Gen. 1985 Dec;114(4):451-71
pubmed: 2934498
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2009 May;35(3):780-805
pubmed: 19379049
PLoS One. 2016 Jun 23;11(6):e0157685
pubmed: 27336834
Cogn Sci. 2017 May;41(4):1020-1041
pubmed: 27471016
PLoS One. 2018 Sep 24;13(9):e0204462
pubmed: 30248154
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017 Nov 21;114(47):12620-12625
pubmed: 29118142
PLoS One. 2013 Nov 05;8(11):e78433
pubmed: 24223805
Science. 2008 May 30;320(5880):1217-20
pubmed: 18511690
PLoS One. 2017 Sep 22;12(9):e0184148
pubmed: 28937984