The Wisdom and Persuadability of Threads
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research
Standard
The Wisdom and Persuadability of Threads. / Engelhardt, Robin; Hendricks, Vincent F.; Stærk-Østergaard, Jacob.
In: arXiv, 12.08.2020.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - The Wisdom and Persuadability of Threads
AU - Engelhardt, Robin
AU - Hendricks, Vincent F.
AU - Stærk-Østergaard, Jacob
PY - 2020/8/12
Y1 - 2020/8/12
N2 - Online discussion threads are important means for individual decision-making and for aggregating collective judgments, e.g. the `wisdom of crowds'. Empirical investigations of the wisdom of crowds are currently ambivalent about the role played by social information. While some findings suggest that social information undermines crowd accuracy due to correlated judgment errors, others show that accuracy improves. We investigate experimentally the accuracy of threads in which participants make magnitude estimates of varying difficulty while seeing a varying number of previous estimates. We demonstrate that, for difficult tasks, seeing preceding estimates aids the wisdom of crowds. If, however, participants only see extreme estimates, wisdom quickly turns into folly. Using a Gaussian Mixture Model, we assign a persuadability score to each participant and show that persuadability increases with task difficulty and with the amount of social information provided. In filtered threads, we see an increasing gap between highly persuadable participants and skeptics.
AB - Online discussion threads are important means for individual decision-making and for aggregating collective judgments, e.g. the `wisdom of crowds'. Empirical investigations of the wisdom of crowds are currently ambivalent about the role played by social information. While some findings suggest that social information undermines crowd accuracy due to correlated judgment errors, others show that accuracy improves. We investigate experimentally the accuracy of threads in which participants make magnitude estimates of varying difficulty while seeing a varying number of previous estimates. We demonstrate that, for difficult tasks, seeing preceding estimates aids the wisdom of crowds. If, however, participants only see extreme estimates, wisdom quickly turns into folly. Using a Gaussian Mixture Model, we assign a persuadability score to each participant and show that persuadability increases with task difficulty and with the amount of social information provided. In filtered threads, we see an increasing gap between highly persuadable participants and skeptics.
KW - cs.SI
KW - physics.soc-ph
KW - J.4
M3 - Journal article
JO - arXiv
JF - arXiv
ER -
ID: 247112884