Feeding the five thousand -- or was it three? Researchers claim most crowd estimations are unreliable

August 25, 2011

The public should view crowd estimation with scepticism, say the authors of a study published today in Significance, the magazine of the Royal Statistical Society and the American Statistical Association, as they suggest more reliable alternatives to current estimating methods.

Estimates of sizes vary greatly, and the success of an event is often measured by the size of the crowd. Organisers of the 2007 "Stop the War" demonstration in London reported crowds of 60,000, whereas the police reported just 10,000. The US Government's estimate of the crowds at Obama's inauguration ceremony was 1.8 million, while other were much less, closer to one million. "In the absence of any accurate estimation methods, the public are left with a view of the truth coloured by the beliefs of the people making the estimates," claims Professor Paul Yip, of the University of Hong Kong, one of the authors of the study.

Such a huge in estimates is currently not unusual and suggests the use of crowd sizes as a political tool. Larger crowd sizes are a means of recruiting others to the cause, and it is more difficult for the authorities to ignore demands. "The authorities are sometimes put in a difficult position," says Yip. "It is important to highlight the shortcomings of existing estimating methods."

In today's study, the authors reveal several more accurate, more reliable methods of estimating crowd sizes. Currently, even when searching for the truth, there is a wide margin of error. The authors recommend organisers and authorities use an area x density estimating method for static crowds, which reduces the margin of error to less than 10%. Furthermore, they have devised an entirely new method of reliably estimating mobile crowds. Two inspection points are placed along the route where the number of participants is estimated, not too close together and with one near the end. In applying this two-inspection-point method to the Hong Kong 1st July march (a demonstration of widely-varying claimed size and of great political sensitivity) since 2003, more reliable estimates can then be obtained.

"It is important to rectify the myth of counting people. The public would be better served by estimates less open to political bias. Our study shows that crowd estimates with a margin of error of less than 10% can be achieved with the proposed method," Yip concludes.

Explore further: Is that your final answer? Study suggests method for improving individual decisions

Related Stories

Does the wisdom of crowds prevail when betting on football?

November 15, 2010

the number of points by which a strong team can be expected to defeat a weaker team—are supposed to reflect the "wisdom of crowds." But a new study in the Journal of Consumer Research found that crowds don't have a clue.

Global war deaths have been substantially underestimated

June 20, 2008

[B]Research paper: 50 years of violent war deaths from Vietnam to Bosnia[/B] Globally, war has killed three times more people than previously estimated, and there is no evidence to support claims of a recent decline in war ...

Recommended for you

'Tully monster' mystery is far from solved, group argues

February 20, 2017

Last year, headlines in The New York Times, The Atlantic, Scientific American and other outlets declared that a decades-old paleontological mystery had been solved. The "Tully monster," an ancient animal that had long defied ...

Study on prehistoric violence published

February 20, 2017

A longtime Cal Poly Pomona anthropology professor who studies violence among prehistoric people in California has been published in a prestigious journal.

Mathematical models predict how we wait in line, traffic

February 17, 2017

As New Jersey drivers approach the George Washington Bridge to enter New York City, a digital sign flashes overhead with estimates of the delays on the upper and lower levels of the bridge. Most drivers choose the level with ...

Remembering the need to forget

February 17, 2017

We are built to forget – it is a psychological necessity. But in a social media world that captures – and, more importantly, remembers – everything we say and do, forgetting is becoming a thing of the past. If we lose ...

0 comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.