Researchers determine how groups make decisions

Temnothorax rugatulus. Credit: Arizona State University

From Beats headphones' rise to prominence or a political candidate's surge in the polls to how ants and bees select a new nest site, decisions emerging from groups frequently occur without a leader.

Researchers from Carnegie Mellon University have developed a that explains how groups make collective decisions when no single member of the group has access to all possible information or the ability to make and communicate a final decision. Published in Science Advances, the de-centralized decision-making model shows how positive feedback during the exploration process proves useful for making good and quick decisions.

"Throughout the presidential primary process, people are trying to find an ideal candidate in a crowded landscape. The person in the lead - say Donald Trump - gets more media coverage and attention, which could lead to more people thinking about voting for him based on name recognition," said David Hagmann, a Ph.D. student in CMU's Department of Social and Decision Sciences. "Eventually, the added exposure could highlight information that people do not like, causing a candidate to fade in the polls."

Hagmann, along with Russell Golman and John H. Miller, developed the mathematical model based on two elements: recruitment with positive feedback, where initially popular options get reinforced, and quorum sensing, where enough support for a given choice triggers a final decision. Using a Polya urn scheme - a statistical model in which balls of different colors are repeatedly drawn from a container and previously picked colors become more likely to be drawn again - the researchers were able to look at how long it takes to make decisions and calculate their accuracy.

"We found that the model is pretty robust across how it is implemented," said Golman, assistant professor of social and decision sciences. "Most interesting, when one choice has more variation in how it is perceived, it's chosen less frequently, establishing systemic risk aversion."

Being a bit risk-averse when deciding on, say, where to relocate thousands of bees, is the evolutionarily safe choice.

"When everyone has to do the same thing, you want to be slow and steady to avoid extreme choices," Golman said.

The process could also be used to explain how the brain's neurons work.

"The way the brain works, you need to get a certain amount of neurons to be active in order to make a decision. Current theories on neuronal decision-making don't take the process of positive feedback into account. But, neuroscience generally recognizes that neurons are connected in recurrent networks, which allow for ," Golman said.

The model also helps explain how trends take off, such as the popularity of Beats headphones, and the success of word-of-mouth marketing tactics.

"Early adopters are walking advertisements for the products they buy. Choosing the most popular headphones is not necessarily the best option," Golman said, "but it's not a bad rule of thumb."

Explore further

Too many candidates spoil the stew

More information: "Polya's bees: A model of decentralized decision-making" Science Advances,
Journal information: Science Advances

Citation: Researchers determine how groups make decisions (2015, September 18) retrieved 23 August 2019 from
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.

Feedback to editors

User comments

Sep 18, 2015
I appreciate this post, it involves political science. Understanding the concept of human life is not much different than using a Petri dish, "the world", introducing a series of similar, but a few simple changes of bacteria within the outer parameters of the dish. Unfortunately we are not much more than this. We oppose ourselves, when something is considered irregular, than one will try to destroy that entity.

Sep 21, 2015
Each group has its own leader(s), but it may be insensibly for our models. In reality all elements of a group are differ from each other, and there are exist better and inferior ones. For example on the image above: the first ant which did right decision according to situation is the leader (it should be more smart, sensitive and active). It may transfer the decision to ants around.

Sep 21, 2015
which could lead to more people thinking about voting for him based on name recognition

It's sort of sad that all that is left of democracy is "voting for the guy most people know by name" rather than any issue-based policies.

That way extreme choices aren't avoided because the hairsytle of the candidate says precious little about how extreme they'll be. (Although, if history is anything to go by: the more extreme the hairstyle the more extreme the political leanings)

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