Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28490500›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2017

The wisdom of crowds for visual search.

Mordechai Z Juni, Miguel P Eckstein

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. The motor Wisdom of the Crowd.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2022
    Article
  6. Bayesian modeling of human-AI complementarity.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Mordechai Z JuniDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-9660; mzjuni@gmail.com.
Miguel P EcksteinDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-9660.

Funding

Assessment of medical image quality with foveated search modelsR01EB018958 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA BARBARA · PI ECKSTEIN, MIGUEL PATRICIO · 2015 to 2018
$1.7M
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB018958
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Decision-making accuracy typically increases through collective integration of people's judgments into group decisions, a phenomenon known as the wisdom of crowds. For simple perceptual laboratory tasks, classic signal detection theory specifies the upper limit for collective integration benefits obtained by weighted averaging of people's confidences, and simple majority voting can often approximate that limit. Life-critical perceptual decisions often involve searching large image data (e.g., medical, security, and aerial imagery), but the expected benefits and merits of using different pooling algorithms are unknown for such tasks. Here, we show that expected pooling benefits are significantly greater for visual search than for single-location perceptual tasks and the prediction given by classic signal detection theory. In addition, we show that simple majority voting obtains inferior accuracy benefits for visual search relative to averaging and weighted averaging of observers' confidences. Analysis of gaze behavior across observers suggests that the greater collective integration benefits for visual search arise from an interaction between the foveated properties of the human visual system (high foveal acuity and low peripheral acuity) and observers' nonexhaustive search patterns, and can be predicted by an extended signal detection theory framework with trial to trial sampling from a varying mixture of high and low target detectabilities across observers (SDT-MIX). These findings advance our theoretical understanding of how to predict and enhance the wisdom of crowds for real world search tasks and could apply more generally to any decision-making task for which the minority of group members with high expertise varies from decision to decision.

Indexed as

JudgmentPerceptionAdultCrowdingDecision MakingFemaleFixation, OcularHumansMalePoliticsVisual PerceptionYoung Adultgroup decision rulesideal observer analysessignal detection theorywisdom of crowds

Identifiers

PMID28490500
PMCPMC5448189

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.