ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2018
Collective decision making by rational individuals.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed, 78 citations in OpenAlex.
- An Entropy Approach to Interdependent Human-Machine Teams.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Agents seeking long-term access to the wisdom of the crowd reduce immediate decision-making accuracy.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Accuracy, rationality and specialization in a generalized model of collective navigation.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2024Article
- Fast decisions reflect biases; slow decisions do not.Physical review. E · 2024Article
- A Cognitive Computational Approach to Social and Collective Decision-Making.Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2024Article
- Collective decision-making and spatial patterns in orientation of an endemic ungulate on the Tibetan Plateau.Current zoology · 2024Article
- Article
- Artificial Intelligence (AI) Trust Framework and Maturity Model: Applying an Entropy Lens to Improve Security, Privacy, and Ethical AI.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Flexible social inference facilitates targeted social learning when rewards are not observable.Nature human behaviour · 2023Article
- A Quantum-like Model of Interdependence for Embodied Human-Machine Teams: Reviewing the Path to Autonomy Facing Complexity and Uncertainty.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Low-distortion information propagation with noise suppression in swarm networks.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
- Asynchrony rescues statistically optimal group decisions from information cascades through emergent leaders.Royal Society open science · 2023Article
- Interdependent Autonomous Human-Machine Systems: The Complementarity of Fitness, Vulnerability and Evolution.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Avoiding costly mistakes in groups: The evolution of error management in collective decision making.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
- Epistemic Communities under Active Inference.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Dynamical systems as a level of cognitive analysis of multi-agent learning: Algorithmic foundations of temporal-difference learning dynamics.Neural computing & applications · 2022Article
- Optimal use of simplified social information in sequential decision-making.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2021Article
- Evolution of heterogeneous perceptual limits and indifference in competitive foraging.PLoS computational biology · 2021Article
- Follow the straggler: zebrafish use a simple heuristic for collective decision-making.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2020Article
- Heterogeneity Improves Speed and Accuracy in Social Networks.Physical review letters · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The patterns and mechanisms of collective decision making in humans and animals have attracted both empirical and theoretical attention. Of particular interest has been the variety of social feedback rules and the extent to which these behavioral rules can be explained and predicted from theories of rational estimation and decision making. However, models that aim to model the full range of social information use have incorporated ad hoc departures from rational decision-making theory to explain the apparent stochasticity and variability of behavior. In this paper I develop a model of social information use and collective decision making by fully rational agents that reveals how a wide range of apparently stochastic social decision rules emerge from fundamental information asymmetries both between individuals and between the decision makers and the observer of those decisions. As well as showing that rational decision making is consistent with empirical observations of collective behavior, this model makes several testable predictions about how individuals make decisions in groups and offers a valuable perspective on how we view sources of variability in animal, and human, behavior.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.