Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33143576›Full record

ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2020

The wisdom of stalemates: consensus and clustering as filtering mechanisms for improving collective accuracy.

Claudia Winklmayr, Albert B Kao, Joseph B Bak-Coleman, Pawel Romanczuk

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Quantifying the impact of network structure on speed and accuracy in collective decision-making.Theory in biosciences = Theorie in den Biowissenschaften · 2021
    Article
  3. 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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Claudia WinklmayrBernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience, Berlin, Germany.
Albert B KaoSanta Fe Institute, Santa Fe, NM, USA.
Joseph B Bak-ColemanDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA.
Pawel RomanczukBernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience, Berlin, Germany.
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin · DEMax Planck Institute for Mathematics in the Sciences · DEPrinceton University · USSanta Fe Institute · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Groups of organisms, from bacteria to fish schools to human societies, depend on their ability to make accurate decisions in an uncertain world. Most models of collective decision-making assume that groups reach a consensus during a decision-making bout, often through simple majority rule. In many natural and sociological systems, however, groups may fail to reach consensus, resulting in stalemates. Here, we build on opinion dynamics and collective wisdom models to examine how stalemates may affect the wisdom of crowds. For simple environments, where individuals have access to independent sources of information, we find that stalemates improve collective accuracy by selectively filtering out incorrect decisions (an effect we call stalemate filtering). In complex environments, where individuals have access to both shared and independent information, this effect is even more pronounced, restoring the wisdom of crowds in regions of parameter space where large groups perform poorly when making decisions using majority rule. We identify network properties that tune the system between consensus and accuracy, providing mechanisms by which animals, or evolution, could dynamically adjust the collective decision-making process in response to the reward structure of the possible outcomes. Overall, these results highlight the adaptive potential of stalemate filtering for improving the decision-making abilities of group-living animals.

Indexed as

Decision MakingAnimalsCluster AnalysisConsensusCrowdingHumansSocial Behaviorcollective decision makingcollective intelligenceconsensus decisionvoter modelwisdom of crowds

Identifiers

PMID33143576
PMCPMC7735266
OpenAlexW3096424387

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.