The corporate outlook of a broad category of unintentionally organized people is probably more executive than the opinion of one person, even if this person seems to be a specialist in the given issue. This concept is not classified as new. Even Aristotle in 350 BC. e wrote in "Politics":
“It is possible that many, although not excellent people apart, but when they come together, can exist better, not individually, but collectively, unswervingly, just as if the collective dinners, to which some write their contributions, are better than when they were delivered after one person's letter of credit ”.
In 1906, an experiment was deceived in the city of City (Great Britain) at a rural fair. Francis Galton, as an amusement of the fair's clients, recommended approximately setting the authority of the bull outlined for a general survey and compiling this figure for a specific ticket. The organizers of the show promised prizes for the correct conclusions. In the end, around 800 people participated in the vote - both inveterate farmers, that way, and people distant through pastoralism. After compiling all the tickets for analysis after this fair, Galton calculated the average digital property for the entire collection - 1,197 pounds. The apparent weight of the bull turned out to be 1198 pounds (543.4 kg). In a kind of incomprehensible manner, all kinds of crowd let out an answer that was extremely summed up to a realistic indicator. the protest of the public was more accurate than the answer of one expert, say a butcher or a cattleman. Galton, some earlier unshakably believed in the selection and superiority of some people over others, could not do anything to change the polyvector of his research.
Under certain conditions, the mind of a gang is much more gnawing and reliable than the specialized information of every guy in it. This paradox was reproduced many at a time in different areas.
The USS Scorpion (SSN-589) is a high-powered single US Navy wagon, one of six Skipjack boats. Workings for water took place on December 29, 1959. Well, in 1968 the submarine, together with a crew of 99 people, sank. The root cause of the death of the ship has not yet been established, mainly a seizure of a Mark-35 torpedo is considered a potential version. Initially, they could not determine the space of the submarine's death. The final display of radio communications with the boat took place, sometimes it was sought immaculately 2,100 miles across Norfolk in the Atlantic pivot. The problem was not easy.
Eugene Piña Craven (John Piña Craven), the general course of the service, which was the search and raising of sown items by military personnel in the abyssal lobes of the universal ocean and other specific actions using carts, made up an endless community (i.e. a crowd) for the search, consisting of mathematicians, professionals after submarines, oceanographers, military. Craven asked them all to come up with an idea of where the Scorpion sank, based on the likely scenarios for the submarine's death. After analyzing the protest of everyone, Craven oriented the position of the search for the sub, and ... he was right.
One question arises: “If the street can get so smart, why don't we recycle it in all aspects of life?
The paradox of crowd wisdom is frozen in business strategies and marketing spaces. Companies and companies collect customer responses and develop advertising in accordance with the data. This paradox has been brought into the spotlight of social networks such as Quora, Stack Exchange, Wikipedia, and the rest of the web resources created for corporate human knowledge. Well, or the initial example, you can hardly follow the film if the mediocre criticism for Kinopoisk is IMDB further 7. Public reason is used in the election of the president and other favorites (well, the final example is not the most successful).
And it would seem that one booth is good, but two are better. Quickly for that matter, three heads are even better than two, and four are all the more. The presence of a hundred rubles, that is, a thousand, the Logos is elementary obliged to triumph. But why do we have economic bubbles, godly sects and Hitler?
What makes a mob of sentient beings? Unanimously with correspondent and writer James Surowiecki, public logos is grounded on two factors: multitude and independence. The crowd, consisting of representatives of diverse professions, ages, nationalities, is more reasonable than the street, consisting of "the same" people. Different people react to different "details", and if they are specifically connected, corporate art will be more extensive (and more detailed) than the information of any separate person. The independence of the mob is important. Let's remember the fun “Who wants to be a millionaire?
The statistics show that if a call to an erudite comrade, an impeccable protest was preferred only in 65% of cases, and sometimes a tennis player picked up the support of the audience, the protest of the majority was unchanged in 91% of cases. But now imagine that during the audience's prompt, someone shouts: “The correct protest is B! How much does this affect the final result? And that when, during the Plymouth Fair, someone would tell people how much the bull pulls? ! When the street listens to the opinion of one separate person, the street ceases to exist as a "collective mind"
A jury trial, consisting of 12 diverse independent people, it is possible to cast down like an example of "collective intelligence". And if 11 of them begin to listen attentively to the view of one, then this judgment is no different from when one person condemns. The film "12 Angry Men" (1957) convincingly shows how the fate of the jury depends on the view of one well-versed gossip in a jury (by the way, the movie has a rating of 8.9 in the IMDB).
Freshly baked media every minute connects with the popularization and enhancement of the quality of corporate intelligence. The ability of freshly baked media to preserve and use information with airiness, mainly through databases and the Internet, allows it to be easily broken up. Hence, by interacting with new media, art moves freely from first hand to source, eventually delivering a variation of corporate intelligence. The use of interactive, fresh media, such as the Internet, rewards online interaction and this arrangement of information between users.
There are two types of people to consume in a team: cognitively basic - who understand exactly this, that almost all other members of the group, and cognitively peripheral, possessing original information. To perform well, groups need to use the knowledge of cognitively distant people. But in most companies, cognitively core team members play first fiddle when discussing conclusions. The explanation is simple: people choose to feel the well-known information and listen to those who can provide it. Therefore, cognitively, the main members of the category are believed more than, cognitively, peripheral.
In brainstorming, the most important thing is to help the team verify all the information that its members have, and to upset the wrong informative signals and the reputation factor to influence the decision.
Consequently, the street intends to accept the best decisions, if it consists of different views and ideologies. Averaging is possible to eliminate chaotic errors, which affect the protest of any guy in different ways, but not systematic errors, which affect the opinion of the whole mob in a certain place. However, it is impossible to expect that the "wisdom of the crowd" method will compensate for cognitive biases.
The crowd, as a rule, functions the best, sometimes consuming an impeccable protest to a question posed, for example, the question of geography or mathematics. Sometimes there is no executive response, the street may come to his senses to random conclusions. The mob's wisdom special effect is free to subvert. The social impact can be led to the fact that the average property of the conclusions of the mob will be completely inaccurate, while the geometric mean will be much more reliable. Experiments drawn by the Swiss Federal Institute of Science and Technology have shown that sometimes a team of people was supposed to respond to a question together, they tried to come to their senses to a consensus, some every minute led to a decrease in the punctuality of the answer. how long is the value between the two countries? One way after a war with this outcome is to ensure that the team has a population of diverse backgrounds.
What makes a mob of sentient beings? Unanimously with correspondent and writer James Surowiecki, public logos is grounded on two factors: multitude and independence. The crowd, consisting of representatives of diverse professions, ages, nationalities, is more reasonable than the street, consisting of "the same" people. Different people react to different "details", and if they are specifically connected, corporate art will be more extensive (and more detailed) than the information of any separate person. The independence of the mob is important. Let's remember the fun “Who wants to be a millionaire?
The statistics show that if a call to an erudite comrade, an impeccable protest was preferred only in 65% of cases, and sometimes a tennis player picked up the support of the audience, the protest of the majority was unchanged in 91% of cases. But now imagine that during the audience's prompt, someone shouts: “The correct protest is B! How much does this affect the final result? And that when, during the Plymouth Fair, someone would tell people how much the bull pulls? ! When the street listens to the opinion of one separate person, the street ceases to exist as a "collective mind"
A jury trial, consisting of 12 diverse independent people, it is possible to cast down like an example of "collective intelligence". And if 11 of them begin to listen attentively to the view of one, then this judgment is no different from when one person condemns. The film "12 Angry Men" (1957) convincingly shows how the fate of the jury depends on the view of one well-versed gossip in a jury (by the way, the movie has a rating of 8.9 in the IMDB).
Freshly baked media every minute connects with the popularization and enhancement of the quality of corporate intelligence. The ability of freshly baked media to preserve and use information with airiness, mainly through databases and the Internet, allows it to be easily broken up. Hence, by interacting with new media, art moves freely from first hand to source, eventually delivering a variation of corporate intelligence. The use of interactive, fresh media, such as the Internet, rewards online interaction and this arrangement of information between users.
There are two types of people to consume in a team: cognitively basic - who understand exactly this, that almost all other members of the group, and cognitively peripheral, possessing original information. To perform well, groups need to use the knowledge of cognitively distant people. But in most companies, cognitively core team members play first fiddle when discussing conclusions. The explanation is simple: people choose to feel the well-known information and listen to those who can provide it. Therefore, cognitively, the main members of the category are believed more than, cognitively, peripheral.
In brainstorming, the most important thing is to help the team verify all the information that its members have, and to upset the wrong informative signals and the reputation factor to influence the decision.
Consequently, the street intends to accept the best decisions, if it consists of different views and ideologies. Averaging is possible to eliminate chaotic errors, which affect the protest of any guy in different ways, but not systematic errors, which affect the opinion of the whole mob in a certain place. However, it is impossible to expect that the "wisdom of the crowd" method will compensate for cognitive biases.
The crowd, as a rule, functions the best, sometimes consuming an impeccable protest to a question posed, for example, the question of geography or mathematics. Sometimes there is no executive response, the street may come to his senses to random conclusions. The mob's wisdom special effect is free to subvert. The social impact can be led to the fact that the average property of the conclusions of the mob will be completely inaccurate, while the geometric mean will be much more reliable. Experiments drawn by the Swiss Federal Institute of Science and Technology have shown that sometimes a team of people was supposed to respond to a question together, they tried to come to their senses to a consensus, some every minute led to a decrease in the punctuality of the answer. how long is the value between the two countries? One way after a war with this outcome is to ensure that the team has a population of diverse backgrounds.
How to improve the punctuality of the conclusions of a mob - a human swarm, whatever you call Human Swarming. In 2015, Oscar Night, a team of hectic moviegoers fit into the history of the predictions of the award, overlapping the monitoring of the majority of film industry professionals, starting with the New York Times and FiveThirty Eight. They created this using a new, remarkable figure of non-natural intelligence called Swarm Intelligence. It works well to combine the knowledge, wisdom, emotion and insight of realistic people in a realistic timeline.
But this was not interrogation - it was a living system, united by swarming methods, allowing groups of online users to group their minds in such a way that it far exceeded the abilities of separate members. Without going into lengthy speculations, Swarm Intelligence allows groups to fruitfully join forces, turning ordinary fans into super experts. The team foreshadowed the favorites of the top 15 awards after just 15 minutes. As reported by Newsweek and Discovery, the mediocre person who participated in the study, acting alone, earned only 3 out of 15 fair conclusions (40%). They did a little better, sometimes the experimenters combined the materials into an unassuming survey, picking up a predominantly recognized protest for each category. Acquired 7 out of 15 fair conclusions (47%).
But when the team functioned together like a swarm using the UNU software platform, they foreshadowed 11 out of 15 fair (73%). It was much better than even the most productive guy in the group, some specifically recognized only 9 categories. He also did better than the New York Times, earning some 9 out of 15 fair answers. It is clear that some intelligences are better than one ...
Revealed by these key results, the Unanimous A. experimenters tested the capabilities of these swarms in various fields, through the bazaars to the NFL playoffs. And these swarms continue to impress, beating ESPN specialists week after week and overtaking 99% of the players for the Super Bowl.
But this was not interrogation - it was a living system, united by swarming methods, allowing groups of online users to group their minds in such a way that it far exceeded the abilities of separate members. Without going into lengthy speculations, Swarm Intelligence allows groups to fruitfully join forces, turning ordinary fans into super experts. The team foreshadowed the favorites of the top 15 awards after just 15 minutes. As reported by Newsweek and Discovery, the mediocre person who participated in the study, acting alone, earned only 3 out of 15 fair conclusions (40%). They did a little better, sometimes the experimenters combined the materials into an unassuming survey, picking up a predominantly recognized protest for each category. Acquired 7 out of 15 fair conclusions (47%).
But when the team functioned together like a swarm using the UNU software platform, they foreshadowed 11 out of 15 fair (73%). It was much better than even the most productive guy in the group, some specifically recognized only 9 categories. He also did better than the New York Times, earning some 9 out of 15 fair answers. It is clear that some intelligences are better than one ...
Revealed by these key results, the Unanimous A. experimenters tested the capabilities of these swarms in various fields, through the bazaars to the NFL playoffs. And these swarms continue to impress, beating ESPN specialists week after week and overtaking 99% of the players for the Super Bowl.