http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11614183

Psychology
The crowd within

Jun 26th 2008
>From The Economist print edition
A battle of ideas is going on inside your mind

THAT problem solving becomes easier when more minds are put to the task
is no more than common sense. But the phenomenon goes further than that.
Ask two people to answer a question like “how many windows are there on
a London double-decker bus” and average their answers. Their combined
guesses will usually be more accurate than if just one person had been
asked. Ask a crowd, rather than a pair, and the average is often very
close to the truth. The phenomenon was called “the wisdom of crowds” by
James Surowiecki, a columnist for the New Yorker who wrote a book about
it. Now a pair of psychologists have found an intriguing corollary. They
have discovered that two guesses made by the same person at different
times are also better than one.

That is strange. Until now, psychologists have assumed that when people
make a guess, they make the most accurate guess that they can. Ask them
to make a second and it should, by definition, be less accurate. If that
were true, averaging the first and second guesses should decrease the
accuracy. Yet Edward Vul at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
and Harold Pashler at the University of California, San Diego, have
revealed in a study just published in Psychological Science that the
average of first and second guesses is indeed better than either guess
on its own.

The two researchers asked 428 people eight questions drawn from the “CIA
World Factbook”: for example, “What percentage of the world’s airports
are in the USA?” Half the participants were unexpectedly asked to make a
second, different guess immediately after they completed the initial
questionnaire. The other half were asked to make a second guess three
weeks later.

Dr Vul and Dr Pashler found that in both circumstances the average of
the two guesses was better than either guess on its own. They also
noticed that the interval between the first and second guesses
determined how accurate that average was. Second guesses made
immediately improved accuracy by an average of 6.5%; those made after
three weeks improved the accuracy by 16%.

Even after three weeks, the result is still only one-third as good as
the wisdom of several different people. But that this happens at all
raises questions about “individuality” within an individual. If guesses
can shift almost at random, where are they coming from?

One answer could be that they are evidence for the “generate and test”
model of creative thinking. This suggests that the brain is constantly
creating hypotheses about the world and checking them against reality.
Those that pass muster are adopted. Guessing the answers to questions
you do not know the correct answer to, but have some idea of what the
right answer ought to look like, could tap into such a system. A hive
mind buzzing with ideas, as it were, but inside a single skull.


-- 
((Udhay Shankar N)) ((udhay @ pobox.com)) ((www.digeratus.com))

Reply via email to