http://waderoush.typepad.com/twr/2005/03/james_surowieck.html

Rhody writes about the arguements that James Surowiecki revealed in a conference he gave. Surowiecki talks about all the fuss about collective action and collaboration over the last decade with all the new websites. But in a way he looks at the wisdom and use of these type of situations with scepticism. Rhody briefly brings up his book, “Wisdom of Crowds” and some examples that he used like a group of people only being a pound off from guessing the weight of an ox after it had been slaughtered and dressed. He says the wisdom of crowds works well when there is a true answer, and as long as some choices are better than others. He says the key to coming up with the right information is the use of private information some may be wrong but the diversity of each individuals answer is a good thing. Surowiecki believes that the best way is not to have everyone to use their own information and mix it in with others but for each individual to come to their own conclusion and then share it. The less personal interaction the better. He then contrasts it to a centralized type of collaboration that linux uses with a large group working but one or a few people decide on the final decision.Then he shows how ants are able to figure things out but shows that humans don’t have the same tools as ants do. He says the more humans interact the dumber we seem. He gives two reasons for why this is; One being that human beings herd, and second being that we imitate. People like the comfort of a crowd if you want to look legit then do what everyone around you is doing. He says that we are imitation machines and shows this by an example that he used in his book when he had scientists just looking up into the sky on the street corner and people began to do the same thing. He then brings up “The Tipping Point” and its explanation of what a information cascade is. Collective decisions may not be tied with quality. He quotes Pascal as the problems of the world arise because a man cannot sit in a room and think quietly by himself. He then says that that isn’t what he thinks we should do since some information from others can be useful but how can we have group intelligence without the influence of others in order to keep the independence.

In this article we look at information cascades and network effects. Although we see what information other people have we can’t rely on that since it alters our own opinions the best thing is for others to develop their own information and answer and then use what other people have decided on as well because as Rhody and Surowiecki have shown that humans are too easily influenced and this ruins the information that each person brings to the group decision. In information cascades after the first two people decide on the same option (accept/reject) then all others “should” follow despite ones own opinion in the matter but what if the opinions of the ones before were right or wrong. That is why in some cases the group can be very smart but in other times they can appear less intelligent than they would seem than if they were individually making a decision.