Dataset Information

Demographically diverse crowds are typically not much wiser than homogeneous crowds.

ABSTRACT: Averaging independent numerical judgments can be more accurate than the average individual judgment. This "wisdom of crowds" effect has been shown with large, diverse samples, but the layperson wishing to take advantage of this may only have access to the opinions of a small, more demographically homogeneous "convenience sample." How wise are homogeneous crowds relative to diverse crowds? In simulations and survey studies, we demonstrate three necessary conditions under which small socially diverse crowds can outperform socially homogeneous crowds: Social identity must predict judgment, the effect of social identity on judgment must be at least moderate in size, and the average estimates of the social groups in question must "bracket" the truth being judged. Seven survey studies suggest that these conditions are rarely met in real judgment tasks. Comparisons between the performances of diverse and homogeneous crowds further confirm that social diversity can make crowds wiser but typically by a very small margin.

SUBMITTER: de Oliveira S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5834705 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Demographically diverse crowds are typically not much wiser than homogeneous crowds.

de Oliveira Stephanie S Nisbett Richard E RE

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 20180209 9

Averaging independent numerical judgments can be more accurate than the average individual judgment. This "wisdom of crowds" effect has been shown with large, diverse samples, but the layperson wishing to take advantage of this may only have access to the opinions of a small, more demographically homogeneous "convenience sample." How wise are homogeneous crowds relative to diverse crowds? In simulations and survey studies, we demonstrate three necessary conditions under which small socially dive ...[more]

PMID: 29440376

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceOrganized screening outreach can reduce differences in colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality between demographic subgroups. Outcomes associated with additional outreach, beyond universal outreach, are not well known.ObjectiveTo compare CRC screening completion by race and ethnicity, age, and sex after universal automated outreach and additional personalized outreach.Design, setting, and participantsThis observational cohort study included screening-eligible individuals aged 50 to 75 years assessed during 2019 in a community-based organized CRC screening program within the Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) integrated health care delivery setting. For KPNC members who are not up to date with screening by colonoscopy, each year the program first uses automated outreach (mailed prescreening notification postcards and fecal immunochemical test [FIT] kits, automated telephone calls, and postcard reminders), followed by personalized components for nonresponders (telephone calls, electronic messaging, and screening offers during office visits). Data analyses were performed between November 2021 and February 2023 and completed on February 5, 2023.ExposuresCompleted CRC screening via colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, or FIT.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the proportion of participants completing an FIT or colonoscopy after each component of the screening process. Differences across subgroups were assessed using the χ2 test.ResultsThis study included 1 046 745 KPNC members. Their mean (SD) age was 61.1 (6.9) years, and more than half (53.2%) were women. A total of 0.4% of members were American Indian or Alaska Native, 18.5% were Asian, 7.2% were Black, 16.2% were Hispanic, 0.8% were Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and 56.5% were White. Automated outreach significantly increased screening participation by 31.1%, 38.1%, 29.5%, 31.9%, 31.8%, and 34.5% among these groups, respectively; follow-up personalized outreach further significantly increased participation by absolute additional increases of 12.5%, 12.4%, 13.3%, 14.4%, 14.7%, and 11.2%, respectively (all differences P < .05 compared with White members). Overall screening coverage at the end of the yearly program differed significantly among members who were American Indian or Alaska Native (74.1%), Asian (83.5%), Black (77.7%), Hispanic (76.4%), or Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander (74.4%) compared with White members (82.2%) (all differences P < .05 compared with White members). Screening completion was similar by sex; older members were substantially more likely to be up to date with CRC screening both before and at the end of the screening process.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study of a CRC screening program, sequential automated and personalized strategies each contributed to substantial increases in screening completion in all demographic groups. These findings suggest that such programs may potentially reduce differences in CRC screening completion across demographic groups.

Project description:A single risk factor can increase the risk of developing multiple diseases, but most risk communication research has been conducted in the context of a single disease. We explored which combination of three recommended risk communication strategies is most effective in simultaneously conveying risk estimates of four diseases associated with physical inactivity: colon cancer, stroke, diabetes, and heart disease. Participants (N = 1161, 50% no college experience, 50% racial/ethnic minority) were shown hypothetical risk estimates for each of the four diseases. All four diseases were placed at varying heights on 1 of 12 vertical bar charts (i.e., "risk ladders") to indicate their respective probabilities. The risk ladders varied in a 2 (risk reduction information: present/absent) × 2 (numerical format: words/words and numbers) × 3 (social comparison information: none/somewhat higher than average/much higher than average) full factorial design. Participants were randomly assigned to view one of the risk ladders and then completed a questionnaire assessing message comprehension, message acceptance, physical activity-related risk and efficacy beliefs, and physical activity intentions. Higher message acceptance was found among (1) people who received risk reduction information versus those who did not (p = .01), and (2) people who did not receive social comparison information versus those told that they were at higher than average risk (p = .03). Further, absolute cognitive perceived risk of developing "any of the diseases shown in the picture" was higher among people who did not receive social comparison information (p = .03). No other main effects and only very few interactions with demographic variables were found. Combining recommended risk communication strategies did not improve or impair key cognitive or affective precursors of health behavior change. It might not be necessary to provide people with extensive information when communicating risk estimates of multiple diseases.

Dataset Information

Demographically diverse crowds are typically not much wiser than homogeneous crowds.

Publications

Demographically diverse crowds are typically not much wiser than homogeneous crowds.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets