- Joined
- Apr 12, 2005
- Messages
- 4,767
- Reaction score
- 697
I'm putting this in Science & Tech because it's research.
In group decision-making, ignorance promotes democracy
Of course this may not apply to humans because a loud minority can be persuasive enough to convince people to act against their own best interests - whereas animals are likely to just be attracted to the biggest group (in other words, they're attracted to the majority and by doing so, increase it's size). Also, it's questionable if the majority wins here because majority means more then half think a certain way. If part of the majority is made up of uninformed people, then is it really a majority who think a certain way? I think the research shows that the larger group wins, but still doesn't prove that a majority wins. It's a subtle difference that many people seem to miss.
In group decision-making, ignorance promotes democracy
Researchers have long wondered how the dynamics of decision-making work in these cases. Some evidence suggests that those who are ignorant or naïve are subject to manipulation by a loud, opinionated minority. If this is true, uninformed individuals are detrimental to democratic decision-making, since they can turn over power to a minority. However, a new study in this week's Science shows that, under certain conditions, uninformed individuals actually shift the balance toward the majority, enabling a democratic process where the majority rules.
Of course this may not apply to humans because a loud minority can be persuasive enough to convince people to act against their own best interests - whereas animals are likely to just be attracted to the biggest group (in other words, they're attracted to the majority and by doing so, increase it's size). Also, it's questionable if the majority wins here because majority means more then half think a certain way. If part of the majority is made up of uninformed people, then is it really a majority who think a certain way? I think the research shows that the larger group wins, but still doesn't prove that a majority wins. It's a subtle difference that many people seem to miss.