» Articles » PMID: 19073480

Quorum Responses and Consensus Decision Making

Overview
Specialty Biology
Date 2008 Dec 17
PMID 19073480
Citations 110
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Animal groups are said to make consensus decisions when group members come to agree on the same option. Consensus decisions are taxonomically widespread and potentially offer three key benefits: maintenance of group cohesion, enhancement of decision accuracy compared with lone individuals and improvement in decision speed. In the absence of centralized control, arriving at a consensus depends on local interactions in which each individual's likelihood of choosing an option increases with the number of others already committed to that option. The resulting positive feedback can effectively direct most or all group members to the best available choice. In this paper, we examine the functional form of the individual response to others' behaviour that lies at the heart of this process. We review recent theoretical and empirical work on consensus decisions, and we develop a simple mathematical model to show the central importance to speedy and accurate decisions of quorum responses, in which an animal's probability of exhibiting a behaviour is a sharply nonlinear function of the number of other individuals already performing this behaviour. We argue that systems relying on such quorum rules can achieve cohesive choice of the best option while also permitting adaptive tuning of the trade-off between decision speed and accuracy.

Citing Articles

Sexually differentiated decision-making involves faster recruitment in the early stages for the Tibetan antelopes .

Zhu Q, Guan J, Lei T, Xuan K, Guo S, Zhao Y Curr Zool. 2025; 71(1):124-135.

PMID: 39996253 PMC: 11847017. DOI: 10.1093/cz/zoae036.


Agents seeking long-term access to the wisdom of the crowd reduce immediate decision-making accuracy.

Mann R Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2024; 379(1916):20220467.

PMID: 39463248 PMC: 11528357. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2022.0467.


Vocal consensus building for collective departures in wild western gorillas.

Nellissen L, Fuh T, Zuberbuhler K, Masi S Proc Biol Sci. 2024; 291(2033):20240597.

PMID: 39437843 PMC: 11495957. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2024.0597.


Beyond six feet: The collective behavior of social distancing.

Wu Z PLoS One. 2024; 19(9):e0293489.

PMID: 39269926 PMC: 11398703. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0293489.


Understanding collective behavior through neurobiology.

Yu J, Napoli J, Lovett-Barron M Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2024; 86:102866.

PMID: 38852986 PMC: 11439442. DOI: 10.1016/j.conb.2024.102866.


References
1.
Franks N, Dornhaus A, Fitzsimmons J, Stevens M . Speed versus accuracy in collective decision making. Proc Biol Sci. 2003; 270(1532):2457-63. PMC: 1691524. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2003.2527. View

2.
Conradt L, Roper T . Consensus decision making in animals. Trends Ecol Evol. 2006; 20(8):449-56. DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2005.05.008. View

3.
Bonabeau E, Theraulaz G, Deneubourg J, Aron S, Camazine S . Self-organization in social insects. Trends Ecol Evol. 2011; 12(5):188-93. DOI: 10.1016/s0169-5347(97)01048-3. View

4.
Dambach M, Goehlen B . Aggregation density and longevity correlate with humidity in first-instar nymphs of the cockroach (Blattella germanica L., Dictyoptera). J Insect Physiol. 2003; 45(5):423-429. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-1910(98)00141-3. View

5.
Seeley T, Kleinhenz M, Bujok B, Tautz J . Thorough warm-up before take-off in honey bee swarms. Naturwissenschaften. 2003; 90(6):256-60. DOI: 10.1007/s00114-003-0425-4. View