» Articles » PMID: 35984855

Avoiding Costly Mistakes in Groups: The Evolution of Error Management in Collective Decision Making

Overview
Specialty Biology
Date 2022 Aug 19
PMID 35984855
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Individuals continuously have to balance the error costs of alternative decisions. A wealth of research has studied how single individuals navigate this, showing that individuals develop response biases to avoid the more costly error. We, however, know little about the dynamics in groups facing asymmetrical error costs and when social influence amplifies either safe or risky behavior. Here, we investigate this by modeling the decision process and information flow with a drift-diffusion model extended to the social domain. In the model individuals first gather independent personal information; they then enter a social phase in which they can either decide early based on personal information, or wait for additional social information. We combined the model with an evolutionary algorithm to derive adaptive behavior. We find that under asymmetric costs, individuals in large cooperative groups do not develop response biases because such biases amplify at the collective level, triggering false information cascades. Selfish individuals, however, undermine the group's performance for their own benefit by developing higher response biases and waiting for more information. Our results have implications for our understanding of the social dynamics in groups facing asymmetrical errors costs, such as animal groups evading predation or police officers holding a suspect at gunpoint.

Citing Articles

Fast decisions reflect biases; slow decisions do not.

Linn S, Lawley S, Karamched B, Kilpatrick Z, Josic K Phys Rev E. 2024; 110(2-1):024305.

PMID: 39295031 PMC: 11778257. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.110.024305.


Moderate confirmation bias enhances decision-making in groups of reinforcement-learning agents.

Bergerot C, Barfuss W, Romanczuk P PLoS Comput Biol. 2024; 20(9):e1012404.

PMID: 39231162 PMC: 11404843. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1012404.


Visual social information use in collective foraging.

Mezey D, Deffner D, Kurvers R, Romanczuk P PLoS Comput Biol. 2024; 20(5):e1012087.

PMID: 38701082 PMC: 11095736. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1012087.


Fast decisions reflect biases, slow decisions do not.

Linn S, Lawley S, Karamched B, Kilpatrick Z, Josic K ArXiv. 2024; .

PMID: 38259347 PMC: 10802676.


A Cognitive Computational Approach to Social and Collective Decision-Making.

Tump A, Deffner D, Pleskac T, Romanczuk P, Kurvers R Perspect Psychol Sci. 2023; 19(2):538-551.

PMID: 37671891 PMC: 10913326. DOI: 10.1177/17456916231186964.


References
1.
Johnson D, Blumstein D, Fowler J, Haselton M . The evolution of error: error management, cognitive constraints, and adaptive decision-making biases. Trends Ecol Evol. 2013; 28(8):474-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2013.05.014. View

2.
Darley J, Latane B . Bystander intervention in emergencies: diffusion of responsibility. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1968; 8(4):377-83. DOI: 10.1037/h0025589. View

3.
Hartnett A, Schertzer E, Levin S, Couzin I . Heterogeneous Preference and Local Nonlinearity in Consensus Decision Making. Phys Rev Lett. 2016; 116(3):038701. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.038701. View

4.
Gold J, Shadlen M . The neural basis of decision making. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2007; 30:535-74. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.neuro.29.051605.113038. View

5.
Marshall J, Kurvers R, Krause J, Wolf M . Quorums enable optimal pooling of independent judgements in biological systems. Elife. 2019; 8. PMC: 6374072. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.40368. View