Think twice and then: combining or choosing in dialectical bootstrapping?
Abstract
Individuals can partly recreate the "wisdom of crowds" within their own minds by combining nonredundant estimates they themselves have generated. Herzog and Hertwig (2009) showed that this accuracy gain could be boosted by urging people to actively think differently when generating a 2nd estimate ("dialectical bootstrapping"). Although the "crowd within" promises accuracy gains, it remains unclear whether and when people spontaneously reap those gains. What makes people combine their estimates rather than trying to identify the better one? This research found that participants were more likely to combine when they were instructed to actively contradict themselves. Furthermore, they were more likely to combine as the size of the disagreement between 1st and 2nd estimate grew. People thus acted as if they were hedging against the risk of making large errors. Finally, when people pursued a strategy other than combination, they were not able to outperform their crowd within.
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Combining in silico and in vitro approaches to identification of potent inhibitor against phospholipase A2 (PLA2)
- In silico and in vitro studies: investigating the chemical composition, DFT, molecular docking, and dynamic simulation of Satureja candidissima (Munby) Briq essential oil as a potential antibacterial agent
- Quercetin combined with ciprofloxacin and gentamicin inhibits biofilm formation and virulence in Staphylococcus aureus
- In silico study of the mechanism of action, pharmacokinetic and toxicological properties of some N-methylanthranilates and their analogs
- Anticonvulsant Effects of Citronellal, Daidzin, and Phytol, Possibly Through GABAA Receptor and Voltage-Gated Sodium Channel Interaction Pathways: In Vivo and In Silico Studies
- 2-Phenylcyclopropylmethylamine (PCPMA) Derivatives as D3R-Selective Ligands for 3D-QSAR, Docking and Molecular Dynamics Simulation Studies
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.