Department of Psychology, Williams College, 25 Stetson Ct., Williamstown, MA, 01267, USA.
Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2021 Feb 5;6(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s41235-021-00273-6.
We investigated the effect of expertise on the wisdom of crowds. Participants completed 60 trials of a numerical estimation task, during which they saw 50-100 asterisks and were asked to estimate how many stars they had just seen. Experiment 1 established that both inner- and outer-crowd wisdom extended to our novel task: Single responses alone were less accurate than responses aggregated across a single participant (showing inner-crowd wisdom) and responses aggregated across different participants were even more accurate (showing outer-crowd wisdom). In Experiment 2, prior to beginning the critical trials, participants did 12 practice trials with feedback, which greatly increased their accuracy. There was a benefit of outer-crowd wisdom relative to a single estimate. There was no inner-crowd wisdom effect, however; with high accuracy came highly restricted variance, and aggregating insufficiently varying responses is not beneficial. Our data suggest that experts give almost the same answer every time they are asked and so they should consult the outer crowd rather than solicit multiple estimates from themselves.
我们研究了专业知识对群体智慧的影响。参与者完成了 60 次数值估计任务，在此期间，他们看到了 50-100 个星号，并被要求估计他们刚刚看到了多少颗星。实验 1 表明，内群和外群的智慧都扩展到了我们的新任务：单独的反应准确性低于单个参与者聚合的反应（表现出内群智慧），而不同参与者聚合的反应甚至更准确（表现出外群智慧）。在实验 2 中，在开始关键试验之前，参与者进行了 12 次有反馈的练习试验，这大大提高了他们的准确性。与单个估计相比，外群智慧具有优势。然而，并没有内群智慧效应；高准确性伴随着高度受限的方差，聚合变化不足的反应并没有好处。我们的数据表明，专家每次被问到几乎都会给出相同的答案，因此他们应该咨询外群，而不是向自己征求多个估计。
