Mercier Hugo, Morin Olivier
Institut Jean Nicod, PSL University, CNRS, Paris France.
Max Planck institute for the Science of Human History, Jena, Germany.
Evol Hum Sci. 2019 May 31;1:e6. doi: 10.1017/ehs.2019.6. eCollection 2019.
Mathematical models and simulations demonstrate the power of majority rules, i.e. following an opinion shared by a majority of group members. Majority opinion should be followed more when (a) the relative and absolute size of the majority grow, the members of the majority are (b) competent, and (c) benevolent, (d) the majority opinion conflicts less with our prior beliefs and (e) the members of the majority formed their opinions independently. We review the experimental literature bearing on these points. The few experiments bearing on (b) and (c) suggest that both factors are adequately taken into account. Many experiments show that (d) is also followed, with participants usually putting too much weight on their own opinion relative to that of the majority. Regarding factors (a) and (e), in contrast, the evidence is mixed: participants sometimes take into account optimally the absolute and relative size of the majority, as well as the presence of informational dependencies. In other circumstances, these factors are ignored. We suggest that an evolutionary framework can help make sense of these conflicting results by distinguishing between evolutionarily valid cues - that are readily taken into account - and non-evolutionarily valid cues - that are ignored by default.
数学模型和模拟展示了多数规则的力量，即遵循多数群体成员共同持有的观点。在以下情况下，应该更遵循多数人的意见：（a）多数群体的相对规模和绝对规模增大，多数群体的成员（b）有能力，且（c）善意，（d）多数人的意见与我们先前的信念冲突较小，以及（e）多数群体的成员独立形成他们的意见。我们回顾了与此相关的实验文献。少数针对（b）和（c）的实验表明，这两个因素都得到了充分考虑。许多实验表明，（d）也会被遵循，参与者通常相对于多数人的意见，对自己的意见赋予了过多权重。相比之下，关于因素（a）和（e），证据则参差不齐：参与者有时会最佳地考虑多数群体的绝对规模和相对规模，以及信息依赖的存在。在其他情况下，这些因素会被忽略。我们认为，一个进化框架可以通过区分进化上有效的线索（这些线索很容易被考虑到）和非进化上有效的线索（默认情况下会被忽略），来帮助理解这些相互矛盾的结果。
