A Crowd Is Useful Only When Its Judgments Are Independent
Syed recounts Solomon Asch's line experiment to show how group consensus can override an individual's direct perception. He then distinguishes genuinely independent agreement, which can supply useful evidence, from a bandwagon in which each person copies earlier behaviour and the apparent crowd contains little new information.
- Participants could conform even when the visual difference appeared obvious
- Conformity may sometimes reflect a normally useful trust in collective evidence
- Ten independent judgments contain more information than ten copied judgments
- Market bubbles illustrate how sequential imitation can create false consensus
“they're effectively disbelieving the evidence of their own eyes in order to fit in with the crowd”
“crowds can converge on things incorrectly”