We show that when the uninformed participate, the group can come to a majority decision even in the face of a powerful minority. They prevent deadlock and fragmentation because the strength of an opinion no longer matters - it comes down to numbers. You can imagine this being a good or bad thing. Either way, a certain number of uninformed individuals keep that minority from dictating or complicating the behaviour of the group.
Contrary to the ideal of a completely engaged electorate, individuals who have the least interest in a specific outcome can actually be vital to achieving a democratic consensus. These individuals dilute the influence of powerful minority factions who would otherwise dominate everyone else, according to new research published in Science. A Princeton University -based research team, led by Professor Iain Couzin , reports that this finding - based on group decision-making experiments on fish, as well as mathematical models and computer simulations - can ultimately provide insights into humans' political behaviour. The researchers, who include Christos Ioannou and Thilo Gross at the University of Bristol, report that in animal groups, uninformed individuals - those with no prior knowledge or strong feelings on a situation's outcome - tend to side with and embolden the numerical majority. Relating the results to human political activity, the study challenges the common notion that an outspoken minority can manipulate uncommitted voters. "The classic view is that uninformed or uncommitted individuals may allow extreme views to proliferate. We found that might not be the case," said Professor Couzin. "We show that when the uninformed participate, the group can come to a majority decision even in the face of a powerful minority.
TO READ THIS ARTICLE, CREATE YOUR ACCOUNT
And extend your reading, free of charge and with no commitment.
