last updated 11/18/2009

Four Big Problems of Deliberative Groups
Sunstein' Infotopia.  pp. 75-102

Thesis/ Themes

• Group (face-to-face) deliberation is susceptable to FOUR big problems based on interactions that result in a poor information base for decision-making.

Key Concepts

• AMPLIFICATION Errors:  For the reasons indicated below, the original or prevailing view/information in a deliberating group prior to discussion is likely to be amplified, increased and held more intensely because it will be reinforced during discussion.  This is true even when the totality of the group's information (including information held solely by single individuals) shows the original view is likely wrong.

  • Heuristics - mental shorthands to reasoning and deciding.

    • Availability - information that is familiar or highly salient is weighed more heavily in decision-making than less available information (which can easily be ignored even when it is more important and useful).

    • Representativeness - (see p. 77)

    • and a variety of others.

    "Groups are more likely than individuals to escalate their commitment to a course of action that is failing -- and all the more so if members identify strongly with the groups of which they are a part."  (p. 79)
     

  • Informational influences -- Information/knowledge shared by many in the group is valued more than individually held information/knowledge (hidden profiles)

    • shared information is comes up in discussion more often.

    • shared information results in members having a more positive view of the source who birings it up (a reward)

    • hearing information discussed that one shares with others causes us to have a more positive view of ourselves (rewarding)
       

  • Social influences -- People wish not to stand out as different (risky to image)

    • Thus, little new information that is individually held is given.people defer to the group/others when they fear their statements will be punished, ridiculed or disliked.

    • Cognitively central people (the ones who share the most information with others in the group/ are most connected and communicative) have higher credibility than cognitively peripheral individuals who possess information different from most or all others (and perhaps information more useful to the group).  Thus, cognitively central people will be more influential to the exclusion of individually held information by others.
       

  • [ From the preceeding chapter ]  Groups function better and share information better when the benefits of good decision-making result in meaningful, real rewards for the individual members.
     

• POLARIZATION - "Deliberating groups typically end up in a more extreme position in line with their tendencies before deliberation began." (p. 92)  this occurs for the reasons above and due to pressures toward conformity and due to confidence gained by seeing others agree with prexisting views.
   

• FRAMING - Groups can develop or share a common contextual understanding of what is important or how a decision should be made, a frame, that leads to a single view point that may be wrong.
   

• CASCADES

  • Informational cascades - information is repeated (perhpas because it is shared) by several and then others, even those with differing information, go along supress/ignore the differing viewpoint they hold.

  • reputational cascades - individuals who hear many others holding views different than their own will withold their views to protect their reputations.