Cargando…

Collective Enumeration

Many joint decisions in everyday life (e.g., Which bar is less crowded?) depend on approximate enumeration, but very little is known about the psychological characteristics of counting together. Here we systematically investigated collective approximate enumeration. Pairs of participants made indivi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bahrami, Bahador, Didino, Daniele, Frith, Chris, Butterworth, Brian, Rees, Geraint
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Psychological Association 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3607463/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22889187
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0029717
_version_ 1782264108495667200
author Bahrami, Bahador
Didino, Daniele
Frith, Chris
Butterworth, Brian
Rees, Geraint
author_facet Bahrami, Bahador
Didino, Daniele
Frith, Chris
Butterworth, Brian
Rees, Geraint
author_sort Bahrami, Bahador
collection PubMed
description Many joint decisions in everyday life (e.g., Which bar is less crowded?) depend on approximate enumeration, but very little is known about the psychological characteristics of counting together. Here we systematically investigated collective approximate enumeration. Pairs of participants made individual and collective enumeration judgments in a 2-alternative forced-choice task and when in disagreement, they negotiated joint decisions via verbal communication and received feedback about accuracy at the end of each trial. The results showed that two people could collectively count better than either one alone, but not as well as expected by previous models of collective sensory decision making in more basic perceptual domains (e.g., luminance contrast). Moreover, such collective enumeration benefited from prior, noninteractive practice showing that social learning of how to combine shared information about enumeration required substantial individual experience. Finally, the collective context had a positive but transient impact on an individual's enumeration sensitivity. This transient social influence may be explained as a motivational factor arising from the fact that members of a collective must take responsibility for their individual decisions and face the consequences of their judgments.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3607463
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher American Psychological Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-36074632013-03-25 Collective Enumeration Bahrami, Bahador Didino, Daniele Frith, Chris Butterworth, Brian Rees, Geraint J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform Reports Many joint decisions in everyday life (e.g., Which bar is less crowded?) depend on approximate enumeration, but very little is known about the psychological characteristics of counting together. Here we systematically investigated collective approximate enumeration. Pairs of participants made individual and collective enumeration judgments in a 2-alternative forced-choice task and when in disagreement, they negotiated joint decisions via verbal communication and received feedback about accuracy at the end of each trial. The results showed that two people could collectively count better than either one alone, but not as well as expected by previous models of collective sensory decision making in more basic perceptual domains (e.g., luminance contrast). Moreover, such collective enumeration benefited from prior, noninteractive practice showing that social learning of how to combine shared information about enumeration required substantial individual experience. Finally, the collective context had a positive but transient impact on an individual's enumeration sensitivity. This transient social influence may be explained as a motivational factor arising from the fact that members of a collective must take responsibility for their individual decisions and face the consequences of their judgments. American Psychological Association 2012-08-13 2013-04 /pmc/articles/PMC3607463/ /pubmed/22889187 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0029717 Text en © 2012 American Psychological Association. This article, manuscript, or document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association (APA). For non-commercial, education and research purposes, users may access, download, copy, display, and redistribute this article or manuscript as well as adapt, translate, or data and text mine the content contained in this document. For any such use of this document, appropriate attribution or bibliographic citation must be given. Users should not delete any copyright notices or disclaimers. For more information or to obtain permission beyond that granted here, visit http://www.apa.org/about/copyright.html.
spellingShingle Reports
Bahrami, Bahador
Didino, Daniele
Frith, Chris
Butterworth, Brian
Rees, Geraint
Collective Enumeration
title Collective Enumeration
title_full Collective Enumeration
title_fullStr Collective Enumeration
title_full_unstemmed Collective Enumeration
title_short Collective Enumeration
title_sort collective enumeration
topic Reports
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3607463/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22889187
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0029717
work_keys_str_mv AT bahramibahador collectiveenumeration
AT didinodaniele collectiveenumeration
AT frithchris collectiveenumeration
AT butterworthbrian collectiveenumeration
AT reesgeraint collectiveenumeration