Ideas like the wisdom of crowds have shed considerable insight into how consensus can emerge in large groups of people, but rather less is known about how group dynamics function in smaller groups. New research from New York University believes it has the answer, and reveals how leaders emerge in small groups over time.
The researchers analyzed several teams of five to undertake 10 cognitive tests, one after the other, each requiring the teams to estimate the number of dots briefly displayed on a screen. During each round, the volunteers were presented with multiple options to choose from, but were forbidden from verbally communicating with each other.
Each experiment was structured so that the answers from each volunteer could be changed once the rest of their team had submitted their guess, with the answers from each team member shown on screen together with the performance of each person in the previous rounds.
Following the lead
When the researchers analyzed both the results from each team and the dynamics of those teams, they found that individuals didn’t follow the majority rule, but rather dynamically decided which person to follow based upon that ‘leaders’ performance over time.
“Individuals used social information more and more over time, and the more accurate the information, the more influence it had over participants’ choices,” the authors explain. “Therefore, the relationship between participants’ performance and their social influence was reinforced over time, resulting in the emergence of group leaders.”
This social information was crucial in terms of influencing the guesses made within each group, with participants changing answers to those no one else in the team had chosen just 5% of the time. Perhaps unsurprisingly, they were much more likely to copy the answers of those with a good track record from previous tasks, but interestingly, they would do this even if the group generally thought otherwise.
The researchers believe this is because small teams have a unique dynamic that allows people to look past the majority opinion.
“Where a large crowd would adopt a simple majority rule, with an increase in the accuracy of performance over repeated interactions, individuals rely more on social than personal information and as a consequence, good performers would emerge as group leaders, exerting a stronger influence on others over time,” the authors explain.
The team believe their findings are robust as traditionally, studies have relied upon static networks and fixed relationships, which doesn’t really reflect the reality of team dynamics.
“Historically, people have looked at social networks as equivalent to an anatomical network based on static ties between people. We are putting forward the idea that in small groups, networks evolve in time based on actions,” the team explain. “Our approach is analogous to learning about neural circuits based on how they function in the brain, rather than how they are anatomically connected.”
