Group Performance Depends on the Majority Rule

Some group decisions require a two-thirds or three-quarters majority of the people voting; others require only a simple majority. Does the accuracy of a group's decision making depend on which majority rule is used? A signal detection theory analysis was used to answer this question. Each member of a group was presented with a noisy display of either a signal or a nonsignal, and then each member cast a yes or no vote for the existence of a signal. The group decision was determined by a majority rule of the members' votes. Normative groups and groups of 5 or 7 people exhibited the same behavior: Performance was best when the group used a simple-majority rule and decreased when the group used more stringent rules. The worst performance was produced by a unanimous rule. Some group members adopted more liberal response criteria when the majority rule was made more stringent.

[1]  John A. Swets,et al.  Evaluation of diagnostic systems : methods from signal detection theory , 1982 .

[2]  J. Swets.  Indices of discrimination or diagnostic accuracy: their ROCs and implied models. , 1986, Psychological bulletin.

[3]  J. Banks,et al.  Information Aggregation, Rationality, and the Condorcet Jury Theorem , 1996, American Political Science Review.

[4]  Jacob Paroush,et al.  Variability of decisional ability and the essential order of decision rules , 1994 .

[5]  L. Shapley,et al.  Optimizing group judgmental accuracy in the presence of interdependencies , 1984 .

[6]  D. M. Green,et al.  Signal detection theory and psychophysics , 1966 .

[7]  Scott L. Feld,et al.  Group size and the performance of a composite group majority: Statistical truths and empirical results , 1984 .

[8]  G. Owen,et al.  Thirteen theorems in search of the truth , 1983 .

[9]  J A Swets,et al.  Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. , 1988, Science.

[10]  Shmuel Nitzan,et al.  Optimal Decision Rules in Uncertain Dichotomous Choice Situations , 1982 .

[11]  Marilyn L Shaw,et al.  Attending to multiple sources of information: I. The integration of information in decision making , 1982, Cognitive Psychology.

[12]  Bernard Grofman,et al.  Information pooling and group decision making : proceedings of the Second University of California, Irvine, Conference on Political Economy , 1986 .

[13]  Shmuel Nitzan,et al.  The significance of independent decisions in uncertain dichotomous choice situations , 1984 .

[14]  Mary Susan Weldon,et al.  Integration of information from multiple element displays , 1991 .

[15]  D. Kleinman,et al.  Optimal team and individual decision rules in uncertain dichotomous situations , 1993 .

[16]  Shmuel Nitzan,et al.  Partial information on decisional competences and the desirability of the expert rule in uncertain dichotomous choice situations , 1994 .

[17]  Krishna R. Pattipati,et al.  Distributed detection in teams with partial information: a normative-descriptive model , 1993, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[18]  Daniel Gopher,et al.  Toward a generalization of signal detection theory to N -person games: the example of two-person safety problem , 1995 .

[19]  Huanping Dai,et al.  Signal Detection Analysis of the Ideal Group , 1994 .

[20]  J A Swets,et al.  Form of empirical ROCs in discrimination and diagnostic tasks: implications for theory and measurement of performance. , 1986, Psychological bulletin.

[21]  R. Swensson,et al.  Improving diagnostic accuracy: a comparison of interactive and Delphi consultations. , 1977, Investigative radiology.

[22]  Shmuel Nitzan,et al.  A general theorem and eight corollaries in search of correct decision , 1994 .

[23]  Robert D. Sorkin,et al.  Observer Sensitivity to Element Reliability in a Multielement Visual Display , 1996, Hum. Factors.