uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Consensus Decision Making by Fish
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Mathematics and Computer Science, Department of Mathematics.
Show others and affiliations
2008 (English)In: Current Biology, ISSN 0960-9822, Vol. 18, no 22, 1773-1777 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Decisions reached through consensus are often more accurate, because they efficiently utilize the diverse information possessed by group members [1-3]. A trust in consensus decision making underlies many of our democratic political and judicial institutions [4], as well as the design of web tools such as Google, Wikipedia, and prediction markets [5, 6]. In theory, consensus for the option favored by the majority of group members will lead to improved decision-making accuracy as group size increases [2, 4]. Although group-living animals are known to utilize social information [7-10], little is known about whether or not decision accuracy increases with group size. In order to reach consensus, group members must be able to integrate the disparate information they possess. Positive feedback, resulting from copying others, can spread information quickly through the group, but it can also result in all individuals making the same, possibly incorrect, choice [8,11,12]. On the other hand, if individuals never copy each other, their decision making remains independent and they fail to benefit from information exchange [4]. Here, we show how small groups of sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus) reach consensus when choosing which of two replica fish to follow. As group size increases, the fish make more accurate decisions, becoming better at discriminating subtle phenotypic differences of the replicas. A simple quorum rule proves sufficient to explain our observations, suggesting that animals can make accurate decisions without the need for complicated comparison of the information they possess. Furthermore, although submission to peers can lead to occasional cascades of incorrect decisions, these can be explained as a byproduct of what is usually accurate consensus decision making.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2008. Vol. 18, no 22, 1773-1777 p.
National Category
Biological Sciences
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-107037DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2008.09.064ISI: 000261244800028OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-107037DiVA: diva2:227590
Available from: 2009-07-15 Created: 2009-07-15 Last updated: 2009-07-15Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text
By organisation
Department of Mathematics
In the same journal
Current Biology
Biological Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 155 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link