scholarly journals Group decisions and the amount of transmitted information in absolute identification of pitch

1984 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 203-204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ante Fulgosi ◽  
Zvonimir KnezoviĆ ◽  
Predrag Zarevski
2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michel Handgraaf ◽  
Philip Schuette ◽  
Nicole Yoskowitz ◽  
Elke Weber ◽  
Kerry Milch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanna Marno ◽  
Christoph Johannes Völter ◽  
Brandon Tinklenberg ◽  
Dan Sperber ◽  
Josep Call

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 56-67
Author(s):  
S. S. Kukushkin ◽  
V. V. Kochemasov ◽  
S. V. Lazarenko

Technical measurements representing a measurement of higher achieved accuracy, are characterized by the fact that we have to deal with unpredictable errors caused by interference. At the same time, there remains the problem of increasing the reliability of received data and results of measurements while continuously increasing demands on transmission rate information and the reliability of the received data. The article presents a new approach to the transmission of information when using non-traditional representations received and transmitted messages.


Author(s):  
Sascha Meyen ◽  
Dorothee M. B. Sigg ◽  
Ulrike von Luxburg ◽  
Volker H. Franz

Abstract Background It has repeatedly been reported that, when making decisions under uncertainty, groups outperform individuals. Real groups are often replaced by simulated groups: Instead of performing an actual group discussion, individual responses are aggregated by a numerical computation. While studies have typically used unweighted majority voting (MV) for this aggregation, the theoretically optimal method is confidence weighted majority voting (CWMV)—if independent and accurate confidence ratings from the individual group members are available. To determine which simulations (MV vs. CWMV) reflect real group processes better, we applied formal cognitive modeling and compared simulated group responses to real group responses. Results Simulated group decisions based on CWMV matched the accuracy of real group decisions, while simulated group decisions based on MV showed lower accuracy. CWMV predicted the confidence that groups put into their group decisions well. However, real groups treated individual votes to some extent more equally weighted than suggested by CWMV. Additionally, real groups tend to put lower confidence into their decisions compared to CWMV simulations. Conclusion Our results highlight the importance of taking individual confidences into account when simulating group decisions: We found that real groups can aggregate individual confidences in a way that matches statistical aggregations given by CWMV to some extent. This implies that research using simulated group decisions should use CWMV instead of MV as a benchmark to compare real groups to.


1976 ◽  
Vol 59 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. P. Lippmann ◽  
L. D. Braida ◽  
N. I. Durlach

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document